Because they pay through the nose to come here, universities and the national balance of payments need the fee income, and if we tell them they can't bring their families, they will go elsewhere?
Besides, aren't the Conservatives meant to be the Party Of Family Values?
As much coming from Nigeria and India each as from the Rest of the World combined suggests there is something fishy going on though.
Didn't somebody here point out the other day that the "something fishy" was that government policy was specifically targeting Nigeria and India as priorities as part of their international education strategy?
Republicans against Trump @RpsAgainstTrump This Muslim fundamentalist who leads the campaign against Biden in swing states, says he’s not worried about Trump getting elected president:
“We have to send an important message...It may take 12 years, 20 years but at least we’ll send a message so in the future, next time there’s a Democrat in the WH he won't take our votes for granted.”
"And you say the ordinary people have ice cubes too? Amazing."
First Light Fusion's target, I think ?
Yep which meant trying to come up with a realistic quip has taken some time - that “ice cube” is the target designed to focus the energy to reach critical temperatures and densities
This focusses things so that come the next election you will get the votes of just the true believers.
I thought you might have done something with their fusion technique being inspired by a shrimp...
Well, the SHRIMP device did quite a bit of fusion in the Castle Bravo test.
Rather more than was wanted, actually.
Lithium 7 says hello.
Different shrimp.
https://firstlightfusion.com/technology/targets ...First Light’s journey to a new method for fusion started in nature, with the pistol shrimp. The pistol shrimp has an oversized claw, which it can “click” shut at very high speed. The motion is so fast that it launches a shock wave into the water and stresses it so much that it rips apart and forms a bubble. The shock wave and the bubble interact and the bubble collapses just as quickly as it forms. The vapour inside is heated to tens of thousands of degrees and emits a bright flash of light...
Of course the energies are vastly higher, and methods of much greater complexity, but the principle of focusing pressure waves is similar.
Tim Montgomerie 🇬🇧 @montie · 4h The Tories repeatedly promised controlled immigration and didn't deliver. Meanwhile Starmer is promising pound-sized economic change with penny-sized half measures. Both parties are playing dangerous games with our democracy.
If Starmer fails to turn things around in a couple of years could we see Farage Party at 30% in polls?
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
Never a pleasant experience to encounter fundamental differences of opinion with friends (not over trivial matters), even if it not felt to to rise to the level of antisemitism.
For me the most awkwardness has been visiting inlaw relations whose default 'jokes' seems to frequently involve wishing the death of anybody who has ever voted Tory. But at least that does not involve getting into distressing arguments about matters.
Republicans against Trump @RpsAgainstTrump This Muslim fundamentalist who leads the campaign against Biden in swing states, says he’s not worried about Trump getting elected president:
“We have to send an important message...It may take 12 years, 20 years but at least we’ll send a message so in the future, next time there’s a Democrat in the WH he won't take our votes for granted.”
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
Never a pleasant experience to encounter fundamental differences of opinion with friends (not over trivial matters), even if it not felt to to rise to the level of antisemitism.
For me the most awkwardness has been visiting inlaw relations whose default 'jokes' seems to frequently involve wishing the death of anybody who has ever voted Tory. But at least that does not involve getting into distressing arguments about matters.
We parted on perfectly good terms but it has stuck in my mind.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
You will find quite a few Israelis also blame Netanyahu, and once the fighting is over there will doubtless be inquiries into who knew what when, and who should have known what when. Unfortunately this creates a perverse incentive to continue fighting.
As to the long term solution, I should try to avoid such discussions. Far cleverer people than me, and I dare say than you and your mate, have tried and failed.
Labelling your friend antisemitic, or for that matter labelling yourself as the opposite for your apparent relative indifference to Gazan or Palestinian casualties, is unhelpful. In short, to save your friendship, both of you should STFU about the Middle East. After all, even if you do light upon an ideal solution, no-one that mattered would be listening anyway.
It does undermine the idea that immigration can be used as a quick fix for the dependency ratio.
Worth pulling in some figures
Remember it's 65,000 visas for partners out of 1.3million immigrants into the country.
Those figures can't be the full picture because there were 152,980 visas given to dependants of students alone.
Out of interest is there anything in Cleverly's announcement to stop students bringing dependents into the country?
(Am I alone in wondering why we ever allow that anyway?)
Because they pay through the nose to come here, universities and the national balance of payments need the fee income, and if we tell them they can't bring their families, they will go elsewhere?
Besides, aren't the Conservatives meant to be the Party Of Family Values?
As much coming from Nigeria and India each as from the Rest of the World combined suggests there is something fishy going on though.
Nigeria and India have the 2nd and 3rd largest English-speaking populations in the world.
I'm not generally a fan of elected representatives spending much time engaging in petty trolling, but Fetterman has seemed to display both integrity and humour effectively at times.
Former Congressman George Santos is now offering personalized video messages through the website Cameo, and it appears one of his first customers is Senator John Fetterman (D-PA).
Fetterman posted the support video he commissioned from the expelled congressman on X (formerly known as Twitter), where he noted that the video was to give 'some encouragement' to Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) 'given his substantial legal problems.' https://www.meidastouch.com/news/fetterman-trolls-menendez-with-santos-cameo
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
The rise of social media and sharing has meant that we know more about people these days, and that means more we don't like. It is improbable that other people will share exactly the same views as oneself. You have to decide where the cutoff line is. I have had friends whose views I found reprehensible or even disgusting. As I grew older they fell away, usually thru my neglect. Now I have fewer friends, and I think that is better. But other people have a greater need for socialisation and you may draw the line differently.
But whatever decision you take, it is your decision and your responsibility. Keep them or drop them, it's up to you. But it is up to you. Good luck.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
The fact that your friend doesn't agree with you doesn't make him an antisemite.
Unison: 'you can earn two or three £ more an hour down the road at a supermarket than the local care home"
THIS. 1000x this.
A relative of mine left their job at a McDonalds to go back into care work, which they'd worked in before. Big mistake, financially speaking.
Back in the days when I did photography I worked with a model who was a heroin addict (unknown to me at the time). She regaled me with stories of working in the care home sector which largely involved being sex-pested by the elderly female patients who claimed they needed various 'bits' extra soapy-cleaned.
Which made me doubly shudder once I knew she had been shooting up during her breaks.
Tim Montgomerie 🇬🇧 @montie · 4h The Tories repeatedly promised controlled immigration and didn't deliver. Meanwhile Starmer is promising pound-sized economic change with penny-sized half measures. Both parties are playing dangerous games with our democracy.
If Starmer fails to turn things around in a couple of years could we see Farage Party at 30% in polls?
On the upside - if he burns down the Reichstag Houses of Parliament it would save us a few billion in repair bills.
Unison: 'you can earn two or three £ more an hour down the road at a supermarket than the local care home"
THIS. 1000x this.
A relative of mine left their job at a McDonalds to go back into care work, which they'd worked in before. Big mistake, financially speaking.
I know far more than I would like about the care sector.
Seems to me there are three classes of worker: Vocational - they do it for the love of their fellow man and the emotional side of looking after the vulnerable (they stay for years and are probably now middle aged); just there temporarily for quick cash before they move on in six months; and, a few, torn between the two sides.
If the final set were given another £4 a hour they might become the first set.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
Your own damn fool fault for discussing Israel/Gaza with anyone in particular a friend.
Tim Montgomerie 🇬🇧 @montie · 4h The Tories repeatedly promised controlled immigration and didn't deliver. Meanwhile Starmer is promising pound-sized economic change with penny-sized half measures. Both parties are playing dangerous games with our democracy.
If Starmer fails to turn things around in a couple of years could we see Farage Party at 30% in polls?
On the upside - if he burns down the Reichstag Houses of Parliament it would save us a few billion in repair bills.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
Your own damn fool fault for discussing Israel/Gaza with anyone in particular a friend.
Fair point. It should be on PB instead where people can discuss it calmly and dispassionately.
"And you say the ordinary people have ice cubes too? Amazing."
First Light Fusion's target, I think ?
Yep which meant trying to come up with a realistic quip has taken some time - that “ice cube” is the target designed to focus the energy to reach critical temperatures and densities
This focusses things so that come the next election you will get the votes of just the true believers.
I thought you might have done something with their fusion technique being inspired by a shrimp...
Well, the SHRIMP device did quite a bit of fusion in the Castle Bravo test.
Rather more than was wanted, actually.
Lithium 7 says hello.
Different shrimp.
https://firstlightfusion.com/technology/targets ...First Light’s journey to a new method for fusion started in nature, with the pistol shrimp. The pistol shrimp has an oversized claw, which it can “click” shut at very high speed. The motion is so fast that it launches a shock wave into the water and stresses it so much that it rips apart and forms a bubble. The shock wave and the bubble interact and the bubble collapses just as quickly as it forms. The vapour inside is heated to tens of thousands of degrees and emits a bright flash of light...
Of course the energies are vastly higher, and methods of much greater complexity, but the principle of focusing pressure waves is similar.
Paul Brand @PaulBrandITV · 5h NEW: Older people's charity @age_uk on the new immigration rules.
"It is an open secret that inward migration effectively 'saved' the social care workforce last year and, as things stand, anything that undermines that source of support must be a real concern."
Unison: 'you can earn two or three £ more an hour down the road at a supermarket than the local care home"
THIS. 1000x this.
I'm not sure populating care homes with high turnover foreign workers is a terribly good solution to a staff shortage in such a sensitive job.
Care at home would be better than care homes, but care visitors suffer from a high turnover too, so none of them really get to know the 'patient' or what they need. The council don't pay enough but somehow the cost to the end user who does pay is upwards of £25 / hr, despite the minimum wage staff - even here in the cheap seats.
We have 'solved' this by doing the job ourselves but obviously that has a big downside.
The whole business needs a massive shakeup. Though it would appear to be an election loser, so nobody wants to touch it.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
The fact that your friend doesn't agree with you doesn't make him an antisemite.
Forcing on a one state solution on Israel even if they don't want it and being indifferent to how a future Palestinian government treated Jews in such a state does seem like something an anti-Semite would believe.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
The fact that your friend doesn't agree with you doesn't make him an antisemite.
Forcing on a one state solution on Israel even if they don't want it and being indifferent to how a future Palestinian government treated Jews in such a state does seem like something an anti-Semite would believe.
Is Corbyn going to throw his hat in the ring for London mayor or not? It's time to take the plunge, his Labour opponents are going to win big nationally despite the anger of his supporters, so might as well go out with a bang.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
Your own damn fool fault for discussing Israel/Gaza with anyone in particular a friend.
It's a fair point - never discuss Gaza with friends. There also is unlikely to be any animus to his ignorant (and dangerous if it were acted on) indifference though. It's just a certain completely callous attitude towards Israel (and more widely Jews, by implication once one gets through the weeds of what that means and results in) has become so unquestioned and embedded in specific parts of the left, those saying these things don't really quite understand the horrors they're advocating or tacitly accepting as the price for ending other, admitted horrors.
And perhaps why those who might be on the end of said horrors (and were on 7 October), might take a rather different view to someone who never will be from the comfort of their fashionable, distant opinions.
Is Corbyn going to throw his hat in the ring for London mayor or not? It's time to take the plunge, his Labour opponents are going to win big nationally despite the anger of his supporters, so might as well go out with a bang.
Is Corbyn going to throw his hat in the ring for London mayor or not? It's time to take the plunge, his Labour opponents are going to win big nationally despite the anger of his supporters, so might as well go out with a bang.
It would really get quite ugly if he did, given his best hope would be to run a horrible Gallowayesque campaign aimed at pitting people against each other while claiming to stand for 'peace'.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
The fact that your friend doesn't agree with you doesn't make him an antisemite.
Forcing on a one state solution on Israel even if they don't want it and being indifferent to how a future Palestinian government treated Jews in such a state does seem like something an anti-Semite would believe.
Isn't there a single state now? Israel?
Yes, but there are two large chunks of land called Gaza and the West Bank which are controlled by Israel but whose inhabitants don't exactly get the full-citizens-of-Israel treatment. The 'One State Solution' means that everyone in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank would become equal under the sun. But Israel tends to reject this approach for reasons of demographics.
Unison: 'you can earn two or three £ more an hour down the road at a supermarket than the local care home"
THIS. 1000x this.
I'm not sure populating care homes with high turnover foreign workers is a terribly good solution to a staff shortage in such a sensitive job.
Care at home would be better than care homes, but care visitors suffer from a high turnover too, so none of them really get to know the 'patient' or what they need. The council don't pay enough but somehow the cost to the end user who does pay is upwards of £25 / hr, despite the minimum wage staff - even here in the cheap seats.
We have 'solved' this by doing the job ourselves but obviously that has a big downside.
The whole business needs a massive shakeup. Though it would appear to be an election loser, so nobody wants to touch it.
In my local town I've seen the impact of this migration just inside the last 18 months.
There are a significant number of extra Indian and African care workers pushing around disabled and elderly people than there were pre-Covid, when many were European and here on a temporary basis.
Tim Montgomerie 🇬🇧 @montie · 4h The Tories repeatedly promised controlled immigration and didn't deliver. Meanwhile Starmer is promising pound-sized economic change with penny-sized half measures. Both parties are playing dangerous games with our democracy.
If Starmer fails to turn things around in a couple of years could we see Farage Party at 30% in polls?
So, I'm not a Labour supporter but I think it's very important for the future stability of our democracy that they deliver for their base if they take office.
I don't want a radical left-wing party taking over that might end up attacking private property rights, or extra-democratic "action" that causes mass disruption to our way of life.
Nor do I want the hard-right counterreaction to that.
The Premier League has concluded deals with Sky Sports and TNT Sports for five UK live packages and with BBC Sport for the free-to-air highlights package. All three agreements will cover the four-year period starting Season 2025/26 and are the largest sports media rights deals ever concluded in the UK.
Sky Sports has been awarded live rights packages B, C, D and E, covering a minimum of 215 live matches per season, which will include more than 140 matches played at weekends, evening matches on Fridays and Mondays, and full coverage of three midweek match rounds. For the first time, Sky Sports will also broadcast all 10 matches on the final day of each season.
TNT Sports has been awarded live rights package A, covering 52 live matches per season, including exclusive coverage of matches played on Saturdays at 12.30pm and full coverage of two midweek match rounds.
For the first time in the UK, all matches taking place outside of the Saturday 3pm "closed period", including those displaced to Sunday 2pm because of club participation in European competitions, will be broadcast live.
No any Brit can marry a foreigner provided the foreigner earns over £38k a year or is in a shortage occupation
So someone like my father - a doctor - marrying a foreign woman who chooses to stay at home to bring up children would now be unable to do so. If such a rule had been in place, he would have left England. So rather than gain a skilled migrant Britain would have lost one and 2 skilled children who have also contributed a load of taxes to this country.
Brilliant. Just brilliant.
I thought you lot were in favour of traditional stable families.
Is there anyone left in the Tory party able to think through the consequences of what they announce? Anyone at all?
Well would have freed up some housing and demand for public services.
Seriously though I think the annual minimum gross income for the foreign spouse and their UK partner so the spouse gets a visa stays at £18,600.
This is just foreign workers in the UK being banned from bringing over family members unless those family members earn over £38k
Still very much wrong, but slightly warmer than the previous answer.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
The fact that your friend doesn't agree with you doesn't make him an antisemite.
Forcing on a one state solution on Israel even if they don't want it and being indifferent to how a future Palestinian government treated Jews in such a state does seem like something an anti-Semite would believe.
Isn't there a single state now? Israel?
Yes, but there are two large chunks of land called Gaza and the West Bank which are controlled by Israel but whose inhabitants don't exactly get the full-citizens-of-Israel treatment. The 'One State Solution' means that everyone in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank would become equal under the sun. But Israel tends to reject this approach for reasons of demographics.
'Demographic reasons' is a hell of a euphemism for 'there's a strong chance they would end up living under a government intent on their extermination'.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
The fact that your friend doesn't agree with you doesn't make him an antisemite.
Forcing on a one state solution on Israel even if they don't want it and being indifferent to how a future Palestinian government treated Jews in such a state does seem like something an anti-Semite would believe.
Isn't there a single state now? Israel?
Yes, but there are two large chunks of land called Gaza and the West Bank which are controlled by Israel but whose inhabitants don't exactly get the full-citizens-of-Israel treatment. The 'One State Solution' means that everyone in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank would become equal under the sun. But Israel tends to reject this approach for reasons of demographics.
It certainly would *not* mean that, for the aforesaid reasons of demographics.
Anyone who talks glibly of a ‘one state solution’ is one of three things: (1) a rabid Zionist trying to pretend to be reasonable (2) a rabid antisemite trying to pretend to be reasonable (3) a complete idiot who doesn’t understand the blindingly obvious implications.
The catch is Netanyahu is (1) and Hamas and their supporters are (2).
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
The fact that your friend doesn't agree with you doesn't make him an antisemite.
Forcing on a one state solution on Israel even if they don't want it and being indifferent to how a future Palestinian government treated Jews in such a state does seem like something an anti-Semite would believe.
Isn't there a single state now? Israel?
Yes, but there are two large chunks of land called Gaza and the West Bank which are controlled by Israel but whose inhabitants don't exactly get the full-citizens-of-Israel treatment. The 'One State Solution' means that everyone in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank would become equal under the sun. But Israel tends to reject this approach for reasons of demographics.
It certainly would *not* mean that, for the aforesaid reasons of demographics.
Anyone who talks glibly of a ‘one state solution’ is one of three things: (1) a rabid Zionist trying to pretend to be reasonable (2) a rabid antisemite trying to pretend to be reasonable (3) a complete idiot who doesn’t understand the blindingly obvious implications.
The catch is Netanyahu is (1) and Hamas and their supporters are (2).
Wasn't October 24th seen as one of the most likely dates for the GE?
This would appear to pretty much rule it out.
It may also rule out October 17th as Charles would need to be here to appoint a new PM - likely on the 18th but wouldn't they have to allow for possibility of it dragging on if no clear cut result. And he might be leaving by the 18th anyway if they are doing a tour rather than just going to the meeting.
It may also reduce the chances of October 31st because surely Sunak couldn't go all the way to Australia in the last 10 days of the campaign.
So that meeting looks like it havs major implications for timing of GE.
Wasn't October 24th seen as one of the most likely dates for the GE?
This would appear to pretty much rule it out.
It may also rule out October 17th as Charles would need to be here to appoint a new PM - likely on the 18th but wouldn't they have to allow for possibility of it dragging on if no clear cut result. And he might be leaving by the 18th anyway if they are doing a tour rather than just going to the meeting.
It may also reduce the chances of October 31st because surely Sunak couldn't go all the way to Australia in the last 10 days of the campaign.
So that meeting looks like it havs major implications for timing of GE.
Oct just seems like agony for everyone.... my money is on Apr/May.
I have a problem. I'm worried my friend might be an antisemite. I went round to his house yesterday and we chatted about all sorts of things like we usually do. He's much more left wing than me and we eventually got onto the issue of Starmer, about whom he was most displeased. Not surprisingly we then started to discuss Gaza. He's expressed before his strong feelings about the Palestinian cause. I tend to feel there are an awful lot of other causes as well. It wasn't so much that he saw Starmer as a warmonger but thought he had opportunistically got rid of some of his more left wing frontbenchers and was enjoying rubbing the Corbynites' noses in the dirt.
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
The fact that your friend doesn't agree with you doesn't make him an antisemite.
Forcing on a one state solution on Israel even if they don't want it and being indifferent to how a future Palestinian government treated Jews in such a state does seem like something an anti-Semite would believe.
Isn't there a single state now? Israel?
Yes, but there are two large chunks of land called Gaza and the West Bank which are controlled by Israel but whose inhabitants don't exactly get the full-citizens-of-Israel treatment. The 'One State Solution' means that everyone in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank would become equal under the sun. But Israel tends to reject this approach for reasons of demographics.
It certainly would *not* mean that, for the aforesaid reasons of demographics.
Anyone who talks glibly of a ‘one state solution’ is one of three things: (1) a rabid Zionist trying to pretend to be reasonable (2) a rabid antisemite trying to pretend to be reasonable (3) a complete idiot who doesn’t understand the blindingly obvious implications.
The catch is Netanyahu is (1) and Hamas and their supporters are (2).
While American Presidents often fall into (3)
To be fair, I can’t think of many US presidents in n recent years who have openly advocated one state solutions.
That may just mean I haven’t been paying attention to their every word on Israel, of course.
Wasn't October 24th seen as one of the most likely dates for the GE?
This would appear to pretty much rule it out.
It may also rule out October 17th as Charles would need to be here to appoint a new PM - likely on the 18th but wouldn't they have to allow for possibility of it dragging on if no clear cut result. And he might be leaving by the 18th anyway if they are doing a tour rather than just going to the meeting.
It may also reduce the chances of October 31st because surely Sunak couldn't go all the way to Australia in the last 10 days of the campaign.
So that meeting looks like it havs major implications for timing of GE.
Good points. Oct 24th has been the favourite date for a while now, but that Comonwealth meeting makes it somewhat unlikely. Oct 10th possibly, otherwise it’s looking like a return to spring elections. 2nd May, to coincide with the locals?
GTA VI trailer up to 40 million views in 6 hours. Going to save up some Annual Leave for it (released in 2025...)
Biggest release in gaming media history I would have thought.
There’s already 50m PS5s and 20m of the latest XBox out there, plus hundreds of millions of PCs - and pretty much everyone will want what’s undoubtedly the game of the decade.
There’s going to be a couple of billion dollars in sales, in the first few weeks.
Wasn't October 24th seen as one of the most likely dates for the GE?
This would appear to pretty much rule it out.
It may also rule out October 17th as Charles would need to be here to appoint a new PM - likely on the 18th but wouldn't they have to allow for possibility of it dragging on if no clear cut result. And he might be leaving by the 18th anyway if they are doing a tour rather than just going to the meeting.
It may also reduce the chances of October 31st because surely Sunak couldn't go all the way to Australia in the last 10 days of the campaign.
So that meeting looks like it havs major implications for timing of GE.
Good points. Oct 24th has been the favourite date for a while now, but that Comonwealth meeting makes it somewhat unlikely. Oct 10th possibly, otherwise it’s looking like a return to spring elections. 2nd May, to coincide with the locals?
Charles would surely be at the Commonwealth meeting on the first day - ie Oct 21st.
The meeting is in Samoa and he is doing a "tour" of Australia first.
So on reflection I think he would be leaving the UK around about Oct 13th or 14th. I reckon that could easily rule out an Oct 10th GE as well.
This is surely a massive consideration.
Oct 17th, 24th and 31st all look definitely out.
Oct 10th looks likely out - as Charles couldn't delay his tour and would have to be here if it took even 2 or 3 days for PM to emerge.
Nov 7th is also probably out as Sunak couldn't go all the way to Australia mid campaign.
The latest wrinkle in the water utility scandal - the injection of funds which was spun as an equity injection was actually funded by more debt issued by the holding company.
It's increasingly sounding as though Thames (for example) is insolvent - and are hoping that the regulator will bail them out at bill payers' expense.
More investment in the infrastructure is needed, but funding that by what is going to be very expensive borrowing by a dodgy company is going to be far more expensive than it need be. Time for government to look at putting some of these companies into administration.
Are the Tories confident of a poll bounce to get them within striking range of Labour by May ?
I’m still not convinced that this May talk is realistic. Given the Royal visit , early October or November looks a bit more likely .
Of course there’s always the chance Sunak could hang on right into January 2025 . That does look desperate though and not sure the public would be in a great mood after the Christmas come down .
Are the Tories confident of a poll bounce to get them within striking range of Labour by May ?
I’m still not convinced that this May talk is realistic. Given the Royal visit , early October or November looks a bit more likely .
Of course there’s always the chance Sunak could hang on right into January 2025 . That does look desperate though and not sure the public would be in a great mood after the Christmas come down .
Recall Theresa May, get a poll bounce?
Well, it might work. More likely to work than the current idiots in Cabinet are.
GTA VI trailer up to 40 million views in 6 hours. Going to save up some Annual Leave for it (released in 2025...)
Biggest release in gaming media history I would have thought.
There’s already 50m PS5s and 20m of the latest XBox out there, plus hundreds of millions of PCs - and pretty much everyone will want what’s undoubtedly the game of the decade.
There’s going to be a couple of billion dollars in sales, in the first few weeks.
It's not going to be on PC almost unbelievably apparently
The latest wrinkle in the water utility scandal - the injection of funds which was spun as an equity injection was actually funded by more debt issued by the holding company.
It's increasingly sounding as though Thames (for example) is insolvent - and are hoping that the regulator will bail them out at bill payers' expense.
More investment in the infrastructure is needed, but funding that by what is going to be very expensive borrowing by a dodgy company is going to be far more expensive than it need be. Time for government to look at putting some of these companies into administration.
Absolutely
The water sector is a rip off. Time to make the shareholders face up to their responsibilities. Clearing out Ofwat is also needed.
GTA VI trailer up to 40 million views in 6 hours. Going to save up some Annual Leave for it (released in 2025...)
Biggest release in gaming media history I would have thought.
There’s already 50m PS5s and 20m of the latest XBox out there, plus hundreds of millions of PCs - and pretty much everyone will want what’s undoubtedly the game of the decade.
There’s going to be a couple of billion dollars in sales, in the first few weeks.
It's not going to be on PC almost unbelievably apparently
In that case, there’s about to be another PS5 shortage!
The latest wrinkle in the water utility scandal - the injection of funds which was spun as an equity injection was actually funded by more debt issued by the holding company.
It's increasingly sounding as though Thames (for example) is insolvent - and are hoping that the regulator will bail them out at bill payers' expense.
More investment in the infrastructure is needed, but funding that by what is going to be very expensive borrowing by a dodgy company is going to be far more expensive than it need be. Time for government to look at putting some of these companies into administration.
Absolutely
The water sector is a rip off. Time to make the shareholders face up to their responsibilities. Clearing out Ofwat is also needed.
Those that bought the water companies were effectively buying a long term bond which paid a dividend financed by the customers bills. They then used this bonded income to release huge amounts of capital by borrowing on that bond at very low interest rates. Unfortunately, the cost of that borrowing has now gone up so either the income flow from the customers has to increase or they have to pay back some of the monies released to reduce the borrowing to a sustainable rate.
All of this was fairly rational behaviour from those buying our assets. The assumption that they could continue to borrow indefinitely at such low interest rates was of course stupid but the capital they have been able to release from the companies means that they have got all or sometimes more than all their purchase price back already.
What is far more unforgiveable is the incompetent buffoons in OFWAT that let the purchasers pile up the debt in these companies in the first place, essentially putting the cost of the risk of an increase in interest rates on the customer rather than the shareholder. Yet another regulator that has simply not been up to the mark.
Wasn't October 24th seen as one of the most likely dates for the GE?
This would appear to pretty much rule it out.
It may also rule out October 17th as Charles would need to be here to appoint a new PM - likely on the 18th but wouldn't they have to allow for possibility of it dragging on if no clear cut result. And he might be leaving by the 18th anyway if they are doing a tour rather than just going to the meeting.
It may also reduce the chances of October 31st because surely Sunak couldn't go all the way to Australia in the last 10 days of the campaign.
So that meeting looks like it havs major implications for timing of GE.
Good points. Oct 24th has been the favourite date for a while now, but that Comonwealth meeting makes it somewhat unlikely. Oct 10th possibly, otherwise it’s looking like a return to spring elections. 2nd May, to coincide with the locals?
Charles would surely be at the Commonwealth meeting on the first day - ie Oct 21st.
The meeting is in Samoa and he is doing a "tour" of Australia first.
So on reflection I think he would be leaving the UK around about Oct 13th or 14th. I reckon that could easily rule out an Oct 10th GE as well.
This is surely a massive consideration.
Oct 17th, 24th and 31st all look definitely out.
Oct 10th looks likely out - as Charles couldn't delay his tour and would have to be here if it took even 2 or 3 days for PM to emerge.
Nov 7th is also probably out as Sunak couldn't go all the way to Australia mid campaign.
I'm surprised nobody has spotted this before now.
It was mentioned in a Times column a few weeks back. How viable is early October? Doesn't it mean calling the election mid-recess?
I'm reminded of that paradox about the man who is told he will be executed one morning next week, but not when...
The latest wrinkle in the water utility scandal - the injection of funds which was spun as an equity injection was actually funded by more debt issued by the holding company.
It's increasingly sounding as though Thames (for example) is insolvent - and are hoping that the regulator will bail them out at bill payers' expense.
More investment in the infrastructure is needed, but funding that by what is going to be very expensive borrowing by a dodgy company is going to be far more expensive than it need be. Time for government to look at putting some of these companies into administration.
Absolutely
The water sector is a rip off. Time to make the shareholders face up to their responsibilities. Clearing out Ofwat is also needed.
Those that bought the water companies were effectively buying a long term bond which paid a dividend financed by the customers bills. They then used this bonded income to release huge amounts of capital by borrowing on that bond at very low interest rates. Unfortunately, the cost of that borrowing has now gone up so either the income flow from the customers has to increase or they have to pay back some of the monies released to reduce the borrowing to a sustainable rate.
All of this was fairly rational behaviour from those buying our assets. The assumption that they could continue to borrow indefinitely at such low interest rates was of course stupid but the capital they have been able to release from the companies means that they have got all or sometimes more than all their purchase price back already.
What is far more unforgiveable is the incompetent buffoons in OFWAT that let the purchasers pile up the debt in these companies in the first place, essentially putting the cost of the risk of an increase in interest rates on the customer rather than the shareholder. Yet another regulator that has simply not been up to the mark.
Very corporate David, but having recently spent 3 years working in the industry it is a bastion of poor practice, responsibility ducking and executive greed. The professional investors in the sector appear to have gone in for the wrong reasons and do not realise what they have taken on. The relationship between Ofwat and the water cos is lamentable with the regulator not being fit for purpose. Thames and some of the others are like Southern are on shaky finances. I suspect they will need to fall back in to public ownership.
Are the Tories confident of a poll bounce to get them within striking range of Labour by May ?
I’m still not convinced that this May talk is realistic. Given the Royal visit , early October or November looks a bit more likely .
Of course there’s always the chance Sunak could hang on right into January 2025 . That does look desperate though and not sure the public would be in a great mood after the Christmas come down .
May might be a good shout.
If the ramifications of Cleverly's announcement yesterday have time to feed in, the NHS and the care sector will likely as not have imploded. Implementing the announcement in April on the other hand might get some good client media headlines before reality bites. Rwanda too, best to see the headlines rather than the reality.
The idea that having been shamed by this revolt they would use the Lords to modify it is almost beyond belief, even for Sunak. Not so much a tin ear as stone deaf.
The latest wrinkle in the water utility scandal - the injection of funds which was spun as an equity injection was actually funded by more debt issued by the holding company.
It's increasingly sounding as though Thames (for example) is insolvent - and are hoping that the regulator will bail them out at bill payers' expense.
More investment in the infrastructure is needed, but funding that by what is going to be very expensive borrowing by a dodgy company is going to be far more expensive than it need be. Time for government to look at putting some of these companies into administration.
Absolutely
The water sector is a rip off. Time to make the shareholders face up to their responsibilities. Clearing out Ofwat is also needed.
Those that bought the water companies were effectively buying a long term bond which paid a dividend financed by the customers bills. They then used this bonded income to release huge amounts of capital by borrowing on that bond at very low interest rates. Unfortunately, the cost of that borrowing has now gone up so either the income flow from the customers has to increase or they have to pay back some of the monies released to reduce the borrowing to a sustainable rate.
All of this was fairly rational behaviour from those buying our assets. The assumption that they could continue to borrow indefinitely at such low interest rates was of course stupid but the capital they have been able to release from the companies means that they have got all or sometimes more than all their purchase price back already. ..
It was only rational if greed and irresponsibility are rational. They took an enormous gamble by borrowing using short term debt to fund long term obligations. The bill payers and taxpayers should not further pay for the outcome if that gamble. Bankrupt them and put them into public ownership (in the short term at least).
I entirely agree that the regulator - and successive governments - have been useless at holding them to account. That doesn't let the thieves off the hook.
It would be an outrage were the regulator to bail them out again.
Are the Tories confident of a poll bounce to get them within striking range of Labour by May ?
I’m still not convinced that this May talk is realistic. Given the Royal visit , early October or November looks a bit more likely .
Of course there’s always the chance Sunak could hang on right into January 2025 . That does look desperate though and not sure the public would be in a great mood after the Christmas come down .
May might be a good shout.
If the ramifications of Cleverly's announcement yesterday have time to feed in, the NHS and the care sector will likely as not have imploded. Implementing the announcement in April on the other hand might get some good client media headlines before reality bites. Rwanda too, best to see the headlines rather than the reality.
I think May too.
A budget that establishes clear blue water, and no chance for backbench unrest to cause a further leadership contest.
Telling its readers the UK economy is actually doing OK, Brexit is not a disaster, in some ways the EU is worse off = no way Rejoin will ever be a thing
The latest wrinkle in the water utility scandal - the injection of funds which was spun as an equity injection was actually funded by more debt issued by the holding company.
It's increasingly sounding as though Thames (for example) is insolvent - and are hoping that the regulator will bail them out at bill payers' expense.
More investment in the infrastructure is needed, but funding that by what is going to be very expensive borrowing by a dodgy company is going to be far more expensive than it need be. Time for government to look at putting some of these companies into administration.
Absolutely
The water sector is a rip off. Time to make the shareholders face up to their responsibilities. Clearing out Ofwat is also needed.
Those that bought the water companies were effectively buying a long term bond which paid a dividend financed by the customers bills. They then used this bonded income to release huge amounts of capital by borrowing on that bond at very low interest rates. Unfortunately, the cost of that borrowing has now gone up so either the income flow from the customers has to increase or they have to pay back some of the monies released to reduce the borrowing to a sustainable rate.
All of this was fairly rational behaviour from those buying our assets. The assumption that they could continue to borrow indefinitely at such low interest rates was of course stupid but the capital they have been able to release from the companies means that they have got all or sometimes more than all their purchase price back already.
What is far more unforgiveable is the incompetent buffoons in OFWAT that let the purchasers pile up the debt in these companies in the first place, essentially putting the cost of the risk of an increase in interest rates on the customer rather than the shareholder. Yet another regulator that has simply not been up to the mark.
Very corporate David, but having recently spent 3 years working in the industry it is a bastion of poor practice, responsibility ducking and executive greed. The professional investors in the sector appear to have gone in for the wrong reasons and do not realise what they have taken on. The relationship between Ofwat and the water cos is lamentable with the regulator not being fit for purpose. Thames and some of the others are like Southern are on shaky finances. I suspect they will need to fall back in to public ownership.
Just wait until I introduce you to the electricity supply companies.
GTA VI trailer up to 40 million views in 6 hours. Going to save up some Annual Leave for it (released in 2025...)
Biggest release in gaming media history I would have thought.
There’s already 50m PS5s and 20m of the latest XBox out there, plus hundreds of millions of PCs - and pretty much everyone will want what’s undoubtedly the game of the decade.
There’s going to be a couple of billion dollars in sales, in the first few weeks.
It's not going to be on PC almost unbelievably apparently
The PC version of GTA5 followed six months later; I suspect it will be the same here.
GTA VI trailer up to 40 million views in 6 hours. Going to save up some Annual Leave for it (released in 2025...)
Biggest release in gaming media history I would have thought.
There’s already 50m PS5s and 20m of the latest XBox out there, plus hundreds of millions of PCs - and pretty much everyone will want what’s undoubtedly the game of the decade.
There’s going to be a couple of billion dollars in sales, in the first few weeks.
It's not going to be on PC almost unbelievably apparently
The PC version of GTA5 followed six months later; I suspect it will be the same here.
I was wrong:
"Grand Theft Auto V" (GTA 5) was initially released for console platforms in September 2013. The game later launched on PC on April 14, 2015.
The latest wrinkle in the water utility scandal - the injection of funds which was spun as an equity injection was actually funded by more debt issued by the holding company.
It's increasingly sounding as though Thames (for example) is insolvent - and are hoping that the regulator will bail them out at bill payers' expense.
More investment in the infrastructure is needed, but funding that by what is going to be very expensive borrowing by a dodgy company is going to be far more expensive than it need be. Time for government to look at putting some of these companies into administration.
Absolutely
The water sector is a rip off. Time to make the shareholders face up to their responsibilities. Clearing out Ofwat is also needed.
Those that bought the water companies were effectively buying a long term bond which paid a dividend financed by the customers bills. They then used this bonded income to release huge amounts of capital by borrowing on that bond at very low interest rates. Unfortunately, the cost of that borrowing has now gone up so either the income flow from the customers has to increase or they have to pay back some of the monies released to reduce the borrowing to a sustainable rate.
All of this was fairly rational behaviour from those buying our assets. The assumption that they could continue to borrow indefinitely at such low interest rates was of course stupid but the capital they have been able to release from the companies means that they have got all or sometimes more than all their purchase price back already.
What is far more unforgiveable is the incompetent buffoons in OFWAT that let the purchasers pile up the debt in these companies in the first place, essentially putting the cost of the risk of an increase in interest rates on the customer rather than the shareholder. Yet another regulator that has simply not been up to the mark.
Why does this matter, unless OFWAT are as foolish as to let them increase their prices to service their unnecessary debts. The physical assets remain whatever happens. If they go broke, the administratiors will sell the business/physical assets (which is almost certainly profitable without the debt loading), return what it can to the lenders and that will be that. The owners get wiped out (who cares), the lenders will take a nasty haircut (that should teach them to do a bit more due diligence), and the business will continue belonging to someone or other else.
She and KK will be kicking themselves but all they missed was a funding plan. Now, maybe there wasn't one in which case they could only not provide one.
But I know there were a lot of Cons who liked the messaging but needed some detail on the numbers. For KK who has a PhD in this stuff it was unforgiveable but I hear from friends that he has a touch of the Borises about him wrt hard work.
The baffling thing about it was that they could have made some unrealistic promises about efficiency savings in departmental spending - like every other government since the dawn of time - and it would have made the numbers add up sufficiently well to hide the nasty details in the small print.
Quite why they thought forbidding the OBR from saying anything would be more convincing is the crucial unanswered question.
Every other non-UK alternative (Netflix, CNN, YouTube) cannot replace it because of its parochial nature
So although I am comfortable with discussions of alternate funding models and its scope, I would regret the departure of the BBC. In fact, given their recent gutting of its news programmes and journalist staff, its news/current affairs/documentaries funding should be expanded not contracted.
Having now definitively settled the matter, you can now speak of something else. You're welcome.
The direction of travel of the BBC and its fate is not only a cause and consequence of something but also a symptom.
Viewcode says we need something to unite us as a nation. Maybe. But it does not follow that this will actually occur.
The BBC was a candidate for this. PB alone indicates this is no more. Other candidates abound or once did; each person can make their own commentary:
The Crown/Crown in Parliament Christian culture/church The NHS Effortless superiority of being top dog The good chaps theory of government Empire The anglophone world Common law and legal system An incorruptible civil order 'No sex please we're British' Our traditions of policing by consent A locally spread out aristocracy with obligations as well as rights Stiff upper lip/reserve John Stuart Mill 'On Liberty' The Times/Oxford/Cambridge 'Fair play' or 'It's not cricket' The threat from Vikings/Normans/The French/The Germans/The Russians/Johnny Foreigner.
FWIW I struggle to identify now what would hold us together as a nation, unless it is a literati writing endless articles Why Oh Why on the loss of one or more of the above. Because of reasons.
One of the things that has become glaringly obvious since moving to Ireland is that every country is catastrophically badly run, but in its own unique and specific ways. I remember an erstwhile acquaintance who moved to Denmark who made essentially this point by blogging about the frustrations of life in Denmark as well.
If you only ever compare the specific ways in which your own country is falling to pieces with other countries then it's easy to think that your country is performing particularly badly. But Britain is mostly okay in lots of ways, and notably decent in a few.
I think it would probably make it easier to fix the things that are broken if people were able to feel a bit of pride in the things that weren't. Otherwise people become cynical and give up, and cynicism really is toxic.
Comments
@RpsAgainstTrump
This Muslim fundamentalist who leads the campaign against Biden in swing states, says he’s not worried about Trump getting elected president:
“We have to send an important message...It may take 12 years, 20 years but at least we’ll send a message so in the future, next time there’s a Democrat in the WH he won't take our votes for granted.”
https://twitter.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1731719610737570002
===
I think you'll find you've been deported mate, long, long before the next Democrat.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-border-target-operating-model-august-2023/the-border-target-operating-model-august-2023#:~:text=Instead of the originally planned,rather than 31 January 2024.
https://firstlightfusion.com/technology/targets
...First Light’s journey to a new method for fusion started in nature, with the pistol shrimp. The pistol shrimp has an oversized claw, which it can “click” shut at very high speed. The motion is so fast that it launches a shock wave into the water and stresses it so much that it rips apart and forms a bubble. The shock wave and the bubble interact and the bubble collapses just as quickly as it forms. The vapour inside is heated to tens of thousands of degrees and emits a bright flash of light...
Of course the energies are vastly higher, and methods of much greater complexity, but the principle of focusing pressure waves is similar.
Tim Montgomerie 🇬🇧
@montie
·
4h
The Tories repeatedly promised controlled immigration and didn't deliver. Meanwhile Starmer is promising pound-sized economic change with penny-sized half measures. Both parties are playing dangerous games with our democracy.
If Starmer fails to turn things around in a couple of years could we see Farage Party at 30% in polls?
I'm generally fairly calm in debate, even a little humourous, but even I found the blood pressure rising as we went back and forth. I asked who he blamed the current situation on and he said Netanyahu. Now I wouldn't want to defend the man but I said I thought the fundamental problem was Iran, an enormously larger neighbour (sort of) that was committed to Israel's destruction. He then asked if Iran was actually capable of destroying Israel. I didn't think so and so for him this made it all academic. I tried again with 110m people in Egypt not so long ago under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood but he wasn't shifting.
We then come to the issue of solutions. For him what mattered was ending the indiscriminate killing of people in Gaza and a one state solution as an end goal. He made the point that there would be an Arab majority eventually to which I suggested that might not be great for the Jews. However since it was impossible to say what would happen in future he didn't think my concerns were valid. Whatever the evils of the Holocaust Jews had not been seriously persecuted in the west since 1945. I took that as a suggestion that even if the Jews were forced out of Israel they could always re-settle in western countries. But that seemed to display a remarkable indifference to me, an explanation for which I couldn't put my finger on.
THIS. 1000x this.
For me the most awkwardness has been visiting inlaw relations whose default 'jokes' seems to frequently involve wishing the death of anybody who has ever voted Tory. But at least that does not involve getting into distressing arguments about matters.
As to the long term solution, I should try to avoid such discussions. Far cleverer people than me, and I dare say than you and your mate, have tried and failed.
Labelling your friend antisemitic, or for that matter labelling yourself as the opposite for your apparent relative indifference to Gazan or Palestinian casualties, is unhelpful. In short, to save your friendship, both of you should STFU about the Middle East. After all, even if you do light upon an ideal solution, no-one that mattered would be listening anyway.
Former Congressman George Santos is now offering personalized video messages through the website Cameo, and it appears one of his first customers is Senator John Fetterman (D-PA).
Fetterman posted the support video he commissioned from the expelled congressman on X (formerly known as Twitter), where he noted that the video was to give 'some encouragement' to Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) 'given his substantial legal problems.'
https://www.meidastouch.com/news/fetterman-trolls-menendez-with-santos-cameo
But whatever decision you take, it is your decision and your responsibility. Keep them or drop them, it's up to you. But it is up to you. Good luck.
Which made me doubly shudder once I knew she had been shooting up during her breaks.
Look on the bright side!
Seems to me there are three classes of worker: Vocational - they do it for the love of their fellow man and the emotional side of looking after the vulnerable (they stay for years and are probably now middle aged); just there temporarily for quick cash before they move on in six months; and, a few, torn between the two sides.
If the final set were given another £4 a hour they might become the first set.
I assume this photo was on here earlier… pretty mental of Jezza?
(ducks)
Paul Brand
@PaulBrandITV
·
5h
NEW: Older people's charity
@age_uk
on the new immigration rules.
"It is an open secret that inward migration effectively 'saved' the social care workforce last year and, as things stand, anything that undermines that source of support must be a real concern."
https://x.com/corbyn_project/status/1731623117804413093?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Care at home would be better than care homes, but care visitors suffer from a high turnover too, so none of them really get to know the 'patient' or what they need. The council don't pay enough but somehow the cost to the end user who does pay is upwards of £25 / hr, despite the minimum wage staff - even here in the cheap seats.
We have 'solved' this by doing the job ourselves but obviously that has a big downside.
The whole business needs a massive shakeup. Though it would appear to be an election loser, so nobody wants to touch it.
BREAKING NEWS: #KingCharlesIII and #QueenCamilla, will be travelling to #Australia & #NewZealand in October 2024.
This Royal visit will coincide with the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, which is happening in Apia, Tuamasaga, Samoa from the 21st to the 25th of October
https://x.com/Austmonarchist/status/1731767450906046815?s=20
And perhaps why those who might be on the end of said horrors (and were on 7 October), might take a rather different view to someone who never will be from the comfort of their fashionable, distant opinions.
*Internal combustion engine
There are a significant number of extra Indian and African care workers pushing around disabled and elderly people than there were pre-Covid, when many were European and here on a temporary basis.
I don't want a radical left-wing party taking over that might end up attacking private property rights, or extra-democratic "action" that causes mass disruption to our way of life.
Nor do I want the hard-right counterreaction to that.
Not that it bothers me of course, I can still watch every game live - and thanks to the internet, so can most fans if they really want to.
Anyone who talks glibly of a ‘one state solution’ is one of three things: (1) a rabid Zionist trying to pretend to be reasonable (2) a rabid antisemite trying to pretend to be reasonable (3) a complete idiot who doesn’t understand the blindingly obvious implications.
The catch is Netanyahu is (1) and Hamas and their supporters are (2).
This would appear to pretty much rule it out.
It may also rule out October 17th as Charles would need to be here to appoint a new PM - likely on the 18th but wouldn't they have to allow for possibility of it dragging on if no clear cut result. And he might be leaving by the 18th anyway if they are doing a tour rather than just going to the meeting.
It may also reduce the chances of October 31st because surely Sunak couldn't go all the way to Australia in the last 10 days of the campaign.
So that meeting looks like it havs major implications for timing of GE.
That may just mean I haven’t been paying attention to their every word on Israel, of course.
They are generally idiots in other ways, however.
There’s already 50m PS5s and 20m of the latest XBox out there, plus hundreds of millions of PCs - and pretty much everyone will want what’s undoubtedly the game of the decade.
There’s going to be a couple of billion dollars in sales, in the first few weeks.
The meeting is in Samoa and he is doing a "tour" of Australia first.
So on reflection I think he would be leaving the UK around about Oct 13th or 14th. I reckon that could easily rule out an Oct 10th GE as well.
This is surely a massive consideration.
Oct 17th, 24th and 31st all look definitely out.
Oct 10th looks likely out - as Charles couldn't delay his tour and would have to be here if it took even 2 or 3 days for PM to emerge.
Nov 7th is also probably out as Sunak couldn't go all the way to Australia mid campaign.
I'm surprised nobody has spotted this before now.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/matt-cartoons-december-2023/
It's increasingly sounding as though Thames (for example) is insolvent - and are hoping that the regulator will bail them out at bill payers' expense.
More investment in the infrastructure is needed, but funding that by what is going to be very expensive borrowing by a dodgy company is going to be far more expensive than it need be.
Time for government to look at putting some of these companies into administration.
It's nothing compared to a GE. KC can send Baldy and his haggard Mrs.
I’m still not convinced that this May talk is realistic. Given the Royal visit , early October or November looks a bit more likely .
Of course there’s always the chance Sunak could hang on right into January 2025 . That does look desperate though and not sure the public would be in a great mood after the Christmas come down .
Well, it might work. More likely to work than the current idiots in Cabinet are.
The water sector is a rip off. Time to make the shareholders face up to their responsibilities. Clearing out Ofwat is also needed.
Got to admit, I'm far more interested in Dragon's Dogma 2 than GTA VI, although the latter will sell far more.
All of this was fairly rational behaviour from those buying our assets. The assumption that they could continue to borrow indefinitely at such low interest rates was of course stupid but the capital they have been able to release from the companies means that they have got all or sometimes more than all their purchase price back already.
What is far more unforgiveable is the incompetent buffoons in OFWAT that let the purchasers pile up the debt in these companies in the first place, essentially putting the cost of the risk of an increase in interest rates on the customer rather than the shareholder. Yet another regulator that has simply not been up to the mark.
I'm reminded of that paradox about the man who is told he will be executed one morning next week, but not when...
If the ramifications of Cleverly's announcement yesterday have time to feed in, the NHS and the care sector will likely as not have imploded. Implementing the announcement in April on the other hand might get some good client media headlines before reality bites. Rwanda too, best to see the headlines rather than the reality.
The idea that having been shamed by this revolt they would use the Lords to modify it is almost beyond belief, even for Sunak. Not so much a tin ear as stone deaf.
I entirely agree that the regulator - and successive governments - have been useless at holding them to account. That doesn't let the thieves off the hook.
It would be an outrage were the regulator to bail them out again.
A budget that establishes clear blue water, and no chance for backbench unrest to cause a further leadership contest.
Telling its readers the UK economy is actually doing OK, Brexit is not a disaster, in some ways the EU is worse off = no way Rejoin will ever be a thing
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/05/brexit-disaster-rejoining-channel-europe-economy
NEW THREAD
"Grand Theft Auto V" (GTA 5) was initially released for console platforms in September 2013. The game later launched on PC on April 14, 2015.
Quite why they thought forbidding the OBR from saying anything would be more convincing is the crucial unanswered question.
If you only ever compare the specific ways in which your own country is falling to pieces with other countries then it's easy to think that your country is performing particularly badly. But Britain is mostly okay in lots of ways, and notably decent in a few.
I think it would probably make it easier to fix the things that are broken if people were able to feel a bit of pride in the things that weren't. Otherwise people become cynical and give up, and cynicism really is toxic.