In the last 70 years, only one Prime Minister has "had" two Monarchs: Liz Truss.
Or... in the last 500 years, only one Prime Minister has truly looked like a rabbit caught in headlights: Liz Truss.
Imagine being poor old QE2: your first PM is Winston Churchill, your last PM is Liz Truss. That's quite a downwards trend. No wonder she died.
Whereas KCIII’s first PM was Truss so who knows what titan we will have as PM in the final year of his reign?
Churchill and Truss had one thing in common though, they were both Liberals before they became Conservatives
Churchill was a Conservative when first elected, defected to the Liberals in 1903, joined the Lloyd George Liberals in 1916, became an independent with the fall of the Coalition standing as a Liberal-backed candidate in Leicester in 1923 before becoming an 'Anti-Socialist Constitutionalist' in 1924, rejoining the Conservatives in 1925.
In the last 70 years, only one Prime Minister has "had" two Monarchs: Liz Truss.
Or... in the last 500 years, only one Prime Minister has truly looked like a rabbit caught in headlights: Liz Truss.
Imagine being poor old QE2: your first PM is Winston Churchill, your last PM is Liz Truss. That's quite a downwards trend. No wonder she died.
Whereas KCIII’s first PM was Truss so who knows what titan we will have as PM in the final year of his reign?
Churchill and Truss had one thing in common though, they were both Liberals before they became Conservatives
Churchill was a Conservative when first elected, defected to the Liberals in 1903, joined the Lloyd George Liberals in 1916, became an independent with the fall of the Coalition standing as a Liberal-backed candidate in Leicester in 1923 before becoming an 'Anti-Socialist Constitutionalist' in 1924, rejoining the Conservatives in 1925.
A model Truss apprenticeship?
Not Truss. Johnson was however a model Churchill.
A small and rather unconvincing copy of the real thing.
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Like everything, polling on consumer sentiment is distorted by polarisation. Basically, Democrats are happy with the economy and Republicans say the economy is in the toilet. Under Trump it was the other way round.
51% of independents say the economy is poor in this poll and a majority of Democrats say it's either poor or only fair:
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Like everything, polling on consumer sentiment is distorted by polarisation. Basically, Democrats are happy with the economy and Republicans say the economy is in the toilet. Under Trump it was the other way round.
51% of independents say the economy is poor in this poll and a majority of Democrats say it's either poor or only fair:
I am thoroughly disappointed by this. In an interview, Kelsey Grammer has said he still supports Donald Trump and will back him to be President again in 2024. I had no idea he was a Trump fan."
Kelsey Grammer well-known as long-time right-wing wack-job.
Which, speaking as a far-out woke-job, takes away NOTHING from his comedic genius.
When he's got a decent script, that is. When he don't, he suffers. As with last seasons of "Frasier" (dreck).
With a rather tragic backstory, if memory serves. Plus he is good even if the script sucks, as "Up Periscope" and "Money Plane" prove. But yes, he is right-wing wack job... 😃
As he also has a net worth of $80 million I doubt he cares what people think of his political views, he is rich enough to afford to be one of the few Republicans left in Hollywood
The problem is several fold: Firstly in the recent interview he wasn't prepared to say anything in defence of supporting Trump; secondly everyone who is not a ludicrous ideologue knows there is a moral problem with Trump going way beyond his 'political views', this has a number of facets but his failure to lose properly and democratically is irrefutable. Grammer is not an idiot so something strange is going on. His thoughtful and non payroll supporters have to explain how they can support his fascistic tendency about elections. They notably don't. It's like listening to people in Gaza being asked about Hamas.
BTW I do not think there is a single contributor to PB who is prepared to defend Trump on the issue of how he approached losing the presidential election.
Though the final polls before she was ousted had her leading the Conservatives to their lowest voteshare in history and less than 50 Tory MPs would have been left
LESS than. Fewer is used to refer to number among things that are counted, as in "fewer MPs" and "fewer posts"; less is used to refer to quantity or amount among things that are measured, as in "less time" and "less effort. Here’s a tip: in general, if the noun is plural, use fewer; if it’s singular, use less.
I am thoroughly disappointed by this. In an interview, Kelsey Grammer has said he still supports Donald Trump and will back him to be President again in 2024. I had no idea he was a Trump fan."
Kelsey Grammer well-known as long-time right-wing wack-job.
Which, speaking as a far-out woke-job, takes away NOTHING from his comedic genius.
When he's got a decent script, that is. When he don't, he suffers. As with last seasons of "Frasier" (dreck).
With a rather tragic backstory, if memory serves. Plus he is good even if the script sucks, as "Up Periscope" and "Money Plane" prove. But yes, he is right-wing wack job... 😃
As he also has a net worth of $80 million I doubt he cares what people think of his political views, he is rich enough to afford to be one of the few Republicans left in Hollywood
The problem is several fold: Firstly in the recent interview he wasn't prepared to say anything in defence of supporting Trump; secondly everyone who is not a ludicrous ideologue knows there is a moral problem with Trump going way beyond his 'political views', this has a number of facets but his failure to lose properly and democratically is irrefutable. Grammer is not an idiot so something strange is going on. His thoughtful and non payroll supporters have to explain how they can support his fascistic tendency about elections. They notably don't. It's like listening to people in Gaza being asked about Hamas.
BTW I do not think there is a single contributor to PB who is prepared to defend Trump on the issue of how he approached losing the presidential election.
If you're posting on PB there is a reasonable expectation that you might defend your views. Kelsey Grammer seems to just be answering questions.
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Yesterday I remember reading somewhere (could be x, could be Bluesky) that eating out was now noticeably more expensive than it used to be. I think the comparison was a chain that used to cost $50 all in back in 2021 is now $75 or so.
If you are cutting down on eating out that is very noticeable
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Like everything, polling on consumer sentiment is distorted by polarisation. Basically, Democrats are happy with the economy and Republicans say the economy is in the toilet. Under Trump it was the other way round.
51% of independents say the economy is poor in this poll and a majority of Democrats say it's either poor or only fair:
The point is that consumer confidence surveys used to show minimal partisanship effects, but now it's really pronounced. If almost half the respondents are going to say the economy is shit no matter how it's going then you are going to struggle to get a positive number overall. I agree there's other stuff going on (probably reflects still high levels of inflation and concerns over the deficit) but partisanship is definitely impacting consumer sentiment surveys. See the chart on the link below. (As with so much in the US, Republicans appear to be more extreme than Democrats).
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Just today we can read about data breaches at DNA ancestry site 23andme and US chocolate maker Hersheys.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
Yet its all based on borrowing, which has to be paid back
But that's not US specific. Eg we're drowning in debt but lack the oomph.
Of course but the USA is way beyond the UK in its debt drowning. Its difficult to see how they can continue as they are.
Of course, such thoughts have been aired for a very long time. The only way out (in my view) is to print money to pay off the bulk of the debt, but that has to be done very slowly, and it's no good trying to borrow any more while you're doing it.
That gigantic military spend of theirs could be flexed downwards a little without the world caving in, I'd have thought.
We'd need to spend more if they did.
That's coming, I think. Europe spending more on the military, the US spending less.
Among other things, Doug Burgum started a chimney sweep business. It will not surprise you to learn that he became a billionaire in other businesses.
(For conspiracy fans: Judging by his experience in those other businesses, Burgum is the best candidate to face any problems with AI.)
Correction to last sentence - "Burgum WAS . . ."
As POTUS prospects go, the "campaign" of current North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum for nomination next year, bears some passing resemblance to the 1932 "campaign" of then-Oklahoma Governor William "Alfalfa Bill" Murray.
His memorable campaign slogan (in depths of Great Depression) was based what he called the 4 Bs: Bread, Butter, Bacon and Beans
Wonder what would be 3rd-millennium equivalent for "Digital Doug" Burgum?
Though the final polls before she was ousted had her leading the Conservatives to their lowest voteshare in history and less than 50 Tory MPs would have been left
LESS than. Fewer is used to refer to number among things that are counted, as in "fewer MPs" and "fewer posts"; less is used to refer to quantity or amount among things that are measured, as in "less time" and "less effort. Here’s a tip: in general, if the noun is plural, use fewer; if it’s singular, use less.
DM me if you need any more help with your posts.
Reckon you're more likely to receive a FU as opposed to DM.
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
Yet its all based on borrowing, which has to be paid back
But that's not US specific. Eg we're drowning in debt but lack the oomph.
Of course but the USA is way beyond the UK in its debt drowning. Its difficult to see how they can continue as they are.
Of course, such thoughts have been aired for a very long time. The only way out (in my view) is to print money to pay off the bulk of the debt, but that has to be done very slowly, and it's no good trying to borrow any more while you're doing it.
That gigantic military spend of theirs could be flexed downwards a little without the world caving in, I'd have thought.
Lol. Have you seen the state of the world at present?
Yes. And I've seen their defense budget.
But have you seen the amount of money from the defence complex that flows into American politics?
Have you also seen the way Americans seem indoctrinated to revere their military? Almost regardless of how it behaves.
Yes. And I was particularly struck by the Trump schizophrenic position of (i) pullback from foreign engagement and (ii) spend even more on the military.
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
Yet its all based on borrowing, which has to be paid back
But that's not US specific. Eg we're drowning in debt but lack the oomph.
Of course but the USA is way beyond the UK in its debt drowning. Its difficult to see how they can continue as they are.
Of course, such thoughts have been aired for a very long time. The only way out (in my view) is to print money to pay off the bulk of the debt, but that has to be done very slowly, and it's no good trying to borrow any more while you're doing it.
That gigantic military spend of theirs could be flexed downwards a little without the world caving in, I'd have thought.
We'd need to spend more if they did.
That's coming, I think. Europe spending more on the military, the US spending less.
Yes, but a realistic defence budget without the US is a big number. We have a huge coast with no defence, and therefore we need a capable navy. What we have is a flag waving shambles. We also need a capable airforce - it makes the Navy look good - except for a very small and elite part the RAF is hopeless.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Although Ben Elton's views seems to have changed somewhat since he became richer than God...
I couldn't find any clips from his Friday Night Live heyday in the late 80s, which was required viewing in our household when I was a kid. I saw so many great comedians for the first time on that show.
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Like everything, polling on consumer sentiment is distorted by polarisation. Basically, Democrats are happy with the economy and Republicans say the economy is in the toilet. Under Trump it was the other way round.
51% of independents say the economy is poor in this poll and a majority of Democrats say it's either poor or only fair:
If you look at the per state numbers, Biden is doing particularly badly in the Sun Belt (Nevada, Arizona), but is holding up quite well in the Rust Belt. I think that (a) makes the path to 270 for Trump run through the South, capturing NV, AZ and GA; and (b) makes interest rates the more plausible explanation for both Biden's unpopularity and people thinking the economy is not doing great. Simply, people in the Sun Belt spend a lot more of their salaries on interest payments.
I am thoroughly disappointed by this. In an interview, Kelsey Grammer has said he still supports Donald Trump and will back him to be President again in 2024. I had no idea he was a Trump fan."
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Is there really?
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Where are Gazans supposed to live when the bombing finally stops . Two thirds of homes have been destroyed . I’m sorry but this isn’t some targeted operation . It’s simply turning Gaza into a wasteland . Herding people into an ever smaller area , wide spread disease now breaking out, people starving.
The IDF campaign seems to be just bomb everthing in the hope of killing Hamas fighters regardless of how many Gazans are wiped out in the process .
I don't support Trump but Kelsey Grammar is entitled to his own political opinions.
It'd be a dull world where we only watched comedy by actors or writers we agreed with.
I disagree with almost all of Ben Elton's politics, and even more how he says it, but I still love his stuff.
Perhaps NOT worth noting, but I recall a "Tribute to America" (or something like that) TV special staring John Wayne (well-known as a conservative conservative) which featured a huge map of The Heartland as a backdrop, including a community in Kansas labeled as "Liberty"
Which turned out to be right-wing political correctitude for . . . wait for it . . . the actual town of Liberal.
Early example of cancel culture?
As you can read for yourself, the founder of Liberal was himself a proto-Woke of the worst water!
I am thoroughly disappointed by this. In an interview, Kelsey Grammer has said he still supports Donald Trump and will back him to be President again in 2024. I had no idea he was a Trump fan."
While I'm no Trump fan, people are free to have their own political beliefs.
(That said, the new Frasier is painfully unfunny.)
How often does going back, trying to capture old glories etc. end in failure and disappointment?
Nearly always.
Counter-example: the Wedding Present album Take Fountain. After four or five albums in the late 80s and early 90s (and 12 singles in 1992 alone), the Wedding Present dissolves into side projects in the mid 90s - before reforming in 2002 to release Take Fountain, by some way their finest album and in my view the album of the decade. Notable largely because, as you say, trying to recapture past glories seldom works.
I am thoroughly disappointed by this. In an interview, Kelsey Grammer has said he still supports Donald Trump and will back him to be President again in 2024. I had no idea he was a Trump fan."
I am thoroughly disappointed by this. In an interview, Kelsey Grammer has said he still supports Donald Trump and will back him to be President again in 2024. I had no idea he was a Trump fan."
While I'm no Trump fan, people are free to have their own political beliefs.
(That said, the new Frasier is painfully unfunny.)
How often does going back, trying to capture old glories etc. end in failure and disappointment?
Nearly always.
Counter-example: the Wedding Present album Take Fountain. After four or five albums in the late 80s and early 90s (and 12 singles in 1992 alone), the Wedding Present dissolves into side projects in the mid 90s - before reforming in 2002 to release Take Fountain, by some way their finest album and in my view the album of the decade. Notable largely because, as you say, trying to recapture past glories seldom works.
I don't support Trump but Kelsey Grammar is entitled to his own political opinions.
It'd be a dull world where we only watched comedy by actors or writers we agreed with.
I disagree with almost all of Ben Elton's politics, and even more how he says it, but I still love his stuff.
I'm exactly the same as you, except I think Ben Elton is a talentless non-entity.
Nah, Blackadder.
Fair point, but I like to think that succeeded because of the genius of Richard Curtis, and despite Ben Elton.
Series one, when Elton was not involved, was piss-poor.
From series two Elton started writing and Blackadder was transformed into comedy gold.
What Elton added (and also showed again in the more recent upstart crow) was the trademark mix of wit and surrealism in the dialogue. All those famous one liners are his, I think.
Where are Gazans supposed to live when the bombing finally stops . Two thirds of homes have been destroyed . I’m sorry but this isn’t some targeted operation . It’s simply turning Gaza into a wasteland . Herding people into an ever smaller area , wide spread disease now breaking out, people starving.
The IDF campaign seems to be just bomb everthing in the hope of killing Hamas fighters regardless of how many Gazans are wiped out in the process .
It increasingly seems that way. Reminiscent of Mariupol. The Americans need to have some very firm words otherwise Israel loses this, long term.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Is there really?
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
Put the question this way. What do they do not want kids to see? A sexualised context or unhealthy, unrealistic sex? There’s lot of that implied in non-porn content that just lacks the explicit penetrative sex. Is it the explicit act itself then? Plenty of that in mainstream European cinema. It obviously can’t just be explicit nudity.
It seems to be that wherever you draw the line, some subset of Pornohub type website will be able to continue trading without the restrictions, unless you apply the rules to all cinema.
And that’s the best outcome - as some have said above, I think that if kids can’t access porn on relatively safe website then they’ll go elsewhere and get their credit card cloned and their identity nicked.
As has always been the case since the days when we only saw porn because our mates found a mag in the woods (who put them all there btw?) or someone’s friend’s cousin’s mate lent them a VHS, the way you deal with it is to have good sex education in schools and conversations with parents.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Is there really?
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
Put the question this way. What do they do not want kids to see? A sexualised context or unhealthy, unrealistic sex? There’s lot of that implied in non-porn content that just lacks the explicit penetrative sex. Is it the explicit act itself then? Plenty of that in mainstream European cinema. It obviously can’t just be explicit nudity.
It seems to be that wherever you draw the line, some subset of Pornohub type website will be able to continue trading without the restrictions, unless you apply the rules to all cinema.
And that’s the best outcome - as some have said above, I think that if kids can’t access porn on relatively safe website then they’ll go elsewhere and get their credit card cloned and their identity nicked.
As has always been the case since the days when we only saw porn because our mates found a mag in the woods (who put them all there btw?) or someone’s friend’s cousin’s mate lent them a VHS, the way you deal with it is to have good sex education in schools and conversations with parents.
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Like everything, polling on consumer sentiment is distorted by polarisation. Basically, Democrats are happy with the economy and Republicans say the economy is in the toilet. Under Trump it was the other way round.
51% of independents say the economy is poor in this poll and a majority of Democrats say it's either poor or only fair:
If you look at the per state numbers, Biden is doing particularly badly in the Sun Belt (Nevada, Arizona), but is holding up quite well in the Rust Belt. I think that (a) makes the path to 270 for Trump run through the South, capturing NV, AZ and GA; and (b) makes interest rates the more plausible explanation for both Biden's unpopularity and people thinking the economy is not doing great. Simply, people in the Sun Belt spend a lot more of their salaries on interest payments.
Yes and interest rates in the US are now 5.5%, higher even than the 5.25% base interest rate now in the UK.
Also higher than the 4.5% Eurozone current rate, the 5% rate in Canada, -0.1% rate in Japan, 3.5% rate in South Korea and 4.35% rate in Australia. Those interest rates cover mortgage as well as loan repayment costs
I don't support Trump but Kelsey Grammar is entitled to his own political opinions.
It'd be a dull world where we only watched comedy by actors or writers we agreed with.
I disagree with almost all of Ben Elton's politics, and even more how he says it, but I still love his stuff.
I'm exactly the same as you, except I think Ben Elton is a talentless non-entity.
Nah, Blackadder.
Fair point, but I like to think that succeeded because of the genius of Richard Curtis, and despite Ben Elton.
Series one, when Elton was not involved, was piss-poor.
From series two Elton started writing and Blackadder was transformed into comedy gold.
Series 2-4 were far better than series 1. But series 1 was not bad. It was funny, well written and had some excellent casting and acting. It just was not as good as what followed.
Currently got a GlosCCC meeting on the other screen.
They're thinking of selling Nevill Road.
Would be sad to leave it, but actually it would make a lot of sense. Not really a good location however historic. Too cramped and bloody difficult to get to.
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
Where are Gazans supposed to live when the bombing finally stops . Two thirds of homes have been destroyed . I’m sorry but this isn’t some targeted operation . It’s simply turning Gaza into a wasteland . Herding people into an ever smaller area , wide spread disease now breaking out, people starving.
The IDF campaign seems to be just bomb everthing in the hope of killing Hamas fighters regardless of how many Gazans are wiped out in the process .
It increasingly seems that way. Reminiscent of Mariupol. The Americans need to have some very firm words otherwise Israel loses this, long term.
In the light of @Cyclefree ‘s run of articles about prosecutions, based solely on computer evidence which was assumed to be true, what do we make of this ?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/01/the-gospel-how-israel-uses-ai-to-select-bombing-targets … According to Kochavi, “once this machine was activated” in Israel’s 11-day war with Hamas in May 2021 it generated 100 targets a day. “To put that into perspective, in the past we would produce 50 targets in Gaza per year. Now, this machine produces 100 targets a single day, with 50% of them being attacked.”
Precisely what forms of data are ingested into the Gospel is not known. But experts said AI-based decision support systems for targeting would typically analyse large sets of information from a range of sources, such as drone footage, intercepted communications, surveillance data and information drawn from monitoring the movements and behaviour patterns of individuals and large groups.
The target division was created to address a chronic problem for the IDF: in earlier operations in Gaza, the air force repeatedly ran out of targets to strike...
Somewhat optimistically (and some might say blasphemously) named “The Gospel”, it seems only a very small step from removing humans from the killing process completely. At least from one end of the gun/bomb/missile, that is.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Is there really?
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
Easy.
If it can't be used as a metaphor for the Conservative Party in 2024, it isn't porn.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Is there really?
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
Easy.
If it can't be used as a metaphor for the Conservative Party in 2024, it isn't porn.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Is there really?
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
Put the question this way. What do they do not want kids to see? A sexualised context or unhealthy, unrealistic sex? There’s lot of that implied in non-porn content that just lacks the explicit penetrative sex. Is it the explicit act itself then? Plenty of that in mainstream European cinema. It obviously can’t just be explicit nudity.
It seems to be that wherever you draw the line, some subset of Pornohub type website will be able to continue trading without the restrictions, unless you apply the rules to all cinema.
And that’s the best outcome - as some have said above, I think that if kids can’t access porn on relatively safe website then they’ll go elsewhere and get their credit card cloned and their identity nicked.
As has always been the case since the days when we only saw porn because our mates found a mag in the woods (who put them all there btw?)…
You can take porn out of the wood, but you can’t take the wood out of porn ?
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Like everything, polling on consumer sentiment is distorted by polarisation. Basically, Democrats are happy with the economy and Republicans say the economy is in the toilet. Under Trump it was the other way round.
51% of independents say the economy is poor in this poll and a majority of Democrats say it's either poor or only fair:
If you look at the per state numbers, Biden is doing particularly badly in the Sun Belt (Nevada, Arizona), but is holding up quite well in the Rust Belt. I think that (a) makes the path to 270 for Tr ump run through the South, capturing NV, AZ and GA; and (b) makes interest rates the more plausible explanation for both Biden's unpopularity and people thinking the economy is not doing great. Simply, people in the Sun Belt spend a lot more of their salaries on interest payments.
I thought US mortgages were fixed rate for say 35 years but with the option to refinance cheaper if available?
Appreciate the rise in rates hits buyers and/or people who want to move but are trapped by their good deal, but I'd have thought the impact will be less than over here with short-term fixes.
In any case the trend will likely be towards rates falling back from their peak by November.
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Like everything, polling on consumer sentiment is distorted by polarisation. Basically, Democrats are happy with the economy and Republicans say the economy is in the toilet. Under Trump it was the other way round.
51% of independents say the economy is poor in this poll and a majority of Democrats say it's either poor or only fair:
If you look at the per state numbers, Biden is doing particularly badly in the Sun Belt (Nevada, Arizona), but is holding up quite well in the Rust Belt. I think that (a) makes the path to 270 for Trump run through the South, capturing NV, AZ and GA; and (b) makes interest rates the more plausible explanation for both Biden's unpopularity and people thinking the economy is not doing great. Simply, people in the Sun Belt spend a lot more of their salaries on interest payments.
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
I forgot the decades that Kelsey Grammer spent working as the highest paid presenter at our national broadcaster
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Is there really?
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
Put the question this way. What do they do not want kids to see? A sexualised context or unhealthy, unrealistic sex? There’s lot of that implied in non-porn content that just lacks the explicit penetrative sex. Is it the explicit act itself then? Plenty of that in mainstream European cinema. It obviously can’t just be explicit nudity.
It seems to be that wherever you draw the line, some subset of Pornohub type website will be able to continue trading without the restrictions, unless you apply the rules to all cinema.
And that’s the best outcome - as some have said above, I think that if kids can’t access porn on relatively safe website then they’ll go elsewhere and get their credit card cloned and their identity nicked.
As has always been the case since the days when we only saw porn because our mates found a mag in the woods (who put them all there btw?)…
You can take porn out of the wood, but you can’t take the wood out of porn ?
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Like everything, polling on consumer sentiment is distorted by polarisation. Basically, Democrats are happy with the economy and Republicans say the economy is in the toilet. Under Trump it was the other way round.
51% of independents say the economy is poor in this poll and a majority of Democrats say it's either poor or only fair:
If you look at the per state numbers, Biden is doing particularly badly in the Sun Belt (Nevada, Arizona), but is holding up quite well in the Rust Belt. I think that (a) makes the path to 270 for Trump run through the South, capturing NV, AZ and GA; and (b) makes interest rates the more plausible explanation for both Biden's unpopularity and people thinking the economy is not doing great. Simply, people in the Sun Belt spend a lot more of their salaries on interest payments.
Is this about hispanics turning from the Dems?
Partly, but NOT mostly.
Latinos leaving Dems is like Blacks leaving Dems. A thing but NOT as big a thing as things go.
Note that Reps have been heralding this since (at least) the 1980s.
In the last 70 years, only one Prime Minister has "had" two Monarchs: Liz Truss.
Or... in the last 500 years, only one Prime Minister has truly looked like a rabbit caught in headlights: Liz Truss.
Not a fan of her though I am, since a failure to resist opponents (internal and external) and lose support sufficiently that you get turfed out in less than 2 months is a failure for the leader regardless of whether it was a good idea, but it is a tremendous 'what if' scenario had she only been a little more prepared, a little less inept, her enemies a little less bullish, or the party a little more willing to give her more time after sacrificing Kwarteng.
Her downfall was truly remarkable, and it can be easy to forget how bad it had to have been to happen, but on a long term basis was pushing through it stubbornly the right idea, even if it did not work, given how things have gone?
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
Let the BBC raise its revenue privately and I couldn't care less what its presenters say.
Plenty of Sky and ITV and other presenters say crazy shit, I don't have to watch them, and don't have to pay for them.
But we're taxed to pay for Lineker et al even if we don't watch his show, or his channel at all.
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Like everything, polling on consumer sentiment is distorted by polarisation. Basically, Democrats are happy with the economy and Republicans say the economy is in the toilet. Under Trump it was the other way round.
51% of independents say the economy is poor in this poll and a majority of Democrats say it's either poor or only fair:
If you look at the per state numbers, Biden is doing particularly badly in the Sun Belt (Nevada, Arizona), but is holding up quite well in the Rust Belt. I think that (a) makes the path to 270 for Trump run through the South, capturing NV, AZ and GA; and (b) makes interest rates the more plausible explanation for both Biden's unpopularity and people thinking the economy is not doing great. Simply, people in the Sun Belt spend a lot more of their salaries on interest payments.
Is this about hispanics turning from the Dems?
No it is mainly about high interest rates, the Siena poll has Trump winning 42% of Hispanics which is actually less than the 44% of Hispanics Bush won in 2004
Taxpayers footed £2million bill for failed firm that paid David Cameron millions Foreign Secretary David Cameron is under pressure to declare how much he earned from his role as an adviser to Greensill Capital before it collapsed leaving taxpayers out of pocket https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/taxpayers-footed-2million-bill-failed-31599713
Where are Gazans supposed to live when the bombing finally stops . Two thirds of homes have been destroyed . I’m sorry but this isn’t some targeted operation . It’s simply turning Gaza into a wasteland . Herding people into an ever smaller area , wide spread disease now breaking out, people starving.
The IDF campaign seems to be just bomb everthing in the hope of killing Hamas fighters regardless of how many Gazans are wiped out in the process .
How about Egypt or anywhere else in the Middle East offers them refuge and somewhere safe to live?
The war should end when every single Hamas fighter is dead or surrenders unconditionally, until then there is nowhere safe for Gazans because its a war, war has no safe places.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Is there really?
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
Easy.
If it can't be used as a metaphor for the Conservative Party in 2024, it isn't porn.
I live in a safe seat that has been Tory for 103 of the last 105 years. For the first time that I can ever recall outside of an election period, I have received today a leaflet/note from the incumbent. I find that very telling.
He has a majority of 20k but it is obviously worried.
I am thoroughly disappointed by this. In an interview, Kelsey Grammer has said he still supports Donald Trump and will back him to be President again in 2024. I had no idea he was a Trump fan."
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Is there really?
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
Put the question this way. What do they do not want kids to see? A sexualised context or unhealthy, unrealistic sex? There’s lot of that implied in non-porn content that just lacks the explicit penetrative sex. Is it the explicit act itself then? Plenty of that in mainstream European cinema. It obviously can’t just be explicit nudity.
It seems to be that wherever you draw the line, some subset of Pornohub type website will be able to continue trading without the restrictions, unless you apply the rules to all cinema.
And that’s the best outcome - as some have said above, I think that if kids can’t access porn on relatively safe website then they’ll go elsewhere and get their credit card cloned and their identity nicked.
As has always been the case since the days when we only saw porn because our mates found a mag in the woods (who put them all there btw?)…
You can take porn out of the wood, but you can’t take the wood out of porn ?
Where are Gazans supposed to live when the bombing finally stops . Two thirds of homes have been destroyed . I’m sorry but this isn’t some targeted operation . It’s simply turning Gaza into a wasteland . Herding people into an ever smaller area , wide spread disease now breaking out, people starving.
The IDF campaign seems to be just bomb everthing in the hope of killing Hamas fighters regardless of how many Gazans are wiped out in the process .
It increasingly seems that way. Reminiscent of Mariupol. The Americans need to have some very firm words otherwise Israel loses this, long term.
America is already starting to make that point.
If this is what they say in public what do they say in private and more to the point will Israel care.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Is there really?
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
Easy.
If it can't be used as a metaphor for the Conservative Party in 2024, it isn't porn.
I live in a safe seat that has been Tory for 103 of the last 105 years. For the first time that I can ever recall outside of an election period, I have received today a leaflet/note from the incumbent. I find that very telling.
He has a majority of 20k but it is obviously worried.
Today in our redwall returning Red seat I got a Xmas card / calendar from our MP.
On the back is a photo of him, the local tory councillors, Ben Houchen and Rishi.
I'm not sure which association to one of them is going to do the most damage to his chances of re-election..
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
I forgot the decades that Kelsey Grammer spent working as the highest paid presenter at our national broadcaster
Was it covid that made the right such delicate snowflakes or social media?
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
Let the BBC raise its revenue privately and I couldn't care less what its presenters say.
Plenty of Sky and ITV and other presenters say crazy shit, I don't have to watch them, and don't have to pay for them.
But we're taxed to pay for Lineker et al even if we don't watch his show, or his channel at all.
You can't censor people's opinions because they're paid from the public purse. Do you think you own them or something?
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
Let the BBC raise its revenue privately and I couldn't care less what its presenters say.
Plenty of Sky and ITV and other presenters say crazy shit, I don't have to watch them, and don't have to pay for them.
But we're taxed to pay for Lineker et al even if we don't watch his show, or his channel at all.
You can't censor people's opinions because they're paid from the public purse. Do you think you own them or something?
I’ve never objected to Linekers opinions, just his ludicrous salary for chatting about the footy with his mates, as if down the pub.
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
Let the BBC raise its revenue privately and I couldn't care less what its presenters say.
Plenty of Sky and ITV and other presenters say crazy shit, I don't have to watch them, and don't have to pay for them.
But we're taxed to pay for Lineker et al even if we don't watch his show, or his channel at all.
You can't censor people's opinions because they're paid from the public purse. Do you think you own them or something?
Of course you can.
If you're paid from the public purse, then keep your views to yourself, or stop taking the public's money.
Enjoyed the cognitive dissonance on the last thread where a general dislike of public sector workers was confronted by a faith in free (labour) market economics.
G'Day from a country actively importing British police officers and British doctors.
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
Let the BBC raise its revenue privately and I couldn't care less what its presenters say.
Plenty of Sky and ITV and other presenters say crazy shit, I don't have to watch them, and don't have to pay for them.
But we're taxed to pay for Lineker et al even if we don't watch his show, or his channel at all.
You can't censor people's opinions because they're paid from the public purse. Do you think you own them or something?
I think that is taking the point a bit too broad. There are jobs which are politically restricted, meaning people cannot engage in certain political activities, in local government and I assume central government. That is censoring people's opinions whilst they are paid from the public purse, and very reasonably so I'd say. It even prevents them standing for elected office.
Not broadcasters obviously, but I don't think the point is some universal maxim as you've presented it where how dare a public employer censor opinions.
When it comes to state paid media I think it makes more sense to make those employed in news and reporting to have restrictions (they can just work for a partisan outlet if they want to give opinions which will colour people's view of their reporting), whilst entertainers and others there's less justification, so long as not using their programming to advance their political agendas.
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
Let the BBC raise its revenue privately and I couldn't care less what its presenters say.
Plenty of Sky and ITV and other presenters say crazy shit, I don't have to watch them, and don't have to pay for them.
But we're taxed to pay for Lineker et al even if we don't watch his show, or his channel at all.
You can't censor people's opinions because they're paid from the public purse. Do you think you own them or something?
I think that is taking the point a bit too broad. There are jobs which are politically restricted, meaning people cannot engage in certain political activities, in local government and I assume central government. That is censoring people's opinions whilst they are paid from the public purse, and very reasonably so I'd say. It even prevents them standing for elected office.
Not broadcasters obviously, but I don't think the point is some universal maxim as you've presented it where how dare a public employer censor opinions.
When it comes to state paid media I think it makes more sense to make those employed in news and reporting to have restrictions (they can just work for a partisan outlet if they want to give opinions which will colour people's view of their reporting), whilst entertainers and others there's less justification, so long as not using their programming to advance their political agendas.
Indeed, but that's compounded by the fact there's absolutely no reason whatsoever for entertainers to be paid by the public purse.
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
Let the BBC raise its revenue privately and I couldn't care less what its presenters say.
Plenty of Sky and ITV and other presenters say crazy shit, I don't have to watch them, and don't have to pay for them.
But we're taxed to pay for Lineker et al even if we don't watch his show, or his channel at all.
You can't censor people's opinions because they're paid from the public purse. Do you think you own them or something?
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
I forgot the decades that Kelsey Grammer spent working as the highest paid presenter at our national broadcaster
I thought Kelsey Grammer was the school in Little Britain
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Like everything, polling on consumer sentiment is distorted by polarisation. Basically, Democrats are happy with the economy and Republicans say the economy is in the toilet. Under Trump it was the other way round.
51% of independents say the economy is poor in this poll and a majority of Democrats say it's either poor or only fair:
If you look at the per state numbers, Biden is doing particularly badly in the Sun Belt (Nevada, Arizona), but is holding up quite well in the Rust Belt. I think that (a) makes the path to 270 for Trump run through the South, capturing NV, AZ and GA; and (b) makes interest rates the more plausible explanation for both Biden's unpopularity and people thinking the economy is not doing great. Simply, people in the Sun Belt spend a lot more of their salaries on interest payments.
Why do higher interest rates hurt incumbent governments? For sure, people who are indebted resent them, and are motivated to vote against the government, but you might think that savers would be motivated to vote for the government.
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
Let the BBC raise its revenue privately and I couldn't care less what its presenters say.
Plenty of Sky and ITV and other presenters say crazy shit, I don't have to watch them, and don't have to pay for them.
But we're taxed to pay for Lineker et al even if we don't watch his show, or his channel at all.
You can't censor people's opinions because they're paid from the public purse. Do you think you own them or something?
Of course you can.
If you're paid from the public purse, then keep your views to yourself, or stop taking the public's money.
Why?
There are some roles where doing so would undermine ministers (senior civil servants, for example), but I see no reason why a doctor can't have strong public views on the environment, or a police officer on supermarket competition, or a HMRC employee on public transport provision.
You're attacking the freedom of expression of a very large proportion of the population.
The new online safety bill is an over the top interference . Who in their right mind is going to give ID like a passport to a porn site. Indeed this will just drive users to shadier parts of the web .
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
Plus, what is “porn” for these purposes? Ok, we can all agree that some things are, but there’s a whole load of crossover between porn and art.
Is there really?
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
Put the question this way. What do they do not want kids to see? A sexualised context or unhealthy, unrealistic sex? There’s lot of that implied in non-porn content that just lacks the explicit penetrative sex. Is it the explicit act itself then? Plenty of that in mainstream European cinema. It obviously can’t just be explicit nudity.
It seems to be that wherever you draw the line, some subset of Pornohub type website will be able to continue trading without the restrictions, unless you apply the rules to all cinema.
And that’s the best outcome - as some have said above, I think that if kids can’t access porn on relatively safe website then they’ll go elsewhere and get their credit card cloned and their identity nicked.
As has always been the case since the days when we only saw porn because our mates found a mag in the woods (who put them all there btw?)…
You can take porn out of the wood, but you can’t take the wood out of porn ?
Will someone let the US electorate know that it's the economy, stupids.
https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1731720857578328492 The US economy: - GDP growth 5.2% - Inflation zero last month - Wage growth remains robust - Strongest recovery in G7 - Lowest uninsured rate in US history - Median wealth up 37% 2020-2022 - Dow nearing all-time high
There's an interesting theory that what people are perceiving as a bad economy is actually just an effect of decreasing inequality. People below them are doing better, and they don't like it because it makes them feel relatively poorer.
Could I have a source for that, because economic growth combined with falling inequality should mean that people in the middle and lower-middle should be doing extremely well on an absolute basis.
That's the point. They might be doing well on an absolute basis, but if conveniences that depend on access to cheap labour are scarcer (because those people's incomes have gone up even more in percentage terms) then they won't feel it.
Bidenomics has also created strong wage growth-esp for working class families-that has outpaced inflation, by supporting a tight labor market through policy.
This real wage growth for the bottom and middle income Americans has led to a historic reduction in wage inequality.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do Americans perceive the economy as weak because - although their income have risen - so have mortgage and car payments? Or because inequality has declined?
Is there any evidence that it is the latter?
The theory is that it's the latter. It's just speculation to account for the discrepancy between perception and 'reality', as defined by statistics. It does make some intuitive sense.
Like everything, polling on consumer sentiment is distorted by polarisation. Basically, Democrats are happy with the economy and Republicans say the economy is in the toilet. Under Trump it was the other way round.
51% of independents say the economy is poor in this poll and a majority of Democrats say it's either poor or only fair:
If you look at the per state numbers, Biden is doing particularly badly in the Sun Belt (Nevada, Arizona), but is holding up quite well in the Rust Belt. I think that (a) makes the path to 270 for Trump run through the South, capturing NV, AZ and GA; and (b) makes interest rates the more plausible explanation for both Biden's unpopularity and people thinking the economy is not doing great. Simply, people in the Sun Belt spend a lot more of their salaries on interest payments.
Why do higher interest rates hurt incumbent governments? For sure, people who are indebted resent them, and are motivated to vote against the government, but you might think that savers would be motivated to vote for the government.
Personally I've never been so well off as I am right now (which probably puts me in the underclass of PB posters), but I, like the public, do not do gratitude.
We expect things to go pretty well, as that's our due. Plus even if savers are better placed now it's hard to ignore how nothing works yet everything costs more.
Where are Gazans supposed to live when the bombing finally stops . Two thirds of homes have been destroyed . I’m sorry but this isn’t some targeted operation . It’s simply turning Gaza into a wasteland . Herding people into an ever smaller area , wide spread disease now breaking out, people starving.
The IDF campaign seems to be just bomb everthing in the hope of killing Hamas fighters regardless of how many Gazans are wiped out in the process .
How about Egypt or anywhere else in the Middle East offers them refuge and somewhere safe to live?
The war should end when every single Hamas fighter is dead or surrenders unconditionally, until then there is nowhere safe for Gazans because its a war, war has no safe places.
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
I forgot the decades that Kelsey Grammer spent working as the highest paid presenter at our national broadcaster
Was it covid that made the right such delicate snowflakes or social media?
I gently mocked the absurdity of making an equivalence between a foreign actor and the highest paid Beeb presenter in this context
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
Let the BBC raise its revenue privately and I couldn't care less what its presenters say.
Plenty of Sky and ITV and other presenters say crazy shit, I don't have to watch them, and don't have to pay for them.
But we're taxed to pay for Lineker et al even if we don't watch his show, or his channel at all.
You can't censor people's opinions because they're paid from the public purse. Do you think you own them or something?
Of course you can.
If you're paid from the public purse, then keep your views to yourself, or stop taking the public's money.
Why?
There are some roles where doing so would undermine ministers (senior civil servants, for example), but I see no reason why a doctor can't have strong public views on the environment, or a police officer on supermarket competition, or a HMRC employee on public transport provision.
You're attacking the freedom of expression of a very large proportion of the population.
Good to see the consensus that celebs can publicise their own views without it becoming a massive thing. Saves us all another discussion next time Lineker says something edgy.
Let the BBC raise its revenue privately and I couldn't care less what its presenters say.
Plenty of Sky and ITV and other presenters say crazy shit, I don't have to watch them, and don't have to pay for them.
But we're taxed to pay for Lineker et al even if we don't watch his show, or his channel at all.
You can't censor people's opinions because they're paid from the public purse. Do you think you own them or something?
Of course you can.
If you're paid from the public purse, then keep your views to yourself, or stop taking the public's money.
Why?
There are some roles where doing so would undermine ministers (senior civil servants, for example), but I see no reason why a doctor can't have strong public views on the environment, or a police officer on supermarket competition, or a HMRC employee on public transport provision.
You're attacking the freedom of expression of a very large proportion of the population.
Actually most major corporations too have policies against bringing the company into disrepute and that includes engaging in controversial politics. No reason the public sector shouldn't have the same standards.
If you want to engage in politics anonymously or privately as any individual that is entirely reasonable.
If a doctor or police officer privately campaigns on an issue without advertising themselves as a doctor or police officer that's one thing, but the second you start leveraging a company or the state's role to magnify your views, that is gross misconduct.
Comments
A small and rather unconvincing copy of the real thing.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/11/07/us/elections/times-siena-battlegrounds-registered-voters.html
However Trump wins 62% of whites without college degrees which puts him narrowly ahead overall
BTW I do not think there is a single contributor to PB who is prepared to defend Trump on the issue of how he approached losing the presidential election.
DM me if you need any more help with your posts.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12827791/Kim-Jong-CRIES-calls-North-Korean-women-children.html
If you are cutting down on eating out that is very noticeable
For those stupid enough to hand over ID details , likely there will be leaks leading to possible blackmail . Hackers will have a field day .
https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-ECONOMY/SENTIMENT-POLITICS/gkvlgqjzxpb/index.html
(For conspiracy fans: Judging by his experience in those other businesses, Burgum is the best candidate to face any problems with AI.)
23andMe: Profiles of 6.9 million people hacked
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-67624182
Hershey phishes! Crooks snarf chocolate lovers' creds
https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/04/hershey_phishes_data_breach/
MPs ought to worry about their career-ending tractor porn fetishes being leaked.
It'd be a dull world where we only watched comedy by actors or writers we agreed with.
I disagree with almost all of Ben Elton's politics, and even more how he says it, but I still love his stuff.
As POTUS prospects go, the "campaign" of current North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum for nomination next year, bears some passing resemblance to the 1932 "campaign" of then-Oklahoma Governor William "Alfalfa Bill" Murray.
His memorable campaign slogan (in depths of Great Depression) was based what he called the 4 Bs:
Bread, Butter, Bacon and Beans
Wonder what would be 3rd-millennium equivalent for "Digital Doug" Burgum?
On topic, Ben Elton on Liz Truss.
I couldn't find any clips from his Friday Night Live heyday in the late 80s, which was required viewing in our household when I was a kid. I saw so many great comedians for the first time on that show.
Nearly always.
Personally, I think there's a really simple way of distinguishing between the two. (Not saying porn can't be artistic. Only that porn is typically consumed in a single way.)
The IDF campaign seems to be just bomb everthing in the hope of killing Hamas fighters regardless of how many Gazans are wiped out in the process .
Which turned out to be right-wing political correctitude for . . . wait for it . . . the actual town of Liberal.
Early example of cancel culture?
As you can read for yourself, the founder of Liberal was himself a proto-Woke of the worst water!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal,_Kansas
From series two Elton started writing and Blackadder was transformed into comedy gold.
After four or five albums in the late 80s and early 90s (and 12 singles in 1992 alone), the Wedding Present dissolves into side projects in the mid 90s - before reforming in 2002 to release Take Fountain, by some way their finest album and in my view the album of the decade.
Notable largely because, as you say, trying to recapture past glories seldom works.
It seems to be that wherever you draw the line, some subset of Pornohub type website will be able to continue trading without the restrictions, unless you apply the rules to all cinema.
And that’s the best outcome - as some have said above, I think that if kids can’t access porn on relatively safe website then they’ll go elsewhere and get their credit card cloned and their identity nicked.
As has always been the case since the days when we only saw porn because our mates found a mag in the woods (who put them all there btw?) or someone’s friend’s cousin’s mate lent them a VHS, the way you deal with it is to have good sex education in schools and conversations with parents.
Also higher than the 4.5% Eurozone current rate, the 5% rate in Canada, -0.1% rate in Japan, 3.5% rate in South Korea and 4.35% rate in Australia. Those interest rates cover mortgage as well as loan repayment costs
https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/interest-rate
They're thinking of selling Nevill Road.
Would be sad to leave it, but actually it would make a lot of sense. Not really a good location however historic. Too cramped and bloody difficult to get to.
Lots of mindless abuse in the chat, of course.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/01/the-gospel-how-israel-uses-ai-to-select-bombing-targets
… According to Kochavi, “once this machine was activated” in Israel’s 11-day war with Hamas in May 2021 it generated 100 targets a day. “To put that into perspective, in the past we would produce 50 targets in Gaza per year. Now, this machine produces 100 targets a single day, with 50% of them being attacked.”
Precisely what forms of data are ingested into the Gospel is not known. But experts said AI-based decision support systems for targeting would typically analyse large sets of information from a range of sources, such as drone footage, intercepted communications, surveillance data and information drawn from monitoring the movements and behaviour patterns of individuals and large groups.
The target division was created to address a chronic problem for the IDF: in earlier operations in Gaza, the air force repeatedly ran out of targets to strike...
Somewhat optimistically (and some might say blasphemously) named “The Gospel”, it seems only a very small step from removing humans from the killing process completely.
At least from one end of the gun/bomb/missile, that is.
If it can't be used as a metaphor for the Conservative Party in 2024, it isn't porn.
Appreciate the rise in rates hits buyers and/or people who want to move but are trapped by their good deal, but I'd have thought the impact will be less than over here with short-term fixes.
In any case the trend will likely be towards rates falling back from their peak by November.
Latinos leaving Dems is like Blacks leaving Dems. A thing but NOT as big a thing as things go.
Note that Reps have been heralding this since (at least) the 1980s.
But Ben Elton has been coasting on that for the past four decades. The rest of it is pretty meh.
Her downfall was truly remarkable, and it can be easy to forget how bad it had to have been to happen, but on a long term basis was pushing through it stubbornly the right idea, even if it did not work, given how things have gone?
Plenty of Sky and ITV and other presenters say crazy shit, I don't have to watch them, and don't have to pay for them.
But we're taxed to pay for Lineker et al even if we don't watch his show, or his channel at all.
Foreign Secretary David Cameron is under pressure to declare how much he earned from his role as an adviser to Greensill Capital before it collapsed leaving taxpayers out of pocket
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/taxpayers-footed-2million-bill-failed-31599713
The war should end when every single Hamas fighter is dead or surrenders unconditionally, until then there is nowhere safe for Gazans because its a war, war has no safe places.
He has a majority of 20k but it is obviously worried.
If this is what they say in public what do they say in private and more to the point will Israel care.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/civilians-are-center-gravity-gaza-war-us-defense-secretary-2023-12-02/#:~:text=WASHINGTON, Dec 2 (Reuters),the risks of their radicalization.
On the back is a photo of him, the local tory councillors, Ben Houchen and Rishi.
I'm not sure which association to one of them is going to do the most damage to his chances of re-election..
If you're paid from the public purse, then keep your views to yourself, or stop taking the public's money.
G'Day from a country actively importing British police officers and British doctors.
Not broadcasters obviously, but I don't think the point is some universal maxim as you've presented it where how dare a public employer censor opinions.
When it comes to state paid media I think it makes more sense to make those employed in news and reporting to have restrictions (they can just work for a partisan outlet if they want to give opinions which will colour people's view of their reporting), whilst entertainers and others there's less justification, so long as not using their programming to advance their political agendas.
(I like Stephen Fry, but Hugh Laurie he ain't).
There are some roles where doing so would undermine ministers (senior civil servants, for example), but I see no reason why a doctor can't have strong public views on the environment, or a police officer on supermarket competition, or a HMRC employee on public transport provision.
You're attacking the freedom of expression of a very large proportion of the population.
Or will no upright member support the new bill.
We expect things to go pretty well, as that's our due. Plus even if savers are better placed now it's hard to ignore how nothing works yet everything costs more.
You seem to be the one melting..
I suppose technically it is, but is it 'flashing banner update' worthy?
If you want to engage in politics anonymously or privately as any individual that is entirely reasonable.
If a doctor or police officer privately campaigns on an issue without advertising themselves as a doctor or police officer that's one thing, but the second you start leveraging a company or the state's role to magnify your views, that is gross misconduct.