I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I’ve never even heard of Prince Richard.
I do think it’s fascinating, though, these subtle shifts in kingly responsibilities. It’s not obvious to me why William is maintaining a low profile. Is he just lazy?
I assume it would be a hatred of being in the public eye as a result of what that did to his mother.
I'd have a lot of sympathy for him if that was the case - but if he aspires to be our head of state, he needs to be comfortable with being a public figure - it's the primary requirement of the job. And if he's not, then he needs to resign sooner rather than later. Waiting until he's King and hating it will cause chaos.
He doesn't need to spend his life opening school buildings or visiting hospitals, but he absolutely must find some other way of having an impact on public life.
(I'm not fussed about our form of constitutional monarchy as such, but I have no time for the trappings of royalty or the hereditary principle. I wish the King well, but would much rather we elected a replacement whenever the time comes, rather than having the PoW automatically acceding)
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You hugely underestimate PB’ers if you think that a response about my dog will distract them from noticing that you offer no response whatsoever on your unhealthy fascination with Putin, your now clearly flawed prior adulation of him, and your many failed predictions of other putative saviours who have simply gone on to crash and burn.
Biden won’t stand this year. I think yesterday the veil was ripped away and there’s now no going back. Biden no longer has the mental faculties to be President.
Admitting as much does not amount to a desire for Trump to be President, quite the reverse. The Democrats need to open up the contest soon. Harris, who simply has a grating personality, is not a viable runner either.
Having said all above, it’s funny that nobody’s paired Biden’s frailty with the perfectly believable hypothesis that KCIII has terminal cancer. Some rich ironies here.
The West looks astonishingly weak and decadent, as Putin has his history lecture freely amplified by Elon Musk…
What possible relationship does KCIII’s health have with the cognitive decline of POTUS?
Both are reasonable subjects for speculation, I just don’t see the automatic link
Just the parallel.
Two essentially incapacitated heads of state, while the official story is “nothing (or not much) to see here”
There is little or no evidence of the King having terminal cancer. Currently, at point of diagnosis, you have a 50% chance of being alive 10 years later when diagnosed with cancer. Depending on which cancer he has, he could have a very high chance of a complete cure - e.g. my leukeamia (APML) is estimated at 85-90% chance of cure on diagnosis now (and the danger period is prior to, and just after diagnosis).
I’d agree, and I hope you’re right, but the “news” kind of vibrates with cover-up.
Hopefully that's just the old Royal secrecy thing. I wouldn't be surprised either way - I have no belief that Sunak was told it was caught early - I suspect he was spouting bullshit as always.
I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I'm a Republican by conviction (and ironically, partly inheritance - my mother's view is that hereditary monarch is a silly idea). But. I've been in the presence of Royalty precisely twice, and it made an impression on me both times.
First time, the then Prince of Wales, now KCIII, visited my place of work, a state-funded scientific organisation, and have a short speech to us all. The second time, the present Duke of Edinburgh did the honours at my daughter's graduation.
Despite my Republican views I was definitely more impressed then I would have been by some minor government minister, or local functionary, performing the same tasks. There is definitely something a bit different about being in the Royal presence. I'm certain that anyone who was in the not particularly fussed one way or the other category would be considerably swayed by a similar experience.
If William, and that generation onwards, do hide themselves away, it will be a huge boost for the Republican cause.
Queen Victoria after Albert died ... big boost for republicanism, and not the Irish kind either (though it didn't do any harm).
William isn't King, Charles is and he was doing regular events until his illness and the Queen is still doing duties on his behalf. William also resumed duties this week
I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I’ve never even heard of Prince Richard.
I do think it’s fascinating, though, these subtle shifts in kingly responsibilities. It’s not obvious to me why William is maintaining a low profile. Is he just lazy?
Richard is the Duke of Gloucester - the King's cousin, I think. Did an architecture course in the 70s, and has been stuck opening shopping centres ever since...
As for William, I know there've been rumours about problems in his personal life - and at the very least his wife must have been very ill for some time to need such a hugely serious operation. But I doubt that's enough have stopped him taking some of Anne/Richard/Edward's more prestigious gigs if he'd felt it was necessary to do so - he just doesn't see the value in it.
Yes, Duke of Gloucester. I just never hear him referred to as Prince Richard, for some reason. I agree with the original notion that we’re frankly short of a few royals. Philip and Zara look the most “papabile” to my eye.
William needs to pull his finger out. The deal is that we pay for their luxury, and they perform their duties like Stakhanovites.
Speaking of which, the King is also the King of NZ. I know he’s due for a visit in November, but we kind of need him more often than every five or six years.
The days of organising the monarchy around the contingencies of boat-plane via BOAC are well and truly over.
I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I'm a Republican by conviction (and ironically, partly inheritance - my mother's view is that hereditary monarch is a silly idea). But. I've been in the presence of Royalty precisely twice, and it made an impression on me both times.
First time, the then Prince of Wales, now KCIII, visited my place of work, a state-funded scientific organisation, and have a short speech to us all. The second time, the present Duke of Edinburgh did the honours at my daughter's graduation.
Despite my Republican views I was definitely more impressed then I would have been by some minor government minister, or local functionary, performing the same tasks. There is definitely something a bit different about being in the Royal presence. I'm certain that anyone who was in the not particularly fussed one way or the other category would be considerably swayed by a similar experience.
If William, and that generation onwards, do hide themselves away, it will be a huge boost for the Republican cause.
Queen Victoria after Albert died ...
Yes, precisely. The precedent was mentioned in The Guardian article.
They really need Harry back.
Technically they only need the King and Queen to do duties
I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I'm a Republican by conviction (and ironically, partly inheritance - my mother's view is that hereditary monarch is a silly idea). But. I've been in the presence of Royalty precisely twice, and it made an impression on me both times.
First time, the then Prince of Wales, now KCIII, visited my place of work, a state-funded scientific organisation, and have a short speech to us all. The second time, the present Duke of Edinburgh did the honours at my daughter's graduation.
Despite my Republican views I was definitely more impressed then I would have been by some minor government minister, or local functionary, performing the same tasks. There is definitely something a bit different about being in the Royal presence. I'm certain that anyone who was in the not particularly fussed one way or the other category would be considerably swayed by a similar experience.
If William, and that generation onwards, do hide themselves away, it will be a huge boost for the Republican cause.
Queen Victoria after Albert died ... big boost for republicanism, and not the Irish kind either (though it didn't do any harm).
William isn't King, Charles is and he was doing regular events until his illness and the Queen is still doing duties on his behalf. William also resumed duties this week
We're talking about a different possibility. Not that.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You hugely underestimate PB’ers if you think that a response about my dog will distract them from noticing that you offer no response whatsoever on your unhealthy fascination with Putin, your now clearly flawed prior adulation of him, and your many failed predictions of other putative saviours who have simply gone on to crash and burn.
LOL that football has suspended their “Blue Card” idea.
They still like the sin bin idea, which is good, but they managed to screw up the announcement and process
Solution looking for a problem imvho. Yellow and red cards work fine.
If I had to change anything, I’d change the rules about penalty kicks. It’s an incredibly harsh punishment for often very minor infractions. Goal scoring opportunity, fair enough.
Also yellow card for taking your shirt off remains the silliest law in the game.
Especially given that the amount of dissent being expressed by players appears to have decreased greatly - in the top leagues at least. Automatic yellow seems to have done the trick.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Hitler of course only ever wanted a chunk of Czechoslovakia.
Yeah - happened to me tons of times.
Went out shopping for a couple of drill bits. Came home with the whole store.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Hitler of course only ever wanted a chunk of Czechoslovakia.
Yeah - happened to me tons of times.
Went out shopping for a couple of drill bits. Came home with the whole store.
Vladimir Putin has claimed Boris Johnson is to blame for the continuation of the war in Ukraine.
The Russian President said he was ready to end the war 18 months ago, but that the former Prime Minister put pressure on Ukraine's leaders to back out of the peace deal. Johnson has dismissed the claims as ‘propaganda’.
Even PB couldn't blame Boris for this one, right? Well maybe @Scott_xP could... 😂
My idle speculation about why Putin is *so furious* with Johnson is that Putin assumed that he was in his pocket (a la Trump), and is incensed to learn that being a suck-up when all things are equal does not translate into being a shill when the bullets start flying. One of the few things which stands to Johnson's credit.
The fact that he was so compromised and potentially tainted by his top level russian contacts (remember the visit to Italy when he shook loose his security?) is of course why Johnson had to pull his finger out when the Ukraine issue broke.
Russia's long-term strategy is to break up Western unity any which way. Brexit was one (thanks, Johnson); mass migration is another (thanks, Assad); US isolation is another (thanks, Trump). Every useful idiot has a role to play.
Just because Russia thinks that something is in its interests, it neither follows that they are right, nor that it is against our interests.
Was France partially withdrawing from NATO a massive Cold War victory for the Soviets?
France withdrew from NATO's military command structure because they were afraid of their troops being deployed to protect West Germany, leaving the back door open. With Warsaw Pact tanks less than 300 miles from their border (and two invasions in living memory) this was at least an arguable position. They did not resile from their treaty obligations, which is what a Trump-led USA might well do.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Hitler of course only ever wanted a chunk of Czechoslovakia.
Yeah - happened to me tons of times.
Went out shopping for a couple of drill bits. Came home with the whole store.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You hugely underestimate PB’ers if you think that a response about my dog will distract them from noticing that you offer no response whatsoever on your unhealthy fascination with Putin, your now clearly flawed prior adulation of him, and your many failed predictions of other putative saviours who have simply gone on to crash and burn.
I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I'm a Republican by conviction (and ironically, partly inheritance - my mother's view is that hereditary monarch is a silly idea). But. I've been in the presence of Royalty precisely twice, and it made an impression on me both times.
First time, the then Prince of Wales, now KCIII, visited my place of work, a state-funded scientific organisation, and have a short speech to us all. The second time, the present Duke of Edinburgh did the honours at my daughter's graduation.
Despite my Republican views I was definitely more impressed then I would have been by some minor government minister, or local functionary, performing the same tasks. There is definitely something a bit different about being in the Royal presence. I'm certain that anyone who was in the not particularly fussed one way or the other category would be considerably swayed by a similar experience.
If William, and that generation onwards, do hide themselves away, it will be a huge boost for the Republican cause.
Queen Victoria after Albert died ... big boost for republicanism, and not the Irish kind either (though it didn't do any harm).
William isn't King, Charles is and he was doing regular events until his illness and the Queen is still doing duties on his behalf. William also resumed duties this week
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
Talking of which...
Remember that (quality-adjusted) rents *should* fall over time as a share of people’s incomes, like everything else.
When rents rise in line with incomes, as is currently the case, a large chunk of wage growth goes to property owners rather than the workers earning the wages.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
Talking of which...
Remember that (quality-adjusted) rents *should* fall over time as a share of people’s incomes, like everything else.
When rents rise in line with incomes, as is currently the case, a large chunk of wage growth goes to property owners rather than the workers earning the wages.
And yes, it started in the late 90s. But as each year passes, more people are added to the "can't get a deposit together" trap.
We’ve almost reached the point where the bank of mum and dad is itself highly leveraged on the bank of gramps and gran.
I personally had no bank of mum and dad. It always chilled me in London professional circles when I turned around and realised I was pretty much the only one (ditto not being privately educated).
A society that can’t make space for young talent ossifies, decays, and eventually dies.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You hugely underestimate PB’ers if you think that a response about my dog will distract them from noticing that you offer no response whatsoever on your unhealthy fascination with Putin, your now clearly flawed prior adulation of him, and your many failed predictions of other putative saviours who have simply gone on to crash and burn.
Shape up, or ship out.
Can we get a Trans Gay Illegal Immigrant Alien AI for scale?
No it’s not. Putin adds nothing to what we already know/don’t know.
The body language and the demeanour of both of them
Did Tucker's permanent demeanour of stunned bemusement alter at that point ?
“Stunned bemusement” is good. He does do that a lot
He varies it with weird hilarity and a sort of mock pompous “this is serious” mode
It’s a good interview. No one who hates tucker Carlson or whatever will ever accept this, but given the constraints he is working under - interviewing an autocrat labelled an absolute evil enemy of the west (and the label could well be justified) - he does a good job. He clearly has to tread an impossibly fine line
But that’s a nuanced position. Modern PB - which is so fucking boring - doesn’t do nuance
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You hugely underestimate PB’ers if you think that a response about my dog will distract them from noticing that you offer no response whatsoever on your unhealthy fascination with Putin, your now clearly flawed prior adulation of him, and your many failed predictions of other putative saviours who have simply gone on to crash and burn.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Well, that was grim. Someone collapsed at the pool; staff and medics were doing CPR as I left.
Fuckety fuck fuck.
Not great. My wife's father went for a training swim one day and died at the pool. Not great. Both her parents have died suddenly, and it raises the question - which is easier for the family? A sudden death with no warning, or a long slow decline?
Both are hard on the ones left behind but for different reasons. The "totally unexpected" probably has the edge for being worst for the family because there is no opportunity to say goodbye or any of those other things you might like to say before they depart.
For the departed similar, with the sudden death, no time to say goodbye or put your affairs in order, but then again, once you're gone you won't be worrying about this. It may be better than a slow, painful, lingering death. I guess it depends what kind of person you are.
It's probably never to early to think about your legacy and to bear in mind you could get run over by a bus tomorrow
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
Doesn’t this graph imply it was some other party’s fault?
The UK’s Conservative party is on the brink of a generational wipeout. The single most important factor driving this is the dramatic breakdown of upward social mobility on.ft.com/3SSPGeP
House prices rose by 206% between 1997 and 2007. It was a big factor in Labour's landslide win in 2001, and probably made the difference between victory and defeat in 2005. But, after 2010, these 25-50 year old voters of 1997 switched over heavily towards the Tories. Now they're aged 50 to 75.
The problem is, the Tories, while appealing successfully to this group, were not interested in people who were not on the electoral register in 1997.
That said, at least home ownership rates seem to nudging upwards again.
Isn't one problem with our duel deal of poverty wages & humungous house prices that there simply isn't much spare cash sloshing through the system to invest in the way Americans can for instance in the stock market. If you look at the FTSE vs the S&P since about the year 2000 it's a dreadfully sorry story. I got an email today, about an MSc in Engineering was wanting £22,000 starting salary. OK It's probably a made up person from the recruitment agency but any USA company would die of laughter if a recruitment agency sent them an email with an MSc asking for $28,000 start.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You are wasted on this site Leon. Your charm charisma and intelligence is too much for the regulars to handle.
I know. I sometimes feel I am more approached in Sverdlovsk than Swindon
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Hitler of course only ever wanted a chunk of Czechoslovakia.
Yeah - happened to me tons of times.
Went out shopping for a couple of drill bits. Came home with the whole store.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Yes the freedoms of the One Party state are astonishing
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
Well, I think your version is a reformulation of my own question to an extent. I use my own experience simply because it's easy for me to say, would the 30 year old me have more opportunities in 2010 or 2024? I can't necessarily extrapolate what sort of opportunities someone with different skills and a different life path would have.
Fundamentally, I designed my question in such a way as to counter the "well I'm alright Jack, I was broke in 2010 and now in 2024 I've got a house and a good career so everything must be dandy" tendency. People generally do better as they get older and accumulate wealth or prestige. But that definitely felt a lot more possible in 2010 than it does in 2024.
I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I'm a Republican by conviction (and ironically, partly inheritance - my mother's view is that hereditary monarch is a silly idea). But. I've been in the presence of Royalty precisely twice, and it made an impression on me both times.
First time, the then Prince of Wales, now KCIII, visited my place of work, a state-funded scientific organisation, and have a short speech to us all. The second time, the present Duke of Edinburgh did the honours at my daughter's graduation.
Despite my Republican views I was definitely more impressed then I would have been by some minor government minister, or local functionary, performing the same tasks. There is definitely something a bit different about being in the Royal presence. I'm certain that anyone who was in the not particularly fussed one way or the other category would be considerably swayed by a similar experience.
If William, and that generation onwards, do hide themselves away, it will be a huge boost for the Republican cause.
Queen Victoria after Albert died ... big boost for republicanism, and not the Irish kind either (though it didn't do any harm).
William isn't King, Charles is and he was doing regular events until his illness and the Queen is still doing duties on his behalf. William also resumed duties this week
And yet he has no engagements planned:
He attended an event as recently as Wednesday, yet as I said he is heir not King
I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I’ve never even heard of Prince Richard.
I do think it’s fascinating, though, these subtle shifts in kingly responsibilities. It’s not obvious to me why William is maintaining a low profile. Is he just lazy?
Richard is the Duke of Gloucester - the King's cousin, I think. Did an architecture course in the 70s, and has been stuck opening shopping centres ever since...
As for William, I know there've been rumours about problems in his personal life - and at the very least his wife must have been very ill for some time to need such a hugely serious operation. But I doubt that's enough have stopped him taking some of Anne/Richard/Edward's more prestigious gigs if he'd felt it was necessary to do so - he just doesn't see the value in it.
Yes, Duke of Gloucester. I just never hear him referred to as Prince Richard, for some reason. I agree with the original notion that we’re frankly short of a few royals. Philip and Zara look the most “papabile” to my eye.
William needs to pull his finger out. The deal is that we pay for their luxury, and they perform their duties like Stakhanovites.
Speaking of which, the King is also the King of NZ. I know he’s due for a visit in November, but we kind of need him more often than every five or six years.
The days of organising the monarchy around the contingencies of boat-plane via BOAC are well and truly over.
Profits of the crown estates and duchies pay for the Prince and Princess of Wales actually, taxpayers pay for nothing more than their security.
The Governor General does the day to day things in NZ for the King and is currently a Maori woman
The crown estates belong to the country, they are not the private property of the monarch.
If we became a republic the crown estates would just be rebranded to something else, just as everything that is currently HM whatever will get rebranded then too.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
What is a “race realist”?
The ethnic chinese are race realists. They would laugh at the idea a white person born in China can call themselves Chinese.
No it’s not. Putin adds nothing to what we already know/don’t know.
The body language and the demeanour of both of them
Did Tucker's permanent demeanour of stunned bemusement alter at that point ?
“Stunned bemusement” is good. He does do that a lot
He varies it with weird hilarity and a sort of mock pompous “this is serious” mode
It’s a good interview. No one who hates tucker Carlson or whatever will ever accept this, but given the constraints he is working under - interviewing an autocrat labelled an absolute evil enemy of the west (and the label could well be justified) - he does a good job. He clearly has to tread an impossibly fine line
But that’s a nuanced position. Modern PB - which is so fucking boring - doesn’t do nuance
Did it tell us anything we didn't know yesterday ? Other than that Putin wants to swap a US journalist for one of his hitmen ?
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
Doesn’t this graph imply it was some other party’s fault?
The UK’s Conservative party is on the brink of a generational wipeout. The single most important factor driving this is the dramatic breakdown of upward social mobility on.ft.com/3SSPGeP
House prices rose by 206% between 1997 and 2007. It was a big factor in Labour's landslide win in 2001, and probably made the difference between victory and defeat in 2005. But, after 2010, these 25-50 year old voters of 1997 switched over heavily towards the Tories. Now they're aged 50 to 75.
The problem is, the Tories, while appealing successfully to this group, were not interested in people who were not on the electoral register in 1997.
That said, at least home ownership rates seem to nudging upwards again.
Isn't one problem with our duel deal of poverty wages & humungous house prices that there simply isn't much spare cash sloshing through the system to invest in the way Americans can for instance in the stock market. If you look at the FTSE vs the S&P since about the year 2000 it's a dreadfully sorry story.
The thing is, that when I discuss this with Americans, they make very similar complaints to us. That, back in 1990, a typical family could afford a good house, but now they can't, and their wages have stagnated for years, and all the good blue collar jobs that used to be an offer have disappeared.
My impression is that while the US economic performance has, in overall terms, been better than any other Western country, over the past 20 years, the fruits of it go to quite a narrow section of the population.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
What is a “race realist”?
Easier to understand if you make it into a portmanteau.
Take the first three letters of the first word, then the last three letters of the second.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
What is a “race realist”?
The ethnic chinese are race realists. They would laugh at the idea a white person born in China can call themselves Chinese.
Given their shitty demographics, maybe they want to reconsider.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
The ones I work with seem to be doing OK.
The only drawback is that they have to work with me.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You are wasted on this site Leon. Your charm charisma and intelligence is too much for the regulars to handle.
I know. I sometimes feel I am more approached in Sverdlovsk than Swindon
A prophet without honour etc
What's happened to you, Leon? Are you OK?
Cambodia. Doing good professional knapping but bereft of social life - a self inflicted monastic solitude which I now possibly regret. Because it makes me reliant on PB for discourse at a time when PB has turned to shit
No wonder so many have fled the site
But I will end up with some excellent flints - I think - and it will all be worth it. Head down. Do the graft
Doesn’t this graph imply it was some other party’s fault?
The UK’s Conservative party is on the brink of a generational wipeout. The single most important factor driving this is the dramatic breakdown of upward social mobility on.ft.com/3SSPGeP
House prices rose by 206% between 1997 and 2007. It was a big factor in Labour's landslide win in 2001, and probably made the difference between victory and defeat in 2005. But, after 2010, these 25-50 year old voters of 1997 switched over heavily towards the Tories. Now they're aged 50 to 75.
The problem is, the Tories, while appealing successfully to this group, were not interested in people who were not on the electoral register in 1997.
That said, at least home ownership rates seem to nudging upwards again.
Isn't one problem with our duel deal of poverty wages & humungous house prices that there simply isn't much spare cash sloshing through the system to invest in the way Americans can for instance in the stock market. If you look at the FTSE vs the S&P since about the year 2000 it's a dreadfully sorry story.
The thing is, that when I discuss this with Americans, they make very similar complaints to us. That, back in 1990, a typical family could afford a good house, but now they can't, and their wages have stagnated for years, and all the good blue collar jobs that used to be an offer have disappeared.
My impression is that while the US economic performance has, in overall terms, been better than any other Western country, over the past 20 years, the fruits of it go to quite a narrow section of the population.
Yes, US mean household wealth is $551,347 compared to $302,783 in the UK.
I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I’ve never even heard of Prince Richard.
I do think it’s fascinating, though, these subtle shifts in kingly responsibilities. It’s not obvious to me why William is maintaining a low profile. Is he just lazy?
Richard is the Duke of Gloucester - the King's cousin, I think. Did an architecture course in the 70s, and has been stuck opening shopping centres ever since...
As for William, I know there've been rumours about problems in his personal life - and at the very least his wife must have been very ill for some time to need such a hugely serious operation. But I doubt that's enough have stopped him taking some of Anne/Richard/Edward's more prestigious gigs if he'd felt it was necessary to do so - he just doesn't see the value in it.
Yes, Duke of Gloucester. I just never hear him referred to as Prince Richard, for some reason. I agree with the original notion that we’re frankly short of a few royals. Philip and Zara look the most “papabile” to my eye.
William needs to pull his finger out. The deal is that we pay for their luxury, and they perform their duties like Stakhanovites.
Speaking of which, the King is also the King of NZ. I know he’s due for a visit in November, but we kind of need him more often than every five or six years.
The days of organising the monarchy around the contingencies of boat-plane via BOAC are well and truly over.
Profits of the crown estates and duchies pay for the Prince and Princess of Wales actually, taxpayers pay for nothing more than their security.
The Governor General does the day to day things in NZ for the King and is currently a Maori woman
The crown estates belong to the country, they are not the private property of the monarch.
If we became a republic the crown estates would just be rebranded to something else, just as everything that is currently HM whatever will get rebranded then too.
If we became a republic taxpayers would fund a President and their family direct
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Yes the freedoms of the One Party state are astonishing
Doesn’t this graph imply it was some other party’s fault?
The UK’s Conservative party is on the brink of a generational wipeout. The single most important factor driving this is the dramatic breakdown of upward social mobility on.ft.com/3SSPGeP
House prices rose by 206% between 1997 and 2007. It was a big factor in Labour's landslide win in 2001, and probably made the difference between victory and defeat in 2005. But, after 2010, these 25-50 year old voters of 1997 switched over heavily towards the Tories. Now they're aged 50 to 75.
The problem is, the Tories, while appealing successfully to this group, were not interested in people who were not on the electoral register in 1997.
That said, at least home ownership rates seem to nudging upwards again.
Isn't one problem with our duel deal of poverty wages & humungous house prices that there simply isn't much spare cash sloshing through the system to invest in the way Americans can for instance in the stock market. If you look at the FTSE vs the S&P since about the year 2000 it's a dreadfully sorry story.
The thing is, that when I discuss this with Americans, they make very similar complaints to us. That, back in 1990, a typical family could afford a good house, but now they can't, and their wages have stagnated for years, and all the good blue collar jobs that used to be an offer have disappeared.
My impression is that while the US economic performance has, in overall terms, been better than any other Western country, over the past 20 years, the fruits of it go to quite a narrow section of the population.
This is absolutely true, but in America there is “always Nashville”.
The US is so large, and prosperity better spread, you can always hope and aspire to move to another city to build your fortune.
And millions, really millions do.
So while SF is impossible, NY improbable, and LA not-so-doable, the large swathes of the American middle class can legitimately aspire to home ownership in Phoenix, Nashville, North Durham, and so on.
The same dynamic does not exist in the UK, where housing is extortionate anywhere there are jobs, and where property (and ambitions) are overwhelmingly centred on London and the South East.
Brits can’t even look to Amsterdam, Lisbon, or Barcelona any more, for reasons.
Doesn’t this graph imply it was some other party’s fault?
The UK’s Conservative party is on the brink of a generational wipeout. The single most important factor driving this is the dramatic breakdown of upward social mobility on.ft.com/3SSPGeP
House prices rose by 206% between 1997 and 2007. It was a big factor in Labour's landslide win in 2001, and probably made the difference between victory and defeat in 2005. But, after 2010, these 25-50 year old voters of 1997 switched over heavily towards the Tories. Now they're aged 50 to 75.
The problem is, the Tories, while appealing successfully to this group, were not interested in people who were not on the electoral register in 1997.
That said, at least home ownership rates seem to nudging upwards again.
Isn't one problem with our duel deal of poverty wages & humungous house prices that there simply isn't much spare cash sloshing through the system to invest in the way Americans can for instance in the stock market. If you look at the FTSE vs the S&P since about the year 2000 it's a dreadfully sorry story.
The thing is, that when I discuss this with Americans, they make very similar complaints to us. That, back in 1990, a typical family could afford a good house, but now they can't, and their wages have stagnated for years, and all the good blue collar jobs that used to be an offer have disappeared.
My impression is that while the US economic performance has, in overall terms, been better than any other Western country, over the past 20 years, the fruits of it go to quite a narrow section of the population.
I disagree - both their mean AND crucially median salaries are way above ours.
The median average salary in the UK for people in full-time employment full time is £31,285. The mean average salary for all workers (including full-time and part-time employees) is £31,447.
In contrast, the mean average salary for all full time workers is £38,131.
In the US, the median average salary for women in 2023 was $53,229, and the median average salary for men was $58,342 in the same year.
These figures have taken both full time and part time workers into consideration. This converts to around £42,721 for women, and £49,433 for men.
As you can see, the latter figure is significantly higher than the median average for the UK.
In addition, the mean average is also significantly higher too. In 2020, the mean annual wage per employee was $78,392 and $6,352 a month before tax.
& heck they might not feel particularly richer given healthcare costs and probably higher cost of goods but that cash has to slosh somewhere. If they're not saving it's going to end up in US corporations pockets which of course fuels their stock markets.
On the contrary here there's just not all that much to go, well anywhere.
The West should be more open to negotiating with Vladimir Putin, Nigel Farage has suggested.
The founder of Reform UK said he was “shocked” by the “absolute reluctance” to consider negotiations with Russia since Moscow launched its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
It comes after Putin accused Boris Johnson of sabotaging a peace deal in the spring of that year, during an interview with American broadcaster Tucker Carlson.
Responding to the interview, Mr Farage told GB News: “All of our understanding of what is going on in Ukraine, horrendous though it is, all of our understanding of the Putin mindset, the Russian mindset, I think we understand it ever more clearly after what was said last night.
“[Russia is] not going to stop and they’re switching vast amounts of their industrial production in Russia towards defence, they will never give up on this.
“Now we can find much of what’s happening abhorrent, but the thing that shocked me all the way through has been the absolute reluctance of anyone to think, shouldn’t we at least be having some form of negotiations?”
The Russian President claimed in yesterday’s interview that a peace deal was settled in Istanbul with Ukraine’s chief negotiator in 2022 but it was scuppered by Mr Johnson, prolonging the war by another 18 months. Mr Johnson has previously strongly dismissed the claims as “total nonsense” and “Russian propaganda”.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
What is a “race realist”?
The ethnic chinese are race realists. They would laugh at the idea a white person born in China can call themselves Chinese.
Goes back to my question - if you can be transgender, why can you not be transrace? The same rejection of your natural biology. As a man born with a prostate, if I become a trans-woman I'd still have a prostate and be at risk of prostate cancer (albeit lower risk if testosterone level are suppressed).
I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I’ve never even heard of Prince Richard.
I do think it’s fascinating, though, these subtle shifts in kingly responsibilities. It’s not obvious to me why William is maintaining a low profile. Is he just lazy?
Richard is the Duke of Gloucester - the King's cousin, I think. Did an architecture course in the 70s, and has been stuck opening shopping centres ever since...
As for William, I know there've been rumours about problems in his personal life - and at the very least his wife must have been very ill for some time to need such a hugely serious operation. But I doubt that's enough have stopped him taking some of Anne/Richard/Edward's more prestigious gigs if he'd felt it was necessary to do so - he just doesn't see the value in it.
Yes, Duke of Gloucester. I just never hear him referred to as Prince Richard, for some reason. I agree with the original notion that we’re frankly short of a few royals. Philip and Zara look the most “papabile” to my eye.
William needs to pull his finger out. The deal is that we pay for their luxury, and they perform their duties like Stakhanovites.
Speaking of which, the King is also the King of NZ. I know he’s due for a visit in November, but we kind of need him more often than every five or six years.
The days of organising the monarchy around the contingencies of boat-plane via BOAC are well and truly over.
Profits of the crown estates and duchies pay for the Prince and Princess of Wales actually, taxpayers pay for nothing more than their security.
The Governor General does the day to day things in NZ for the King and is currently a Maori woman
The crown estates belong to the country, they are not the private property of the monarch.
If we became a republic the crown estates would just be rebranded to something else, just as everything that is currently HM whatever will get rebranded then too.
If we became a republic taxpayers would fund a President and their family direct
A damn sight cheaper than the Royals I'd wager. Especially after we have sold of all the crown estate to the Chinese...
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
What is a “race realist”?
The ethnic chinese are race realists. They would laugh at the idea a white person born in China can call themselves Chinese.
I quite like the way the Irish talk about the new Irish.
Doesn’t this graph imply it was some other party’s fault?
The UK’s Conservative party is on the brink of a generational wipeout. The single most important factor driving this is the dramatic breakdown of upward social mobility on.ft.com/3SSPGeP
House prices rose by 206% between 1997 and 2007. It was a big factor in Labour's landslide win in 2001, and probably made the difference between victory and defeat in 2005. But, after 2010, these 25-50 year old voters of 1997 switched over heavily towards the Tories. Now they're aged 50 to 75.
The problem is, the Tories, while appealing successfully to this group, were not interested in people who were not on the electoral register in 1997.
That said, at least home ownership rates seem to nudging upwards again.
Isn't one problem with our duel deal of poverty wages & humungous house prices that there simply isn't much spare cash sloshing through the system to invest in the way Americans can for instance in the stock market. If you look at the FTSE vs the S&P since about the year 2000 it's a dreadfully sorry story.
The thing is, that when I discuss this with Americans, they make very similar complaints to us. That, back in 1990, a typical family could afford a good house, but now they can't, and their wages have stagnated for years, and all the good blue collar jobs that used to be an offer have disappeared.
My impression is that while the US economic performance has, in overall terms, been better than any other Western country, over the past 20 years, the fruits of it go to quite a narrow section of the population.
I disagree - both their mean AND crucially median salaries are way above ours.
The median average salary in the UK for people in full-time employment full time is £31,285. The mean average salary for all workers (including full-time and part-time employees) is £31,447.
In contrast, the mean average salary for all full time workers is £38,131.
In the US, the median average salary for women in 2023 was $53,229, and the median average salary for men was $58,342 in the same year.
These figures have taken both full time and part time workers into consideration. This converts to around £42,721 for women, and £49,433 for men.
As you can see, the latter figure is significantly higher than the median average for the UK.
In addition, the mean average is also significantly higher too. In 2020, the mean annual wage per employee was $78,392 and $6,352 a month before tax.
& heck they might not feel particularly richer given healthcare costs and probably higher cost of goods but that cash has to slosh somewhere. If they're not saving it's going to end up in US corporations pockets which of course fuels their stock markets.
On the contrary here there's just not all that much to go, well anywhere.
The top 1% of Americans (or less) do stratospherically better than their UK counterparts.
The top 65% do substantially better, with health costs evening it up in the lower bands. But they also have access to much cheaper housing (grossly simplifying).
The bottom 35% of Americans do substantially worse than British counterparts.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You are wasted on this site Leon. Your charm charisma and intelligence is too much for the regulars to handle.
I know. I sometimes feel I am more approached in Sverdlovsk than Swindon
A prophet without honour etc
What's happened to you, Leon? Are you OK?
Cambodia. Doing good professional knapping but bereft of social life - a self inflicted monastic solitude which I now possibly regret. Because it makes me reliant on PB for discourse at a time when PB has turned to shit
No wonder so many have fled the site
But I will end up with some excellent flints - I think - and it will all be worth it. Head down. Do the graft
Good work SHOULD be hard
Is PB not just in a lull waiting for some significant political betting to start? The general election could be mere weeks away and the US election is definitely in November. Calm before the storm (and the opportunity to fleece some less savvy punters on the markets?)
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
Talking of which...
Remember that (quality-adjusted) rents *should* fall over time as a share of people’s incomes, like everything else.
When rents rise in line with incomes, as is currently the case, a large chunk of wage growth goes to property owners rather than the workers earning the wages.
And yes, it started in the late 90s. But as each year passes, more people are added to the "can't get a deposit together" trap.
Good point.
10 years ago, I was paying £1200/month for a 1 bedroom flat. Today, I'm paying £2150/month for a studio.
An 80% increase. Both places were of a similar standard, both in London zone 2, both around 10 mins from the nearest tube station.
My salary's risen by a similar percentage, but a large chunk of that has been caught in higher tax bands. So the proportion I spend on rent has actually increased by 3%, and I've got about 20% less living space to show for it.
The West should be more open to negotiating with Vladimir Putin, Nigel Farage has suggested.
The founder of Reform UK said he was “shocked” by the “absolute reluctance” to consider negotiations with Russia since Moscow launched its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
It comes after Putin accused Boris Johnson of sabotaging a peace deal in the spring of that year, during an interview with American broadcaster Tucker Carlson.
Responding to the interview, Mr Farage told GB News: “All of our understanding of what is going on in Ukraine, horrendous though it is, all of our understanding of the Putin mindset, the Russian mindset, I think we understand it ever more clearly after what was said last night.
“[Russia is] not going to stop and they’re switching vast amounts of their industrial production in Russia towards defence, they will never give up on this.
“Now we can find much of what’s happening abhorrent, but the thing that shocked me all the way through has been the absolute reluctance of anyone to think, shouldn’t we at least be having some form of negotiations?”
The Russian President claimed in yesterday’s interview that a peace deal was settled in Istanbul with Ukraine’s chief negotiator in 2022 but it was scuppered by Mr Johnson, prolonging the war by another 18 months. Mr Johnson has previously strongly dismissed the claims as “total nonsense” and “Russian propaganda”.
Why would you negotiate with someone who wishes to subjugate you?
Doesn’t this graph imply it was some other party’s fault?
The UK’s Conservative party is on the brink of a generational wipeout. The single most important factor driving this is the dramatic breakdown of upward social mobility on.ft.com/3SSPGeP
House prices rose by 206% between 1997 and 2007. It was a big factor in Labour's landslide win in 2001, and probably made the difference between victory and defeat in 2005. But, after 2010, these 25-50 year old voters of 1997 switched over heavily towards the Tories. Now they're aged 50 to 75.
The problem is, the Tories, while appealing successfully to this group, were not interested in people who were not on the electoral register in 1997.
That said, at least home ownership rates seem to nudging upwards again.
Isn't one problem with our duel deal of poverty wages & humungous house prices that there simply isn't much spare cash sloshing through the system to invest in the way Americans can for instance in the stock market. If you look at the FTSE vs the S&P since about the year 2000 it's a dreadfully sorry story.
The thing is, that when I discuss this with Americans, they make very similar complaints to us. That, back in 1990, a typical family could afford a good house, but now they can't, and their wages have stagnated for years, and all the good blue collar jobs that used to be an offer have disappeared.
My impression is that while the US economic performance has, in overall terms, been better than any other Western country, over the past 20 years, the fruits of it go to quite a narrow section of the population.
This is absolutely true, but in America there is “always Nashville”.
The US is so large, and prosperity better spread, you can always hope and aspire to move to another city to build your fortune.
And millions, really millions do.
So while SF is impossible, NY improbable, and LA not-so-doable, the large swathes of the American middle class can legitimately aspire to home ownership in Phoenix, Nashville, North Durham, and so on.
The same dynamic does not exist in the UK, where housing is extortionate anywhere there are jobs, and where property (and ambitions) are overwhelmingly centred on London and the South East.
Brits can’t even look to Amsterdam, Lisbon, or Barcelona any more, for reasons.
They have two huge geographical advantages over us: plentiful cheap supplies of domestic fuel, and lots of land. Britain might get the former with the help of, say, £28bn of annual green investment, but it'll never get the latter unless we start annexing territories.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
Doesn’t this graph imply it was some other party’s fault?
The UK’s Conservative party is on the brink of a generational wipeout. The single most important factor driving this is the dramatic breakdown of upward social mobility on.ft.com/3SSPGeP
House prices rose by 206% between 1997 and 2007. It was a big factor in Labour's landslide win in 2001, and probably made the difference between victory and defeat in 2005. But, after 2010, these 25-50 year old voters of 1997 switched over heavily towards the Tories. Now they're aged 50 to 75.
The problem is, the Tories, while appealing successfully to this group, were not interested in people who were not on the electoral register in 1997.
That said, at least home ownership rates seem to nudging upwards again.
Isn't one problem with our duel deal of poverty wages & humungous house prices that there simply isn't much spare cash sloshing through the system to invest in the way Americans can for instance in the stock market. If you look at the FTSE vs the S&P since about the year 2000 it's a dreadfully sorry story.
The thing is, that when I discuss this with Americans, they make very similar complaints to us. That, back in 1990, a typical family could afford a good house, but now they can't, and their wages have stagnated for years, and all the good blue collar jobs that used to be an offer have disappeared.
My impression is that while the US economic performance has, in overall terms, been better than any other Western country, over the past 20 years, the fruits of it go to quite a narrow section of the population.
I disagree - both their mean AND crucially median salaries are way above ours.
The median average salary in the UK for people in full-time employment full time is £31,285. The mean average salary for all workers (including full-time and part-time employees) is £31,447.
In contrast, the mean average salary for all full time workers is £38,131.
In the US, the median average salary for women in 2023 was $53,229, and the median average salary for men was $58,342 in the same year.
These figures have taken both full time and part time workers into consideration. This converts to around £42,721 for women, and £49,433 for men.
As you can see, the latter figure is significantly higher than the median average for the UK.
In addition, the mean average is also significantly higher too. In 2020, the mean annual wage per employee was $78,392 and $6,352 a month before tax.
& heck they might not feel particularly richer given healthcare costs and probably higher cost of goods but that cash has to slosh somewhere. If they're not saving it's going to end up in US corporations pockets which of course fuels their stock markets.
On the contrary here there's just not all that much to go, well anywhere.
I'm well aware that Americans are notably better off than we are. I'm simply reporting what they tell me.
The West should be more open to negotiating with Vladimir Putin, Nigel Farage has suggested.
The founder of Reform UK said he was “shocked” by the “absolute reluctance” to consider negotiations with Russia since Moscow launched its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
It comes after Putin accused Boris Johnson of sabotaging a peace deal in the spring of that year, during an interview with American broadcaster Tucker Carlson.
Responding to the interview, Mr Farage told GB News: “All of our understanding of what is going on in Ukraine, horrendous though it is, all of our understanding of the Putin mindset, the Russian mindset, I think we understand it ever more clearly after what was said last night.
“[Russia is] not going to stop and they’re switching vast amounts of their industrial production in Russia towards defence, they will never give up on this.
“Now we can find much of what’s happening abhorrent, but the thing that shocked me all the way through has been the absolute reluctance of anyone to think, shouldn’t we at least be having some form of negotiations?”
The Russian President claimed in yesterday’s interview that a peace deal was settled in Istanbul with Ukraine’s chief negotiator in 2022 but it was scuppered by Mr Johnson, prolonging the war by another 18 months. Mr Johnson has previously strongly dismissed the claims as “total nonsense” and “Russian propaganda”.
Why would you negotiate with someone who wishes to subjugate you?
"Owning the Libs" has become more important than anything to Farage and his fellow travellers, and so they've lost any moral compass.
The West should be more open to negotiating with Vladimir Putin, Nigel Farage has suggested.
The founder of Reform UK said he was “shocked” by the “absolute reluctance” to consider negotiations with Russia since Moscow launched its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
It comes after Putin accused Boris Johnson of sabotaging a peace deal in the spring of that year, during an interview with American broadcaster Tucker Carlson.
Responding to the interview, Mr Farage told GB News: “All of our understanding of what is going on in Ukraine, horrendous though it is, all of our understanding of the Putin mindset, the Russian mindset, I think we understand it ever more clearly after what was said last night.
“[Russia is] not going to stop and they’re switching vast amounts of their industrial production in Russia towards defence, they will never give up on this.
“Now we can find much of what’s happening abhorrent, but the thing that shocked me all the way through has been the absolute reluctance of anyone to think, shouldn’t we at least be having some form of negotiations?”
The Russian President claimed in yesterday’s interview that a peace deal was settled in Istanbul with Ukraine’s chief negotiator in 2022 but it was scuppered by Mr Johnson, prolonging the war by another 18 months. Mr Johnson has previously strongly dismissed the claims as “total nonsense” and “Russian propaganda”.
The West should be more open to negotiating with Vladimir Putin, Nigel Farage has suggested.
The founder of Reform UK said he was “shocked” by the “absolute reluctance” to consider negotiations with Russia since Moscow launched its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
It comes after Putin accused Boris Johnson of sabotaging a peace deal in the spring of that year, during an interview with American broadcaster Tucker Carlson.
Responding to the interview, Mr Farage told GB News: “All of our understanding of what is going on in Ukraine, horrendous though it is, all of our understanding of the Putin mindset, the Russian mindset, I think we understand it ever more clearly after what was said last night.
“[Russia is] not going to stop and they’re switching vast amounts of their industrial production in Russia towards defence, they will never give up on this.
“Now we can find much of what’s happening abhorrent, but the thing that shocked me all the way through has been the absolute reluctance of anyone to think, shouldn’t we at least be having some form of negotiations?”
The Russian President claimed in yesterday’s interview that a peace deal was settled in Istanbul with Ukraine’s chief negotiator in 2022 but it was scuppered by Mr Johnson, prolonging the war by another 18 months. Mr Johnson has previously strongly dismissed the claims as “total nonsense” and “Russian propaganda”.
Why would you negotiate with someone who wishes to subjugate you?
I was watching a clip of SKS on Sky explaining why he was rowing back on his green policies. He appeared to slip in that this would also impact on housebuilding.
Lol, Prince Regent Harry would be hilarious - and again, could add a lot of otherwise pro monarchy people onto the republican side. Also, who else is there? Andrew? lol once more
Some of us at the time said Charles's plan to slim down the Royal Family made no sense when Harry and Andrew had already left, and he and Anne and the Kents are no spring chickens.
The West should be more open to negotiating with Vladimir Putin, Nigel Farage has suggested.
The founder of Reform UK said he was “shocked” by the “absolute reluctance” to consider negotiations with Russia since Moscow launched its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
It comes after Putin accused Boris Johnson of sabotaging a peace deal in the spring of that year, during an interview with American broadcaster Tucker Carlson.
Responding to the interview, Mr Farage told GB News: “All of our understanding of what is going on in Ukraine, horrendous though it is, all of our understanding of the Putin mindset, the Russian mindset, I think we understand it ever more clearly after what was said last night.
“[Russia is] not going to stop and they’re switching vast amounts of their industrial production in Russia towards defence, they will never give up on this.
“Now we can find much of what’s happening abhorrent, but the thing that shocked me all the way through has been the absolute reluctance of anyone to think, shouldn’t we at least be having some form of negotiations?”
The Russian President claimed in yesterday’s interview that a peace deal was settled in Istanbul with Ukraine’s chief negotiator in 2022 but it was scuppered by Mr Johnson, prolonging the war by another 18 months. Mr Johnson has previously strongly dismissed the claims as “total nonsense” and “Russian propaganda”.
Why would you negotiate with someone who wishes to subjugate you?
"Owning the Libs" has become more important than anything to Farage and his fellow travellers, and so they've lost any moral compass.
It explains the radical right's weird love affair with Putin.
If he is claiming that Russians possess inherent racial characteristics that make them determined to win (a dubious line of argument), one would suppose that their fellow East Slavs in Ukraine would share those same characteristics, and defence is always easier than attack.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You are wasted on this site Leon. Your charm charisma and intelligence is too much for the regulars to handle.
I know. I sometimes feel I am more approached in Sverdlovsk than Swindon
A prophet without honour etc
What's happened to you, Leon? Are you OK?
Cambodia. Doing good professional knapping but bereft of social life - a self inflicted monastic solitude which I now possibly regret. Because it makes me reliant on PB for discourse at a time when PB has turned to shit
No wonder so many have fled the site
But I will end up with some excellent flints - I think - and it will all be worth it. Head down. Do the graft
Good work SHOULD be hard
Is PB not just in a lull waiting for some significant political betting to start? The general election could be mere weeks away and the US election is definitely in November. Calm before the storm (and the opportunity to fleece some less savvy punters on the markets?)
No. Absolutely no
It is in a terrible decline
Recall we used to compare it to a pub. You had the regulars, with their cranky obsessions and ancient gossip, you had frequent visitors - sometimes drunk, sometimes high, often amusing - you had passers by with brilliant new stories or total bewilderment. Crucially you had a core of really intelligent open minded people gathered round the bar
It seems to me that open minded core has gone. Now PB resembles a tedious HR meeting dominated by fucking boring lawyers and accountants and IT nerds who insist they are right, won’t allow dissent, and either chase away interesting people or bore everyone else
The wokeness prevails, there is no intellectual curiosity, no surprising new views from that guy on the corner by the slot machine
The only reason I am still here is because i have invested 15 years of conversation in this place and it will be a large wrench to leave, and I am particularly reliant on it out here in Phnom Penh
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You are wasted on this site Leon. Your charm charisma and intelligence is too much for the regulars to handle.
I know. I sometimes feel I am more approached in Sverdlovsk than Swindon
A prophet without honour etc
What's happened to you, Leon? Are you OK?
Cambodia. Doing good professional knapping but bereft of social life - a self inflicted monastic solitude which I now possibly regret. Because it makes me reliant on PB for discourse at a time when PB has turned to shit
No wonder so many have fled the site
But I will end up with some excellent flints - I think - and it will all be worth it. Head down. Do the graft
Good work SHOULD be hard
Is PB not just in a lull waiting for some significant political betting to start? The general election could be mere weeks away and the US election is definitely in November. Calm before the storm (and the opportunity to fleece some less savvy punters on the markets?)
No. Absolutely no
It is in a terrible decline
Recall we used to compare it to a pub. You had the regulars, with their cranky obsessions and ancient gossip, you had frequent visitors - sometimes drunk, sometimes high, often amusing - you had passers by with brilliant new stories or total bewilderment. Crucially you had a core of really intelligent open minded people gathered round the bar
It seems to me that open minded core has gone. Now PB resembles a tedious HR meeting dominated by fucking boring lawyers and accountants and IT nerds who insist they are right, won’t allow dissent, and either chase away interesting people or bore everyone else
The wokeness prevails, there is no intellectual curiosity, no surprising new views from that guy on the corner by the slot machine
The only reason I am still here is because i have invested 15 years of conversation in this place and it will be a large wrench to leave, and I am particularly reliant on it out here in Phnom Penh
I will leave it as soon as I can
I think reflects the broader politics. Nobody believes in the Brexit fairy anymore, the idea of supporting the Tories is risible, and Starmer is about to offer the blandest prospectus ever put to the British public. Even the Lib Dems have nothing to say.
The world is pivoting, the kaleidoscope has been shaken, but Britain has given up. For the moment, at least.
No it’s not. Putin adds nothing to what we already know/don’t know.
The body language and the demeanour of both of them
Did Tucker's permanent demeanour of stunned bemusement alter at that point ?
“Stunned bemusement” is good. He does do that a lot
He varies it with weird hilarity and a sort of mock pompous “this is serious” mode
It’s a good interview. No one who hates tucker Carlson or whatever will ever accept this, but given the constraints he is working under - interviewing an autocrat labelled an absolute evil enemy of the west (and the label could well be justified) - he does a good job. He clearly has to tread an impossibly fine line
But that’s a nuanced position. Modern PB - which is so fucking boring - doesn’t do nuance
Big Ron Burgundy vibes from Tucker. He could easily be a character in Anchorman
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
What is a “race realist”?
A racist.
Tbf, I ought to have qualified that with 'who is not in denial about it'.
Lol, Prince Regent Harry would be hilarious - and again, could add a lot of otherwise pro monarchy people onto the republican side. Also, who else is there? Andrew? lol once more
Some of us at the time said Charles's plan to slim down the Royal Family made no sense when Harry and Andrew had already left, and he and Anne and the Kents are no spring chickens.
Did I read upthread that only two working royals are under 50?
Leon and William do have a point. It's not whether Biden is more demented than Trump - I'm not sure he is and in any case he's clearly a better person and actually not a bad president on his track record.
No. For the rest of us Biden's primary task is to stop Trump. He managed that successfully in 2020 when others maybe wouldn't have. Will he manage it again in 2024? If not, we need someone else.
He may or may not be in the early stages of dementia (people being definitive either way are ignorable) but there’s no doubt about the lapses and frailty. He’s been a good president but he really shouldn’t be offering himself for a 2nd term. I hope he has a change of heart and doesn’t. I think this is very possible.
With the shit swirling around both of them I’m of the view that the ‘nailed on’ Trump Biden rematch is no more than a 50/50 shot to happen. I have it laid at 1.4 and I’m happy with that. But if it does happen I’ll be rooting 1000% for Joe. If he wins and then has to stand down at some point due to health reasons, so what. It will be managed. The risks of Trump2 are on a different scale.
So in a nutshell what I say is, “Go Joe please”, but if you don’t “Go Joe!”
Have you not had someone close suffer dementia?
If not, count yourself lucky, it is deeply painful to watch - possibly worse for the witnesses than it is for the demented
My mum was diagnosed with it last year, it distresses me greatly. I've also watched my older daughter's great granmother and now grandmother go down with it. I was quite close to the latter. And I've seen it in aunts, the parents of friends, etc. It is one of the great curses of modern times. we can keep people alive so long, but we can't save their minds
Biden looks exactly like these people, the dodderiness. the vagueness, the wandering, the truly spectacular memory losses, the confusion of identities, the decay of syntax in the speech, the inability to string sentences together; indeed, he looks like quite an advanced case. So bad, as the legal report says, that he cannot be prosecuted. He is too senile to stand trial - that is their judgement. Let that sink in
Biden is right there in front of us, exhibiting all this. It is not some kind of pro-Trump propaganda to point this out
And, if you really want Trump beaten, it is better that this is accepted and Biden is persuaded to retire, and they find someone younger
I still quite like my idea of Kamala, with Barack Obama as veep (if that is legal). I reckon that would beat Trump soundly
Er, I just said I hope Biden doesn't run. So, yes. And it's a piece of cake to distinguish reasonable concerns about his age and health from Trumpist propaganda. You just look at the language, the tone, and who it's coming from.
On the dementia, I'm sorry to hear this about your mum, and snap. Mine got an AD diagnosis a year ago, sadly. And boy is it sad. Worse for my dad, probably, at the moment. He's become a fulltime carer at 90.
Sympathies right back at you. It is a pretty horrific illness. It is terrible to say, but it might have been better if my poor Mum had keeled over with a heart attack a few years back (she's had a pacemaker for a decade). But we are where we are
The only saving grace for my Mum is that her partner also has dementia and is losing the plot at about the same pace, and they are in nice sheltered housing. So they are kind of sinking together, half aware of things
To be sane and lucid, like your father, and forced to care for a demented spouse, God that's tough
One reason I am sure Biden has dementia is his way of interweaving real stories (eg about his dead son Beau) with clear confabulations (Beau did not die in Fallujah), constructing a new reality impromptu, for no obvious reason. My mum does this constantly
I think it is the brain replacing missing memories, in a kind of panic, to create any old narrative, even if obviously bogus. Very sad
No that's not a terrible thing to think or say. I'm not wishing a long drawn out decline on my Mum. However calling people with AD "demented" - this, whilst no lie, isn't a great innovation imo. Still, you're the writer.
Joe and "the journey"? Is he on it? If so where? I truly don't know. There's not enough in the public domain for me to say. Certainly not enough to be issuing a firm diagnosis. But ok, you clearly feel you can.
The problem is - for the Dems as much as the GOP - that the right have been crying wolf on this for so long that everyone discounts it.
But the odds are no longer in Biden's favour.
Hmm, the famous "priced in" - to which the only response is "will it still sell?"
I find your last sentence a tad concerning, if you mean vs Trump, you being one of the founding members of the Trump Bear club. TBH the only thing I'm certain of right now is I have no idea where this is all going or how it's going to get there.
Fwiw when I spool forward a year and picture who's in the White House, that person is neither Donald Trump nor Joe Biden.
No, I meant the odds of his still being the candidate by November.
It might be unfair (probably is), but the drip, drip will be relentless. Every time Biden gaffes from now on will be seen through the new lens.
When the 'liberal' press leads with "Special counsel report paints scathing picture of Biden’s memory", it shows how effective is the hit job.
18 USC 1924 is subject to a five year statute of limitations - which is why Trump is being charged (as he reoffended by lying and refusing to return classified documents), and Biden isn't. You won't see that in any headlines, and probably not until paragraph 23, if at all.
Every lead story is 'Biden not be charged because he's senile'.
Ah yes right. Same here in that case. I think Trump v Not Biden or (please please let it be so) Not Trump v Not Biden. Trump loses the first, can't opine on the second without the names.
(Agree about the 'liberal' media. It's about time they started earning the tag when it comes to Donald Trump.)
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You are wasted on this site Leon. Your charm charisma and intelligence is too much for the regulars to handle.
I know. I sometimes feel I am more approached in Sverdlovsk than Swindon
A prophet without honour etc
What's happened to you, Leon? Are you OK?
Cambodia. Doing good professional knapping but bereft of social life - a self inflicted monastic solitude which I now possibly regret. Because it makes me reliant on PB for discourse at a time when PB has turned to shit
No wonder so many have fled the site
But I will end up with some excellent flints - I think - and it will all be worth it. Head down. Do the graft
Good work SHOULD be hard
Is PB not just in a lull waiting for some significant political betting to start? The general election could be mere weeks away and the US election is definitely in November. Calm before the storm (and the opportunity to fleece some less savvy punters on the markets?)
No. Absolutely no
It is in a terrible decline
Recall we used to compare it to a pub. You had the regulars, with their cranky obsessions and ancient gossip, you had frequent visitors - sometimes drunk, sometimes high, often amusing - you had passers by with brilliant new stories or total bewilderment. Crucially you had a core of really intelligent open minded people gathered round the bar
It seems to me that open minded core has gone. Now PB resembles a tedious HR meeting dominated by fucking boring lawyers and accountants and IT nerds who insist they are right, won’t allow dissent, and either chase away interesting people or bore everyone else
The wokeness prevails, there is no intellectual curiosity, no surprising new views from that guy on the corner by the slot machine
The only reason I am still here is because i have invested 15 years of conversation in this place and it will be a large wrench to leave, and I am particularly reliant on it out here in Phnom Penh
I will leave it as soon as I can
Possibly related to the fact that having interesting views nowadays can mean the loss of job and income due to prevailing wokeness, So people censor at work and this becomes a habit and they censor everywhere else too. To be free to speak your mind in the uk you have to be either rich, self employed or unemployed.
I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I’ve never even heard of Prince Richard.
I do think it’s fascinating, though, these subtle shifts in kingly responsibilities. It’s not obvious to me why William is maintaining a low profile. Is he just lazy?
Richard is the Duke of Gloucester - the King's cousin, I think. Did an architecture course in the 70s, and has been stuck opening shopping centres ever since...
As for William, I know there've been rumours about problems in his personal life - and at the very least his wife must have been very ill for some time to need such a hugely serious operation. But I doubt that's enough have stopped him taking some of Anne/Richard/Edward's more prestigious gigs if he'd felt it was necessary to do so - he just doesn't see the value in it.
Yes, Duke of Gloucester. I just never hear him referred to as Prince Richard, for some reason. I agree with the original notion that we’re frankly short of a few royals. Philip and Zara look the most “papabile” to my eye.
William needs to pull his finger out. The deal is that we pay for their luxury, and they perform their duties like Stakhanovites.
Speaking of which, the King is also the King of NZ. I know he’s due for a visit in November, but we kind of need him more often than every five or six years.
The days of organising the monarchy around the contingencies of boat-plane via BOAC are well and truly over.
Profits of the crown estates and duchies pay for the Prince and Princess of Wales actually, taxpayers pay for nothing more than their security.
The Governor General does the day to day things in NZ for the King and is currently a Maori woman
The crown estates belong to the country, they are not the private property of the monarch.
If we became a republic the crown estates would just be rebranded to something else, just as everything that is currently HM whatever will get rebranded then too.
If we became a republic taxpayers would fund a President and their family direct
A damn sight cheaper than the Royals I'd wager. Especially after we have sold of all the crown estate to the Chinese...
No, with no royal wedding, jubilee or coronation revenue whether and the Crown estate certainly won't be sold off, it is our heritage.
I certainly don't want President Johnson or President Blair either
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You are wasted on this site Leon. Your charm charisma and intelligence is too much for the regulars to handle.
I know. I sometimes feel I am more approached in Sverdlovsk than Swindon
A prophet without honour etc
What's happened to you, Leon? Are you OK?
Cambodia. Doing good professional knapping but bereft of social life - a self inflicted monastic solitude which I now possibly regret. Because it makes me reliant on PB for discourse at a time when PB has turned to shit
No wonder so many have fled the site
But I will end up with some excellent flints - I think - and it will all be worth it. Head down. Do the graft
Good work SHOULD be hard
Is PB not just in a lull waiting for some significant political betting to start? The general election could be mere weeks away and the US election is definitely in November. Calm before the storm (and the opportunity to fleece some less savvy punters on the markets?)
No. Absolutely no
It is in a terrible decline
Recall we used to compare it to a pub. You had the regulars, with their cranky obsessions and ancient gossip, you had frequent visitors - sometimes drunk, sometimes high, often amusing - you had passers by with brilliant new stories or total bewilderment. Crucially you had a core of really intelligent open minded people gathered round the bar
It seems to me that open minded core has gone. Now PB resembles a tedious HR meeting dominated by fucking boring lawyers and accountants and IT nerds who insist they are right, won’t allow dissent, and either chase away interesting people or bore everyone else
The wokeness prevails, there is no intellectual curiosity, no surprising new views from that guy on the corner by the slot machine
The only reason I am still here is because i have invested 15 years of conversation in this place and it will be a large wrench to leave, and I am particularly reliant on it out here in Phnom Penh
I will leave it as soon as I can
I think reflects the broader politics. Nobody believes in the Brexit fairy anymore, the idea of supporting the Tories is risible, and Starmer is about to offer the blandest prospectus ever put to the British public. Even the Lib Dems have nothing to say.
The world is pivoting, the kaleidoscope has been shaken, but Britain has given up. For the moment, at least.
Yes. The wider world is definitely part of it. Politics is more polarised so pb is part of that
Also everyone here is just older and crankier perhaps. But fuck knows why I have to respect these geriatric twats - I still travel the world and do stuff - I stay open minded. Pb does not
Hey ho
If I’m still here in a year please please please tease me mercilessly until I am shamed into going. I need to find a replacement forum - it’s not easy. Pb of old was special
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You are wasted on this site Leon. Your charm charisma and intelligence is too much for the regulars to handle.
I know. I sometimes feel I am more approached in Sverdlovsk than Swindon
A prophet without honour etc
What's happened to you, Leon? Are you OK?
Cambodia. Doing good professional knapping but bereft of social life - a self inflicted monastic solitude which I now possibly regret. Because it makes me reliant on PB for discourse at a time when PB has turned to shit
No wonder so many have fled the site
But I will end up with some excellent flints - I think - and it will all be worth it. Head down. Do the graft
Good work SHOULD be hard
Is PB not just in a lull waiting for some significant political betting to start? The general election could be mere weeks away and the US election is definitely in November. Calm before the storm (and the opportunity to fleece some less savvy punters on the markets?)
There are a couple of by-elections just six days away, in Wellingborough (to replace Peter Bone) and in Kingswood (to replace Chris Skidmore who resigned over North Sea oil). And a fortnight later, Rochdale goes to the polls (to replace Tony Lloyd).
What is funny is that Labour are a longer price in the seat they now hold than in the two Tory seats.
Doesn’t this graph imply it was some other party’s fault?
The UK’s Conservative party is on the brink of a generational wipeout. The single most important factor driving this is the dramatic breakdown of upward social mobility on.ft.com/3SSPGeP
House prices rose by 206% between 1997 and 2007. It was a big factor in Labour's landslide win in 2001, and probably made the difference between victory and defeat in 2005. But, after 2010, these 25-50 year old voters of 1997 switched over heavily towards the Tories. Now they're aged 50 to 75.
The problem is, the Tories, while appealing successfully to this group, were not interested in people who were not on the electoral register in 1997.
That said, at least home ownership rates seem to nudging upwards again.
Isn't one problem with our duel deal of poverty wages & humungous house prices that there simply isn't much spare cash sloshing through the system to invest in the way Americans can for instance in the stock market. If you look at the FTSE vs the S&P since about the year 2000 it's a dreadfully sorry story.
The thing is, that when I discuss this with Americans, they make very similar complaints to us. That, back in 1990, a typical family could afford a good house, but now they can't, and their wages have stagnated for years, and all the good blue collar jobs that used to be an offer have disappeared.
My impression is that while the US economic performance has, in overall terms, been better than any other Western country, over the past 20 years, the fruits of it go to quite a narrow section of the population.
I disagree - both their mean AND crucially median salaries are way above ours.
The median average salary in the UK for people in full-time employment full time is £31,285. The mean average salary for all workers (including full-time and part-time employees) is £31,447.
In contrast, the mean average salary for all full time workers is £38,131.
In the US, the median average salary for women in 2023 was $53,229, and the median average salary for men was $58,342 in the same year.
These figures have taken both full time and part time workers into consideration. This converts to around £42,721 for women, and £49,433 for men.
As you can see, the latter figure is significantly higher than the median average for the UK.
In addition, the mean average is also significantly higher too. In 2020, the mean annual wage per employee was $78,392 and $6,352 a month before tax.
& heck they might not feel particularly richer given healthcare costs and probably higher cost of goods but that cash has to slosh somewhere. If they're not saving it's going to end up in US corporations pockets which of course fuels their stock markets.
On the contrary here there's just not all that much to go, well anywhere.
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You are wasted on this site Leon. Your charm charisma and intelligence is too much for the regulars to handle.
I know. I sometimes feel I am more approached in Sverdlovsk than Swindon
A prophet without honour etc
What's happened to you, Leon? Are you OK?
Cambodia. Doing good professional knapping but bereft of social life - a self inflicted monastic solitude which I now possibly regret. Because it makes me reliant on PB for discourse at a time when PB has turned to shit
No wonder so many have fled the site
But I will end up with some excellent flints - I think - and it will all be worth it. Head down. Do the graft
Good work SHOULD be hard
Is PB not just in a lull waiting for some significant political betting to start? The general election could be mere weeks away and the US election is definitely in November. Calm before the storm (and the opportunity to fleece some less savvy punters on the markets?)
No. Absolutely no
It is in a terrible decline
Recall we used to compare it to a pub. You had the regulars, with their cranky obsessions and ancient gossip, you had frequent visitors - sometimes drunk, sometimes high, often amusing - you had passers by with brilliant new stories or total bewilderment. Crucially you had a core of really intelligent open minded people gathered round the bar
It seems to me that open minded core has gone. Now PB resembles a tedious HR meeting dominated by fucking boring lawyers and accountants and IT nerds who insist they are right, won’t allow dissent, and either chase away interesting people or bore everyone else
The wokeness prevails, there is no intellectual curiosity, no surprising new views from that guy on the corner by the slot machine
The only reason I am still here is because i have invested 15 years of conversation in this place and it will be a large wrench to leave, and I am particularly reliant on it out here in Phnom Penh
I will leave it as soon as I can
I think reflects the broader politics. Nobody believes in the Brexit fairy anymore, the idea of supporting the Tories is risible, and Starmer is about to offer the blandest prospectus ever put to the British public. Even the Lib Dems have nothing to say.
The world is pivoting, the kaleidoscope has been shaken, but Britain has given up. For the moment, at least.
Yes. The wider world is definitely part of it. Politics is more polarised so pb is part of that
Also everyone here is just older and crankier perhaps. But fuck knows why I have to respect these geriatric twats - I still travel the world and do stuff - I stay open minded. Pb does not
Hey ho
If I’m still here in a year please please please tease me mercilessly until I am shamed into going. I need to find a replacement forum - it’s not easy. Pb of old was special
I am looking hard
Do you not think you've played a large part in driving away people who disagree with you?
Lol, Prince Regent Harry would be hilarious - and again, could add a lot of otherwise pro monarchy people onto the republican side. Also, who else is there? Andrew? lol once more
Some of us at the time said Charles's plan to slim down the Royal Family made no sense when Harry and Andrew had already left, and he and Anne and the Kents are no spring chickens.
Did I read upthread that only two working royals are under 50?
Not a recipe for success.
Technically you only need 2 working royals, the King and Queen.
Yes you can have the Prince and Princess of Wales too but you don't need all the add ons beyond that in the 21st century, see Denmark.
Once William becomes King the working royals will likely just be him and Kate and his children once they reach adulthood
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You are wasted on this site Leon. Your charm charisma and intelligence is too much for the regulars to handle.
I know. I sometimes feel I am more approached in Sverdlovsk than Swindon
A prophet without honour etc
What's happened to you, Leon? Are you OK?
Cambodia. Doing good professional knapping but bereft of social life - a self inflicted monastic solitude which I now possibly regret. Because it makes me reliant on PB for discourse at a time when PB has turned to shit
No wonder so many have fled the site
But I will end up with some excellent flints - I think - and it will all be worth it. Head down. Do the graft
Good work SHOULD be hard
Due to having fessed up to suffering from excessive boredom during Lockdown, PB's resident flint-knapper @Leon was commissioned by CCHQ to knap the perfect sculpture of Boris Johnson! Finally able to take a break from knapping strangely shaped sex-toys, he accepted the work in a heartbeat, and got to sculpting the same day. Arduous work, but he felt that, over the course of several weeks of almost continuous knapping, that he got it almost completely spot on with just a little bit more required.
However, Leon had found that he had knapped so meticulously that his hands were thoroughly knackered and sore. He wondered about taking some time off in order to finish off his masterpiece at a later date. Boris's office phoned him back reasonably promptly, but to Leon's horror, he was told in no uncertain terms that he would lose his fee if he stopped work!
"Why?" asked Leon on the phone incredulously.
"Simple!" Boris's underling replied. "You're not entitled to any..." He paused for effect. "...Statue-Tory Sick Pay!"
Interim verdict: Putin looks healthy enough. Quite on top of his brief. Remember when we were told he was dying?
Also: not mad. Obsessive. Autocratic. But not insane. Not immediately off putting. Wily. Cunning. Duplicitous
I sense he really doesn’t want to invade and conquer Eastern Europe. But he really does want a large chunk of Ukraine. And he is genuinely aggrieved about NATO expansion - it’s not a pretext
So a dangerous man but not a Hitler
Interim verdict on tucker: doing the best he can. His main achievement is getting the interview in the first place - creating the envy of all his peers
He also asks some quite devious questions that make Putin look a little credulous or clumsy but he does it in a way that Putin doesn’t notice
It is not 120 minutes of sycophancy. But I am only halfway through
Yet still 50 minutes longer than most people with their heads actually screwed on have managed.
Some of us still remember the days when you were telling us all that Putin would be our saviour.
Another one that didn’t surprise on the upside.
It it a constant source of amazement to me that your only friend is a dog, given the ready wit, personal charm and that sly, playful charisma you regularly exhibit on this site
You are wasted on this site Leon. Your charm charisma and intelligence is too much for the regulars to handle.
I know. I sometimes feel I am more approached in Sverdlovsk than Swindon
A prophet without honour etc
What's happened to you, Leon? Are you OK?
Cambodia. Doing good professional knapping but bereft of social life - a self inflicted monastic solitude which I now possibly regret. Because it makes me reliant on PB for discourse at a time when PB has turned to shit
No wonder so many have fled the site
But I will end up with some excellent flints - I think - and it will all be worth it. Head down. Do the graft
Good work SHOULD be hard
Is PB not just in a lull waiting for some significant political betting to start? The general election could be mere weeks away and the US election is definitely in November. Calm before the storm (and the opportunity to fleece some less savvy punters on the markets?)
No. Absolutely no
It is in a terrible decline
Recall we used to compare it to a pub. You had the regulars, with their cranky obsessions and ancient gossip, you had frequent visitors - sometimes drunk, sometimes high, often amusing - you had passers by with brilliant new stories or total bewilderment. Crucially you had a core of really intelligent open minded people gathered round the bar
It seems to me that open minded core has gone. Now PB resembles a tedious HR meeting dominated by fucking boring lawyers and accountants and IT nerds who insist they are right, won’t allow dissent, and either chase away interesting people or bore everyone else
The wokeness prevails, there is no intellectual curiosity, no surprising new views from that guy on the corner by the slot machine
The only reason I am still here is because i have invested 15 years of conversation in this place and it will be a large wrench to leave, and I am particularly reliant on it out here in Phnom Penh
I will leave it as soon as I can
Possibly related to the fact that having interesting views nowadays can mean the loss of job and income due to prevailing wokeness, So people censor at work and this becomes a habit and they censor everywhere else too. To be free to speak your mind in the uk you have to be either rich, self employed or unemployed.
That’s a really astute point. I am relatively free to speak my mind for various reasons - affluent, self employed, already a known gobshite - tho even I can’t say half of what I want to
Others don’t have 10% of my freedom. And they are scared
Also, how fucking ironic that one of the most interesting points of the day comes from a possible putinist bot working in Cape Verde
Vladimir Putin has claimed Boris Johnson is to blame for the continuation of the war in Ukraine.
The Russian President said he was ready to end the war 18 months ago, but that the former Prime Minister put pressure on Ukraine's leaders to back out of the peace deal. Johnson has dismissed the claims as ‘propaganda’.
Even PB couldn't blame Boris for this one, right? Well maybe @Scott_xP could... 😂
My idle speculation about why Putin is *so furious* with Johnson is that Putin assumed that he was in his pocket (a la Trump), and is incensed to learn that being a suck-up when all things are equal does not translate into being a shill when the bullets start flying. One of the few things which stands to Johnson's credit.
The fact that he was so compromised and potentially tainted by his top level russian contacts (remember the visit to Italy when he shook loose his security?) is of course why Johnson had to pull his finger out when the Ukraine issue broke.
Russia's long-term strategy is to break up Western unity any which way. Brexit was one (thanks, Johnson); mass migration is another (thanks, Assad); US isolation is another (thanks, Trump). Every useful idiot has a role to play.
Russian thinking is much more sophisticated than the wests generally and much more long term.
Don't you just love the smell of Bullshit in the air
Doesn’t this graph imply it was some other party’s fault?
The UK’s Conservative party is on the brink of a generational wipeout. The single most important factor driving this is the dramatic breakdown of upward social mobility on.ft.com/3SSPGeP
House prices rose by 206% between 1997 and 2007. It was a big factor in Labour's landslide win in 2001, and probably made the difference between victory and defeat in 2005. But, after 2010, these 25-50 year old voters of 1997 switched over heavily towards the Tories. Now they're aged 50 to 75.
The problem is, the Tories, while appealing successfully to this group, were not interested in people who were not on the electoral register in 1997.
That said, at least home ownership rates seem to nudging upwards again.
Isn't one problem with our duel deal of poverty wages & humungous house prices that there simply isn't much spare cash sloshing through the system to invest in the way Americans can for instance in the stock market. If you look at the FTSE vs the S&P since about the year 2000 it's a dreadfully sorry story.
The thing is, that when I discuss this with Americans, they make very similar complaints to us. That, back in 1990, a typical family could afford a good house, but now they can't, and their wages have stagnated for years, and all the good blue collar jobs that used to be an offer have disappeared.
My impression is that while the US economic performance has, in overall terms, been better than any other Western country, over the past 20 years, the fruits of it go to quite a narrow section of the population.
I disagree - both their mean AND crucially median salaries are way above ours.
The median average salary in the UK for people in full-time employment full time is £31,285. The mean average salary for all workers (including full-time and part-time employees) is £31,447.
In contrast, the mean average salary for all full time workers is £38,131.
In the US, the median average salary for women in 2023 was $53,229, and the median average salary for men was $58,342 in the same year.
These figures have taken both full time and part time workers into consideration. This converts to around £42,721 for women, and £49,433 for men.
As you can see, the latter figure is significantly higher than the median average for the UK.
In addition, the mean average is also significantly higher too. In 2020, the mean annual wage per employee was $78,392 and $6,352 a month before tax.
& heck they might not feel particularly richer given healthcare costs and probably higher cost of goods but that cash has to slosh somewhere. If they're not saving it's going to end up in US corporations pockets which of course fuels their stock markets.
On the contrary here there's just not all that much to go, well anywhere.
I'm well aware that Americans are notably better off than we are. I'm simply reporting what they tell me.
The point about healthcare costs is misleading because many (most?) Americans have health insurance through work, or are covered by the government.
I think it's obvious that the next generation of royals don't see much less value in the "visibility" work that the last Queen was so keen on.
I've been keeping an eye on the Court Circular for the past 6 months (yeah, interesting, I know...)
Princess Anne does lots of sports, rural, and health-related visits Prince Richard does lots of buildings, engineering, built environment-related visits Prince Edward does some theatre, arts, and youth-related visits
And, er, that's it.
Prince William does virtually none of that stuff, even accounting for time off with his wife being ill. He goes to some dinners, and does a feww investiture ceremonies - the rest of his official engagements tend to be for personal projects like the Earthshot Prize. The contrast between his diary in 2023 and Charles' in, say, 2003 is rather eye-opening.
But who's to say that's a bad thing - if you've got a new university building that needs opened, say, why do you need Prince Richard rather than a Lord Mayor, ex-government minister, or someone from off the telly anyway?
At this point, it looks almost like a hobby for the older ones - or something they do because they've always done it, not because there's much need for it.
I’ve never even heard of Prince Richard.
I do think it’s fascinating, though, these subtle shifts in kingly responsibilities. It’s not obvious to me why William is maintaining a low profile. Is he just lazy?
Richard is the Duke of Gloucester - the King's cousin, I think. Did an architecture course in the 70s, and has been stuck opening shopping centres ever since...
As for William, I know there've been rumours about problems in his personal life - and at the very least his wife must have been very ill for some time to need such a hugely serious operation. But I doubt that's enough have stopped him taking some of Anne/Richard/Edward's more prestigious gigs if he'd felt it was necessary to do so - he just doesn't see the value in it.
Yes, Duke of Gloucester. I just never hear him referred to as Prince Richard, for some reason. I agree with the original notion that we’re frankly short of a few royals. Philip and Zara look the most “papabile” to my eye.
William needs to pull his finger out. The deal is that we pay for their luxury, and they perform their duties like Stakhanovites.
Speaking of which, the King is also the King of NZ. I know he’s due for a visit in November, but we kind of need him more often than every five or six years.
The days of organising the monarchy around the contingencies of boat-plane via BOAC are well and truly over.
Profits of the crown estates and duchies pay for the Prince and Princess of Wales actually, taxpayers pay for nothing more than their security.
The Governor General does the day to day things in NZ for the King and is currently a Maori woman
One area that I agree with Leon is that PB's approach to the war in the Ukraine is somewhat unnuanced.
The prevailing consensensus here on PB is that the conflict very closely mirrors World War II, with only the occasional visit from real Russian trolls, or real demented Trumpist-Putinists, to put o any dissenting view. In fact the war is not that simple.
I was watching a clip of SKS on Sky explaining why he was rowing back on his green policies. He appeared to slip in that this would also impact on housebuilding.
I was watching a clip of SKS on Sky explaining why he was rowing back on his green policies. He appeared to slip in that this would also impact on housebuilding.
It isn't just home ownership of course. There's a sense that opportunities are shrinking more generally.
Rent / House prices Stagnant wages Student loans Higher taxes on the class-formerly-known-as-upwardly mobile. Extortionate childcare. Degraded public services. Harder to export. Harder to travel and work in Europe.
The obvious question is, do you feel better off now or in 2010?
But.
The problem is I have to adjust for the fact that the 2010s were my 30s, where my middle-class professional career advanced in leaps and bounds and I made a lot of money, although that probably wasn't the case for the majority of people.
So, ceteris paribus, I ask myself, would I prefer to be 30 now, or 30 in 2010? And on that metric, it's clear to me that the economy, opportunities, public services, housing and all the other things you mention have clearly degraded in that time. Meaning that measure for measure, I would now have fewer opportunities to get ahead, enjoy a worse standard of living, and worst of all, have that sinking feeling that things will only get worse, not better, from here, under the current government.
Isn't this the wrong question though? Most (or at least many) people progress in their careers - get promoted, move jobs for better pay etc. So almost all of us would feel better off now than in 2010. My situation is definitely better (promotions etc).
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
So far as I can tell from family etc, today’s professional 20-somethings are in a significantly worse position than I was when I was a professional 20-something.
Yes its probably better to be a 20 something in China now especially if you are intelligent.
As evidenced by the flocks of young people heading to China.
Dont think its especially easy to immigrate to China. Anyway the chinese are race realists and will favour ethnic chinese in their hiriing,
What is a “race realist”?
A racist.
Tbf, I ought to have qualified that with 'who is not in denial about it'.
Crucial caveat. It has to be one of the least self-reported of traits.
Comments
He doesn't need to spend his life opening school buildings or visiting hospitals, but he absolutely must find some other way of having an impact on public life.
(I'm not fussed about our form of constitutional monarchy as such, but I have no time for the trappings of royalty or the hereditary principle. I wish the King well, but would much rather we elected a replacement whenever the time comes, rather than having the PoW automatically acceding)
Those Enid Blyton kids had better watch out.
Went out shopping for a couple of drill bits. Came home with the whole store.
The comparison would surely be better for an equivalent person now vs me in 2010. So someone aged 38, grade X at a University etc etc. I suspect they would feel significantly worse off than I did.
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1755909657749533159
The Russian president said that the Poles forced Nazi Germany to attack them in 1939, and "Hitler had no other choice."
Remember that (quality-adjusted) rents *should* fall over time as a share of people’s incomes, like everything else.
When rents rise in line with incomes, as is currently the case, a large chunk of wage growth goes to property owners rather than the workers earning the wages.
https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1755966727916036327?t=C8AcsCoASIYPrpgmobrgyA
And yes, it started in the late 90s. But as each year passes, more people are added to the "can't get a deposit together" trap.
Including board's Wanker-in-Chief, also (allegedly) pro-Ukrainian MAGA-maniac.
Anybody surprised by this?
I personally had no bank of mum and dad.
It always chilled me in London professional circles when I turned around and realised I was pretty much the only one (ditto not being privately educated).
A society that can’t make space for young talent ossifies, decays, and eventually dies.
He varies it with weird hilarity and a sort of mock pompous “this is serious” mode
It’s a good interview. No one who hates tucker Carlson or whatever will ever accept this, but given the constraints he is working under - interviewing an autocrat labelled an absolute evil enemy of the west (and the label could well be justified) - he does a good job. He clearly has to tread an impossibly fine line
But that’s a nuanced position. Modern PB - which is so fucking boring - doesn’t do nuance
The "totally unexpected" probably has the edge for being worst for the family because there is no opportunity to say goodbye or any of those other things you might like to say before they depart.
For the departed similar, with the sudden death, no time to say goodbye or put your affairs in order, but then again, once you're gone you won't be worrying about this. It may be better than a slow, painful, lingering death. I guess it depends what kind of person you are.
It's probably never to early to think about your legacy and to bear in mind you could get run over by a bus tomorrow
I got an email today, about an MSc in Engineering was wanting £22,000 starting salary. OK It's probably a made up person from the recruitment agency but any USA company would die of laughter if a recruitment agency sent them an email with an MSc asking for $28,000 start.
But I didn’t steal the good half of his living room. So there’s that.
Fundamentally, I designed my question in such a way as to counter the "well I'm alright Jack, I was broke in 2010 and now in 2024 I've got a house and a good career so everything must be dandy" tendency. People generally do better as they get older and accumulate wealth or prestige. But that definitely felt a lot more possible in 2010 than it does in 2024.
https://news.sky.com/story/prince-william-speaks-publicly-for-first-time-since-king-charless-cancer-diagnosis-13066291
If we became a republic the crown estates would just be rebranded to something else, just as everything that is currently HM whatever will get rebranded then too.
Other than that Putin wants to swap a US journalist for one of his hitmen ?
My impression is that while the US economic performance has, in overall terms, been better than any other Western country, over the past 20 years, the fruits of it go to quite a narrow section of the population.
Take the first three letters of the first word, then the last three letters of the second.
Googles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Against_Rehabilitation_of_Nazism
Race realist
Racist
The only drawback is that they have to work with me.
No wonder so many have fled the site
But I will end up with some excellent flints - I think - and it will all be worth it. Head down. Do the graft
Good work SHOULD be hard
US median wealth however is only $107,739 compared to $151,825 in the UK
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult
The US is so large, and prosperity better spread, you can always hope and aspire to move to another city to build your fortune.
And millions, really millions do.
So while SF is impossible, NY improbable, and LA not-so-doable, the large swathes of the American middle class can legitimately aspire to home ownership in Phoenix, Nashville, North Durham, and so on.
The same dynamic does not exist in the UK, where housing is extortionate anywhere there are jobs, and where property (and ambitions) are overwhelmingly centred on London and the South East.
Brits can’t even look to Amsterdam, Lisbon, or Barcelona any more, for reasons.
The median average salary in the UK for people in full-time employment full time is £31,285. The mean average salary for all workers (including full-time and part-time employees) is £31,447.
In contrast, the mean average salary for all full time workers is £38,131.
In the US, the median average salary for women in 2023 was $53,229, and the median average salary for men was $58,342 in the same year.
These figures have taken both full time and part time workers into consideration. This converts to around £42,721 for women, and £49,433 for men.
As you can see, the latter figure is significantly higher than the median average for the UK.
In addition, the mean average is also significantly higher too. In 2020, the mean annual wage per employee was $78,392 and $6,352 a month before tax.
Sauce: https://upthegains.co.uk/blog/why-are-uk-salaries-so-low
& heck they might not feel particularly richer given healthcare costs and probably higher cost of goods but that cash has to slosh somewhere. If they're not saving it's going to end up in US corporations pockets which of course fuels their stock markets.
On the contrary here there's just not all that much to go, well anywhere.
Superb
The West should be more open to negotiating with Vladimir Putin, Nigel Farage has suggested.
The founder of Reform UK said he was “shocked” by the “absolute reluctance” to consider negotiations with Russia since Moscow launched its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
It comes after Putin accused Boris Johnson of sabotaging a peace deal in the spring of that year, during an interview with American broadcaster Tucker Carlson.
Responding to the interview, Mr Farage told GB News: “All of our understanding of what is going on in Ukraine, horrendous though it is, all of our understanding of the Putin mindset, the Russian mindset, I think we understand it ever more clearly after what was said last night.
“[Russia is] not going to stop and they’re switching vast amounts of their industrial production in Russia towards defence, they will never give up on this.
“Now we can find much of what’s happening abhorrent, but the thing that shocked me all the way through has been the absolute reluctance of anyone to think, shouldn’t we at least be having some form of negotiations?”
The Russian President claimed in yesterday’s interview that a peace deal was settled in Istanbul with Ukraine’s chief negotiator in 2022 but it was scuppered by Mr Johnson, prolonging the war by another 18 months. Mr Johnson has previously strongly dismissed the claims as “total nonsense” and “Russian propaganda”.
The top 65% do substantially better, with health costs evening it up in the lower bands. But they also have access to much cheaper housing (grossly simplifying).
The bottom 35% of Americans do substantially worse than British counterparts.
10 years ago, I was paying £1200/month for a 1 bedroom flat.
Today, I'm paying £2150/month for a studio.
An 80% increase. Both places were of a similar standard, both in London zone 2, both around 10 mins from the nearest tube station.
My salary's risen by a similar percentage, but a large chunk of that has been caught in higher tax bands. So the proportion I spend on rent has actually increased by 3%, and I've got about 20% less living space to show for it.
Is he also ditching the one policy he has left ?
If he is claiming that Russians possess inherent racial characteristics that make them determined to win (a dubious line of argument), one would suppose that their fellow East Slavs in Ukraine would share those same characteristics, and defence is always easier than attack.
It is in a terrible decline
Recall we used to compare it to a pub. You had the regulars, with their cranky obsessions and ancient gossip, you had frequent visitors - sometimes drunk, sometimes high, often amusing - you had passers by with brilliant new stories or total bewilderment. Crucially you had a core of really intelligent open minded people gathered round the bar
It seems to me that open minded core has gone. Now PB resembles a tedious HR meeting dominated by fucking boring lawyers and accountants and IT nerds who insist they are right, won’t allow dissent, and either chase away interesting people or bore everyone else
The wokeness prevails, there is no intellectual curiosity, no surprising new views from that guy on the corner by the slot machine
The only reason I am still here is because i have invested 15 years of conversation in this place and it will be a large wrench to leave, and I am particularly reliant on it out here in Phnom Penh
I will leave it as soon as I can
Nobody believes in the Brexit fairy anymore, the idea of supporting the Tories is risible, and Starmer is about to offer the blandest prospectus ever put to the British public. Even the Lib Dems have nothing to say.
The world is pivoting, the kaleidoscope has been shaken, but Britain has given up. For the moment, at least.
Not a recipe for success.
(Agree about the 'liberal' media. It's about time they started earning the tag when it comes to Donald Trump.)
I certainly don't want President Johnson or President Blair either
Also everyone here is just older and crankier perhaps. But fuck knows why I have to respect these geriatric twats - I still travel the world and do stuff - I stay open minded. Pb does not
Hey ho
If I’m still here in a year please please please tease me mercilessly until I am shamed into going. I need to find a replacement forum - it’s not easy. Pb of old
was special
I am looking hard
What is funny is that Labour are a longer price in the seat they now hold than in the two Tory seats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult
Yes you can have the Prince and Princess of Wales too but you don't need all the add ons beyond that in the 21st century, see Denmark.
Once William becomes King the working royals will likely just be him and Kate and his children once they reach adulthood
However, Leon had found that he had knapped so meticulously that his hands were thoroughly knackered and sore. He wondered about taking some time off in order to finish off his masterpiece at a later date. Boris's office phoned him back reasonably promptly, but to Leon's horror, he was told in no uncertain terms that he would lose his fee if he stopped work!
"Why?" asked Leon on the phone incredulously.
"Simple!" Boris's underling replied. "You're not entitled to any..." He paused for effect. "...Statue-Tory Sick Pay!"
I thank you!
Others don’t have 10% of my freedom. And they are scared
Also, how fucking ironic that one of the most interesting points of the day comes from a possible putinist bot working in Cape Verde
That is PB, today
The prevailing consensensus here on PB is that the conflict very closely mirrors World War II, with only the occasional visit from real Russian trolls, or real demented Trumpist-Putinists, to put o any dissenting view. In fact the war is not that simple.
He has one left?
Pauses some more
He has one?