The best thing about gambling in the UK is that you don't pay tax on winnings. In the USA I believe it counts as income.
But can gambling losses be offset against other income? Asking for a friend.
No. After this afternoon's punting, sadly no.
Definitely not. HMRC will fight tooth and nail against any sort of possibility. Quite why they've not ever managed to just say that all gambling profits are taxable (at some very modest rate) and all losses not deductible escapes me.
Betting on horses used to be taxed at 10 per cent which you could pay with the stake or as 10 per cent of your winnings. Nigel Lawson abolished it on-course; Gordon Brown abolished it off-course, replacing it with a tax on bookmakers' profits or turnover. So betting is already taxed. It is similar with the national lottery. It is taxed at the buying end and payouts are tax-free, whereas in America it is the other way round. The question of income tax has always been a non-runner for the reasons discussed.
Evening all, been away for a while, busy busy busy.
Just wondering, this video with the Jewish bloke, why is pc plod's face now being censored in BBC / Sky? Is there some legal reason for this? Other officers faces haven't been blurred, including others who conversed with him (including a more senior officer).
That looks weird, but is it Liz Truss in the middle?
I don’t know why some images are coming out blurry recently?
I think it is because too many pictures are being embedded recently and Vanilla is struggling to cope.
We saw something similar when Vanilla shrank pictures when too many pics were previously embedded.
Surely this is configurable (and might involve crossing Vanilla's palm with silver). I'd rather go back to the shrunk but legible pictures we still get from pasted images rather than the massive but illegible messes; even when clear there is no point displaying a photo which cannot be viewed on screen at once and we need to scroll down to see the dog cat for scale. What else would be handy is if we must have massive images, can they at least be shrunk when quoted? I've no idea whether Vanilla allows this.
Perhaps we could just avoid posting images?
Non!!
I know I sometimes post a lot but they really add interest to the site. I love the travel ones from @IanB2 and @BlancheLivermore etc
They are like illustrations, photos and cartoons in a magazine. They add variety and life. You might be having a dense argument about by elections or Ukraine or - god help us - trans issues, then suddenly there’s a sweet photo of a dog on a cliff in the sun. It lifts the spirit - and leavens the discourse
Ears are handy for pointing out things, like the church…
That looks weird, but is it Liz Truss in the middle?
I don’t know why some images are coming out blurry recently?
I think it is because too many pictures are being embedded recently and Vanilla is struggling to cope.
We saw something similar when Vanilla shrank pictures when too many pics were previously embedded.
Surely this is configurable (and might involve crossing Vanilla's palm with silver). I'd rather go back to the shrunk but legible pictures we still get from pasted images rather than the massive but illegible messes; even when clear there is no point displaying a photo which cannot be viewed on screen at once and we need to scroll down to see the dog cat for scale. What else would be handy is if we must have massive images, can they at least be shrunk when quoted? I've no idea whether Vanilla allows this.
Perhaps we could just avoid posting images?
Non!!
I know I sometimes post a lot but they really add interest to the site. I love the travel ones from @IanB2 and @BlancheLivermore etc
They are like illustrations, photos and cartoons in a magazine. They add variety and life. You might be having a dense argument about by elections or Ukraine or - god help us - trans issues, then suddenly there’s a sweet photo of a dog on a cliff in the sun. It lifts the spirit - and leavens the discourse
Ears are handy for pointing out things, like the church…
..
How tricky is getting Fido (I don't know his name) in and out of your travel locations?
With his Belgian passport, easy. Brexit has however made travel back from the US horrendously complex and expensive - probably $600+ just for the paperwork now.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
"Mr Khan does have the power to effectively sack the Commissioner, but can only do so with the permission of the Home Secretary, who can also require the Mayor to dismiss the head of the Met."
I suggest you do some research into the dismissals of Commissioners Blair and Dick.
I'm disappointed, Mr Eagles.
You missed an opportunity to tell a poster to look at Dick.
I know, I blame tiredness from editing PB from what is now six months in a row.
I think it's clear that PB top brass need holidays - if only because that's when politicians feel safe to do what politicians do best - insanity!
Your day-to-day presence I'm sure inhibits them from ... well...
Being as brown as Brown Being as ghastly as Truss Being as shabby as Boris Being as disappointing as Sunak Being as dismaying as May
That looks weird, but is it Liz Truss in the middle?
I don’t know why some images are coming out blurry recently?
I think it is because too many pictures are being embedded recently and Vanilla is struggling to cope.
We saw something similar when Vanilla shrank pictures when too many pics were previously embedded.
Surely this is configurable (and might involve crossing Vanilla's palm with silver). I'd rather go back to the shrunk but legible pictures we still get from pasted images rather than the massive but illegible messes; even when clear there is no point displaying a photo which cannot be viewed on screen at once and we need to scroll down to see the dog cat for scale. What else would be handy is if we must have massive images, can they at least be shrunk when quoted? I've no idea whether Vanilla allows this.
Perhaps we could just avoid posting images?
Non!!
I know I sometimes post a lot but they really add interest to the site. I love the travel ones from @IanB2 and @BlancheLivermore etc
They are like illustrations, photos and cartoons in a magazine. They add variety and life. You might be having a dense argument about by elections or Ukraine or - god help us - trans issues, then suddenly there’s a sweet photo of a dog on a cliff in the sun. It lifts the spirit - and leavens the discourse
Ears are handy for pointing out things, like the church…
..
How tricky is getting Fido (I don't know his name) in and out of your travel locations?
With his Belgian passport, easy. Brexit has however made travel back from the US horrendously complex and expensive - probably $600+ just for the paperwork now.
And how does he fly? First class seat next to you?
The best thing about gambling in the UK is that you don't pay tax on winnings. In the USA I believe it counts as income.
But can gambling losses be offset against other income? Asking for a friend.
No. After this afternoon's punting, sadly no.
Definitely not. HMRC will fight tooth and nail against any sort of possibility. Quite why they've not ever managed to just say that all gambling profits are taxable (at some very modest rate) and all losses not deductible escapes me.
Betting on horses used to be taxed at 10 per cent which you could pay with the stake or as 10 per cent of your winnings. Nigel Lawson abolished it on-course; Gordon Brown abolished it off-course, replacing it with a tax on bookmakers' profits or turnover. So betting is already taxed. It is similar with the national lottery. It is taxed at the buying end and payouts are tax-free, whereas in America it is the other way round. The question of income tax has always been a non-runner for the reasons discussed.
The issue of affordability checks has got many in racing really worried and has provoked a strong lobby of Parliament and MPs to water down such checks (the term used is frictionless). The fear is such checks will drive betting underground or abroad though I think some off-shore bookmakers choose to pay a share of profits to help support UK racing.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
All that bile and it's not even rooted in fact.
Is there any mechanism whereby Cleverly can remove Khan from office? That is, suspend the Office of Mayor.
IIRC, the mayor can only be removed by committing a moderately serious crime (but like an MP) or, somewhat curiously, not attending a certain number of meetings of the London Assembly.
Re: your "curiously" note that (at least in my humble experience) the BEST attack line against a political opponent, is to document AND publicize) the opponents less-than-stellar attendance record, that is high percentage of missed meetings, recorded votes, etc. etc.
Reason that charging opponent with being AWOL is that it resonates - or rather repels - voters across the board, regardless of party, ideology or shoe size.
One once-touted candidate for WA State Attorney General, found that his poor attendance record as King Co Councilmember (his full-time day job then, and still today) was a bigger problem than he'd (obviously) ever anticipated.
Interestingly, he lost the general election to ANOTHER member of KC Council (with WAY better attendance) namely Bob Ferguson, who was re-elected as AG twice, and is in 2024 the leading candidate for Governor.
The best thing about gambling in the UK is that you don't pay tax on winnings. In the USA I believe it counts as income.
But can gambling losses be offset against other income? Asking for a friend.
No. After this afternoon's punting, sadly no.
Definitely not. HMRC will fight tooth and nail against any sort of possibility. Quite why they've not ever managed to just say that all gambling profits are taxable (at some very modest rate) and all losses not deductible escapes me.
Betting on horses used to be taxed at 10 per cent which you could pay with the stake or as 10 per cent of your winnings. Nigel Lawson abolished it on-course; Gordon Brown abolished it off-course, replacing it with a tax on bookmakers' profits or turnover. So betting is already taxed. It is similar with the national lottery. It is taxed at the buying end and payouts are tax-free, whereas in America it is the other way round. The question of income tax has always been a non-runner for the reasons discussed.
The issue of affordability checks has got many in racing really worried and has provoked a strong lobby of Parliament and MPs to water down such checks (the term used is frictionless). The fear is such checks will drive betting underground or abroad though I think some off-shore bookmakers choose to pay a share of profits to help support UK racing.
The focus on affordability checks misses that bookies are actively trying to weed out knowledgeable punters, and that besides affordability there are also money laundering, KYC and source of funds checks. There is also the issue of security as sooner or later a great mass of identity documents will be stolen for use by assorted ne'er-do-wells.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
"Mr Khan does have the power to effectively sack the Commissioner, but can only do so with the permission of the Home Secretary, who can also require the Mayor to dismiss the head of the Met."
Two Commissioners binned by different Mayor would suggest that aside from any theory, the Major has the practical power to bin them.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
"Mr Khan does have the power to effectively sack the Commissioner, but can only do so with the permission of the Home Secretary, who can also require the Mayor to dismiss the head of the Met."
Two Commissioners binned by different Mayor would suggest that aside from any theory, the Major has the practical power to bin them.
Indeed the fact that not just his predecessor but the current Mayor himself has already binned one Commissioner says that not only does he have the practical power to bin them, he is willing to in the right circumstances too.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
Sadiq can sack Rowley in the same way Boris sacked Sir Ian Blair, even if in theory it is the Home Secretary's call.
Sadiq Khan also sacked Commissioner Dick in the same way.
And some here act like Khan hasn't done anything sensible in office.
'Khan gets Dick out' was one of my all time favourite headlines.
But Met Commissioners being forced out in ignomy is getting a bit Brenda from Bristol.
At what point do we conclude that the current job is basically undoable? And what the flip do we do next?
Defund the police.
Apparently that is a very effective strategy.
For increasing criminality.
Perhaps they could try running a police force that has less rapists, criminals, racists and does some of that law enforcement stuff.
I know that’s completely insane but we could give that a go…
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
Sadiq can sack Rowley in the same way Boris sacked Sir Ian Blair, even if in theory it is the Home Secretary's call.
Sadiq Khan also sacked Commissioner Dick in the same way.
And some here act like Khan hasn't done anything sensible in office.
'Khan gets Dick out' was one of my all time favourite headlines.
But Met Commissioners being forced out in ignomy is getting a bit Brenda from Bristol.
At what point do we conclude that the current job is basically undoable? And what the flip do we do next?
Defund the police.
Apparently that is a very effective strategy.
For increasing criminality.
Defunding the Met might well have the opposite effect, of course.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
Sadiq can sack Rowley in the same way Boris sacked Sir Ian Blair, even if in theory it is the Home Secretary's call.
Sadiq Khan also sacked Commissioner Dick in the same way.
And some here act like Khan hasn't done anything sensible in office.
'Khan gets Dick out' was one of my all time favourite headlines.
But Met Commissioners being forced out in ignomy is getting a bit Brenda from Bristol.
At what point do we conclude that the current job is basically undoable? And what the flip do we do next?
Defund the police.
Apparently that is a very effective strategy.
For increasing criminality.
Defunding the Met might well have the opposite effect, of course.
The Met, the DfE, Ofsted, multiple health departments . . . perhaps it might be easier to list the sectors that don't actively harm those they're supposed to be supporting?
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
"Mr Khan does have the power to effectively sack the Commissioner, but can only do so with the permission of the Home Secretary, who can also require the Mayor to dismiss the head of the Met."
I suggest you do some research into the dismissals of Commissioners Blair and Dick.
I'm disappointed, Mr Eagles.
You missed an opportunity to tell a poster to look at Dick.
I know, I blame tiredness from editing PB from what is now six months in a row.
Didn't there use to be some other deputy editors of PB a few years back? Maybe I'm imagining it.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
Sadiq can sack Rowley in the same way Boris sacked Sir Ian Blair, even if in theory it is the Home Secretary's call.
Sadiq Khan also sacked Commissioner Dick in the same way.
And some here act like Khan hasn't done anything sensible in office.
'Khan gets Dick out' was one of my all time favourite headlines.
But Met Commissioners being forced out in ignomy is getting a bit Brenda from Bristol.
At what point do we conclude that the current job is basically undoable? And what the flip do we do next?
Defund the police.
Apparently that is a very effective strategy.
For increasing criminality.
Defunding the Met might well have the opposite effect, of course.
The Met, the DfE, Ofsted, multiple health departments . . . perhaps it might be easier to list the sectors that don't actively harm those they're supposed to be supporting?
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it couldn’t manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
WA State Standard - Endorsements and discord: WA GOP wraps up Spokane convention Heading into the thick of the 2024 election cycle, Semi Bird fired up the Republican crowd but moderates have doubts he and other candidates the party is backing can win.
SPOKANE – Semi Bird [candidate for Governor] got his moment. [Former Congresswoman] Jaime Herrera Beutler got rebuffed [for state Commissioner of Public Lands]. [US Rep] Dan Newhouse continues to pay a price for his vote to impeach the former president [ditto Herrera Beutler].
And leaders of the Washington State Republican Party will leave Spokane Saturday evening with an endorsed slate of candidates but also continued discord in their ranks. . . .
Tensions center on whether delegates are backing candidates who might check certain boxes – supporting Donald Trump, eschewing the establishment, committing to more conservative positions – at the expense of electability in a state that’s tilted increasingly Democratic.
Republicans hold zero statewide offices in Washington, are minorities in both chambers of the Legislature, and control just two of the state’s 10 U.S. House seats.
Bird, as expected, got the official party endorsement for governor, garnering 72% of votes cast by the roughly 1,800 delegates. He’s a military veteran and former Richland School Board member, recalled after his opposition to state masking policies during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Dave Reichert, the other GOP candidate, who served 14 years in Congress before not seeking reelection in 2018, withdrew his name from consideration Friday after blasting his party’s endorsement process as a “chaotic mess.”
Meanwhile, Herrera Beutler and Newhouse failed to get endorsements, a sign there’s no forgiving or forgetting their votes to impeach Donald Trump in 2021.
SSI - Turns out that the endorsed Republican for WA Secretary of State is Dale Whitaker of Spokane, who was born & raised in Newcastle, England (and NOT Newcastle, Washington).
My own fearless prediction is that RW will NOT be elected SOS; instead, the incumbent Democratic, Steve Hobbs, being highly likely to be re-elected as state's chief elections officer.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
WTF is this, a whataboutery Olympics of how shit organisations are? If a valid defence to a crime is that other people do it too then we are truly fucked.
The best thing about gambling in the UK is that you don't pay tax on winnings. In the USA I believe it counts as income.
But can gambling losses be offset against other income? Asking for a friend.
No. After this afternoon's punting, sadly no.
Definitely not. HMRC will fight tooth and nail against any sort of possibility. Quite why they've not ever managed to just say that all gambling profits are taxable (at some very modest rate) and all losses not deductible escapes me.
Betting on horses used to be taxed at 10 per cent which you could pay with the stake or as 10 per cent of your winnings. Nigel Lawson abolished it on-course; Gordon Brown abolished it off-course, replacing it with a tax on bookmakers' profits or turnover. So betting is already taxed. It is similar with the national lottery. It is taxed at the buying end and payouts are tax-free, whereas in America it is the other way round. The question of income tax has always been a non-runner for the reasons discussed.
The issue of affordability checks has got many in racing really worried and has provoked a strong lobby of Parliament and MPs to water down such checks (the term used is frictionless). The fear is such checks will drive betting underground or abroad though I think some off-shore bookmakers choose to pay a share of profits to help support UK racing.
The focus on affordability checks misses that bookies are actively trying to weed out knowledgeable punters, and that besides affordability there are also money laundering, KYC and source of funds checks. There is also the issue of security as sooner or later a great mass of identity documents will be stolen for use by assorted ne'er-do-wells.
They ain't "ne'er-do-wells" (at least no more) IF they steal "a great mass of identity documents".
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it couldn’t manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
What’s with the staggeringly rose tinted view of the Met?
The local elections on 2 May have long been regarded as a moment of high peril for Rishi Sunak, with the results likely to anticipate his party’s fate at the next election.
“My colleagues are feeling very restless,” admits one moderate Tory MP. “Rishi needs to show us that the general election isn’t already lost. If we lose the mayoralties in May then I’m afraid we could be on course for a total wipeout. It could be very dangerous for him.”
The Tories have already priced in heavy losses in the council elections, with experts predicting they face defeat in as many as half of their contested seats.
“If your constituency chair is on the phone telling you that your local association has been wiped out, it’s quite difficult to defend ‘priced in’,” they said. “MPs aren’t on the battlefield this time, it’s like the Somme without the generals.”
That looks weird, but is it Liz Truss in the middle?
I don’t know why some images are coming out blurry recently?
I think it is because too many pictures are being embedded recently and Vanilla is struggling to cope.
We saw something similar when Vanilla shrank pictures when too many pics were previously embedded.
Surely this is configurable (and might involve crossing Vanilla's palm with silver). I'd rather go back to the shrunk but legible pictures we still get from pasted images rather than the massive but illegible messes; even when clear there is no point displaying a photo which cannot be viewed on screen at once and we need to scroll down to see the dog cat for scale. What else would be handy is if we must have massive images, can they at least be shrunk when quoted? I've no idea whether Vanilla allows this.
Perhaps we could just avoid posting images?
Non!!
I know I sometimes post a lot but they really add interest to the site. I love the travel ones from @IanB2 and @BlancheLivermore etc
They are like illustrations, photos and cartoons in a magazine. They add variety and life. You might be having a dense argument about by elections or Ukraine or - god help us - trans issues, then suddenly there’s a sweet photo of a dog on a cliff in the sun. It lifts the spirit - and leavens the discourse
Ears are handy for pointing out things, like the church…
..
How tricky is getting Fido (I don't know his name) in and out of your travel locations?
With his Belgian passport, easy. Brexit has however made travel back from the US horrendously complex and expensive - probably $600+ just for the paperwork now.
And how does he fly? First class seat next to you?
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it couldn’t manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
What’s with the staggeringly rose tinted view of the Met?
There's something really odd about the way the current commissioner is being attacked - just any excuse. He seems very capable, and as such I wonder quite what the attackers are trying to hide.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
The thing is we know that all the political parties are shit. We have known it for years. But we do expect our public services, particularly the police and other emergency services, to have a basic level of competency and decency irrespective of how underfunded they might be or how poorly served they are by the politicians. We expect that at least some of them might have a modicum of common sense and a basic set of values that we can relate to such as not being anti-semitic, racist or misogynistic.
If they cannot do these basic things then clearly they are not fit for purpose.
IF you want to ween someone you know who's burdened with a serious gambling addiction, suggest/insist they read ALL three published volumes of "The Journals of Woodrow Wyatt", cover to cover.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
WTF is this, a whataboutery Olympics of how shit organisations are? If a valid defence to a crime is that other people do it too then we are truly fucked.
I’ve got this idea for reforming these organisations.
It involves forming them up in a long line and advancing at a slow walk towards Moscow. Armed with really sharp fruit.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
"Mr Khan does have the power to effectively sack the Commissioner, but can only do so with the permission of the Home Secretary, who can also require the Mayor to dismiss the head of the Met."
I suggest you do some research into the dismissals of Commissioners Blair and Dick.
I'm disappointed, Mr Eagles.
You missed an opportunity to tell a poster to look at Dick.
I know, I blame tiredness from editing PB from what is now six months in a row.
Didn't there use to be some other deputy editors of PB a few years back? Maybe I'm imagining it.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
Sadiq can sack Rowley in the same way Boris sacked Sir Ian Blair, even if in theory it is the Home Secretary's call.
Sadiq Khan also sacked Commissioner Dick in the same way.
And some here act like Khan hasn't done anything sensible in office.
'Khan gets Dick out' was one of my all time favourite headlines.
But Met Commissioners being forced out in ignomy is getting a bit Brenda from Bristol.
At what point do we conclude that the current job is basically undoable? And what the flip do we do next?
Defund the police.
Apparently that is a very effective strategy.
For increasing criminality.
Perhaps they could try running a police force that has less rapists, criminals, racists and does some of that law enforcement stuff.
I know that’s completely insane but we could give that a go…
I sometimes think Anthony Burgess was onto something.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
WTF is this, a whataboutery Olympics of how shit organisations are? If a valid defence to a crime is that other people do it too then we are truly fucked.
I’ve got this idea for reforming these organisations.
It involves forming them up in a long line and advancing at a slow walk towards Moscow. Armed with really sharp fruit.
I remember the much vaunted space canon used to be reversed for such incompetence.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
"Mr Khan does have the power to effectively sack the Commissioner, but can only do so with the permission of the Home Secretary, who can also require the Mayor to dismiss the head of the Met."
Two Commissioners binned by different Mayor would suggest that aside from any theory, the Major has the practical power to bin them.
That looks weird, but is it Liz Truss in the middle?
I don’t know why some images are coming out blurry recently?
I think it is because too many pictures are being embedded recently and Vanilla is struggling to cope.
We saw something similar when Vanilla shrank pictures when too many pics were previously embedded.
Surely this is configurable (and might involve crossing Vanilla's palm with silver). I'd rather go back to the shrunk but legible pictures we still get from pasted images rather than the massive but illegible messes; even when clear there is no point displaying a photo which cannot be viewed on screen at once and we need to scroll down to see the dog cat for scale. What else would be handy is if we must have massive images, can they at least be shrunk when quoted? I've no idea whether Vanilla allows this.
Perhaps we could just avoid posting images?
Non!!
I know I sometimes post a lot but they really add interest to the site. I love the travel ones from @IanB2 and @BlancheLivermore etc
They are like illustrations, photos and cartoons in a magazine. They add variety and life. You might be having a dense argument about by elections or Ukraine or - god help us - trans issues, then suddenly there’s a sweet photo of a dog on a cliff in the sun. It lifts the spirit - and leavens the discourse
Ears are handy for pointing out things, like the church…
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it couldn’t manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
What’s with the staggeringly rose tinted view of the Met?
There's something really odd about the way the current commissioner is being attacked - just any excuse. He seems very capable, and as such I wonder quite what the attackers are trying to hide.
Capable of what? Reducing the number of actual criminals in the Met? Maybe even getting to ones who just do offensive and bigoted crap?
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
"Mr Khan does have the power to effectively sack the Commissioner, but can only do so with the permission of the Home Secretary, who can also require the Mayor to dismiss the head of the Met."
Two Commissioners binned by different Mayor would suggest that aside from any theory, the Major has the practical power to bin them.
Only with the permission of the HS.
Regardless of the letter of the laws, all that has had to happen in the past is that the Mayor says they have lost all confidence in said official and to all intents and purposes they are gone.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it couldn’t manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
What’s with the staggeringly rose tinted view of the Met?
There's something really odd about the way the current commissioner is being attacked - just any excuse. He seems very capable, and as such I wonder quite what the attackers are trying to hide.
Capable of what? Reducing the number of actual criminals in the Met? Maybe even getting to ones who just do offensive and bigoted crap?
All of the above. Compare him with his predecessor, and I think he's a step up.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it couldn’t manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
What’s with the staggeringly rose tinted view of the Met?
There's something really odd about the way the current commissioner is being attacked - just any excuse. He seems very capable, and as such I wonder quite what the attackers are trying to hide.
Capable of what? Reducing the number of actual criminals in the Met? Maybe even getting to ones who just do offensive and bigoted crap?
All of the above. Compare him with his predecessor, and I think he's a step up.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it couldn’t manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
What’s with the staggeringly rose tinted view of the Met?
There's something really odd about the way the current commissioner is being attacked - just any excuse. He seems very capable, and as such I wonder quite what the attackers are trying to hide.
Capable of what? Reducing the number of actual criminals in the Met? Maybe even getting to ones who just do offensive and bigoted crap?
All of the above. Compare him with his predecessor, and I think he's a step up.
So is Rishi Sunak.....but that isn't saying much.
Well..
I think Sunak has actually a slightly higher bar to surmount of the two.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it couldn’t manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
What’s with the staggeringly rose tinted view of the Met?
There's something really odd about the way the current commissioner is being attacked - just any excuse. He seems very capable, and as such I wonder quite what the attackers are trying to hide.
Capable of what? Reducing the number of actual criminals in the Met? Maybe even getting to ones who just do offensive and bigoted crap?
All of the above. Compare him with his predecessor, and I think he's a step up.
So is Rishi Sunak.....but that isn't saying much.
Well..
I think Sunak has actually a slightly higher bar to surmount of the two.
To be fair, Liz Truss was never accused of shooting random electricians.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
Sadiq can sack Rowley in the same way Boris sacked Sir Ian Blair, even if in theory it is the Home Secretary's call.
Sadiq Khan also sacked Commissioner Dick in the same way.
And some here act like Khan hasn't done anything sensible in office.
'Khan gets Dick out' was one of my all time favourite headlines.
But Met Commissioners being forced out in ignomy is getting a bit Brenda from Bristol.
At what point do we conclude that the current job is basically undoable? And what the flip do we do next?
Defund the police.
Apparently that is a very effective strategy.
For increasing criminality.
Perhaps they could try running a police force that has less rapists, criminals, racists and does some of that law enforcement stuff.
I know that’s completely insane but we could give that a go…
I sometimes think Anthony Burgess was onto something.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
The Mayor of London can bin the head of the Met.
That’s been demonstrated.
Not officially though they can make their job untenable by indicating they want them out. Bold to do it over an incident rather than totting up.
The problem, as ever, is the structure of the Met and it being both a national and local police force. If you separated out both you'd get much better accountability and it would be clear who the buck stopped with in each case.
Sadiq Khan is to meet with Mark Rowley tomorrow for an urgent meeting to discuss community relations. Aka an interview without coffee.
Apparently Khan can only sack Rowley with the permission of Cleverly, who can require Khan to sack him regardless of what Khan thinks. Why do they play such a game of silly fuckers? Do they think it's clever? What this means is that Cleverly can sack Rowley but Khan can't.
Fine. Policing London is important. Nothing wrong with it being in the remit of central government. But James Cleverly seems to have been doing something he finds more interesting.
Rowley will certainly fall. The Tories have been playing some politics. Whether Labour will play some is unclear. Perhaps not having a national newspaper hampers them. You would have thought an obvious question to put to the Secretary of State was "Where TF is James Cleverly in these terrible times when a small pro-genocidal phalanx can't barge through an anti-genocide demonstration even just to waltz innocently across the street, akin to nothing more than the heirs of Martin Luther King?"
Sadiq can sack Rowley in the same way Boris sacked Sir Ian Blair, even if in theory it is the Home Secretary's call.
Sadiq Khan also sacked Commissioner Dick in the same way.
And some here act like Khan hasn't done anything sensible in office.
'Khan gets Dick out' was one of my all time favourite headlines.
But Met Commissioners being forced out in ignomy is getting a bit Brenda from Bristol.
At what point do we conclude that the current job is basically undoable? And what the flip do we do next?
Defund the police.
Apparently that is a very effective strategy.
For increasing criminality.
Perhaps they could try running a police force that has less rapists, criminals, racists and does some of that law enforcement stuff.
I know that’s completely insane but we could give that a go…
I sometimes think Anthony Burgess was onto something.
. . . Jack Owens, semi-retired surveyor . . . has been advocating for a modern retracing of the border for 20 years now. He says because of those past controversies, Michigan's Ohio and Wisconsin borders were resurveyed in the early 20th century and staked with durable markers of concrete or stone. In contrast, the Indiana border has not. It was last surveyed in 1827. The team placed wooden posts every mile to mark the border, recording the locations using two reference trees and any notable topographic features like lakes or streams. But those posts have long since rotted away, leaving the state border unclear. . . .
SSI - This is to inform PBers that yours truly will soon embark on expedition, to lay claim to the disputed territory, aka the "Indigan Strip" between the great Hoosier State and the great Wolverine State.
ALL that is required, is sufficient investment capital to fully realize the incredible potential of this valuable territory. Which includes prime frontage on Lake Michigan of at least a quarter-mile!
Perhaps someone could provide contact info re: the Fylde Westminster Group?
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
The thing is we know that all the political parties are shit. We have known it for years. But we do expect our public services, particularly the police and other emergency services, to have a basic level of competency and decency irrespective of how underfunded they might be or how poorly served they are by the politicians. We expect that at least some of them might have a modicum of common sense and a basic set of values that we can relate to such as not being anti-semitic, racist or misogynistic.
If they cannot do these basic things then clearly they are not fit for purpose.
I'd look at it differently. They employ tens of thousands of people, some of whom will inevitably be racist, anti-semitic, misogynistic or just plain nasty or stupid.
If we expect them to be "perfect" it becomes difficult for the organisations to admit problems and instead they close ranks and try and deny or deflect them. That is what we have now.
We should actually expect them to make mistakes, sometimes mean or particularly dim mistakes, but to have systems in place where things can get quickly resolved and rogue employees sacked or retrained as appropriate.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
The thing is we know that all the political parties are shit. We have known it for years. But we do expect our public services, particularly the police and other emergency services, to have a basic level of competency and decency irrespective of how underfunded they might be or how poorly served they are by the politicians. We expect that at least some of them might have a modicum of common sense and a basic set of values that we can relate to such as not being anti-semitic, racist or misogynistic.
If they cannot do these basic things then clearly they are not fit for purpose.
I'd look at it differently. They employ tens of thousands of people, some of whom will inevitably be racist, anti-semitic, misogynistic or just plain nasty or stupid.
If we expect them to be "perfect" it becomes difficult for the organisations to admit problems and instead they close ranks and try and deny or deflect them. That is what we have now.
We should actually expect them to make mistakes, sometimes mean or particularly dim mistakes, but to have systems in place where things can get quickly resolved and rogue employees sacked or retrained as appropriate.
But to be fair, since they can't even manage that it doesn't get us much further forward.
That looks weird, but is it Liz Truss in the middle?
I don’t know why some images are coming out blurry recently?
I think it is because too many pictures are being embedded recently and Vanilla is struggling to cope.
We saw something similar when Vanilla shrank pictures when too many pics were previously embedded.
Surely this is configurable (and might involve crossing Vanilla's palm with silver). I'd rather go back to the shrunk but legible pictures we still get from pasted images rather than the massive but illegible messes; even when clear there is no point displaying a photo which cannot be viewed on screen at once and we need to scroll down to see the dog cat for scale. What else would be handy is if we must have massive images, can they at least be shrunk when quoted? I've no idea whether Vanilla allows this.
Perhaps we could just avoid posting images?
Non!!
I know I sometimes post a lot but they really add interest to the site. I love the travel ones from @IanB2 and @BlancheLivermore etc
They are like illustrations, photos and cartoons in a magazine. They add variety and life. You might be having a dense argument about by elections or Ukraine or - god help us - trans issues, then suddenly there’s a sweet photo of a dog on a cliff in the sun. It lifts the spirit - and leavens the discourse
Ears are handy for pointing out things, like the church…
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
The thing is we know that all the political parties are shit. We have known it for years. But we do expect our public services, particularly the police and other emergency services, to have a basic level of competency and decency irrespective of how underfunded they might be or how poorly served they are by the politicians. We expect that at least some of them might have a modicum of common sense and a basic set of values that we can relate to such as not being anti-semitic, racist or misogynistic.
If they cannot do these basic things then clearly they are not fit for purpose.
I'd look at it differently. They employ tens of thousands of people, some of whom will inevitably be racist, anti-semitic, misogynistic or just plain nasty or stupid.
If we expect them to be "perfect" it becomes difficult for the organisations to admit problems and instead they close ranks and try and deny or deflect them. That is what we have now.
We should actually expect them to make mistakes, sometimes mean or particularly dim mistakes, but to have systems in place where things can get quickly resolved and rogue employees sacked or retrained as appropriate.
. . . Jack Owens, semi-retired surveyor . . . has been advocating for a modern retracing of the border for 20 years now. He says because of those past controversies, Michigan's Ohio and Wisconsin borders were resurveyed in the early 20th century and staked with durable markers of concrete or stone. In contrast, the Indiana border has not. It was last surveyed in 1827. The team placed wooden posts every mile to mark the border, recording the locations using two reference trees and any notable topographic features like lakes or streams. But those posts have long since rotted away, leaving the state border unclear. . . .
SSI - This is to inform PBers that yours truly will soon embark on expedition, to lay claim to the disputed territory, aka the "Indigan Strip" between the great Hoosier State and the great Wolverine State.
ALL that is required, is sufficient investment capital to fully realize the incredible potential of this valuable territory. Which includes prime frontage on Lake Michigan of at least a quarter-mile!
Perhaps someone could provide contact info re: the Fylde Westminster Group?
Correction - more exact guesswork revises likely "Indigan Strip" frontage on Lake Michigan to at least a quarter-INCH.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
The thing is we know that all the political parties are shit. We have known it for years. But we do expect our public services, particularly the police and other emergency services, to have a basic level of competency and decency irrespective of how underfunded they might be or how poorly served they are by the politicians. We expect that at least some of them might have a modicum of common sense and a basic set of values that we can relate to such as not being anti-semitic, racist or misogynistic.
If they cannot do these basic things then clearly they are not fit for purpose.
I'd look at it differently. They employ tens of thousands of people, some of whom will inevitably be racist, anti-semitic, misogynistic or just plain nasty or stupid.
If we expect them to be "perfect" it becomes difficult for the organisations to admit problems and instead they close ranks and try and deny or deflect them. That is what we have now.
We should actually expect them to make mistakes, sometimes mean or particularly dim mistakes, but to have systems in place where things can get quickly resolved and rogue employees sacked or retrained as appropriate.
But to be fair, since they can't even manage that it doesn't get us much further forward.
I disagree, an acceptance that mistakes, sometimes serious, will be made but the important things are taking corrective action and learning, is a mindset shift that would make it easier for these behemothic organisations to both be more accountable and just improve generally.
A lot of elite sportspeople and coaches say we learn more from mistakes than successes. Currently we try to hide the mistakes away rather than learn from them.
That looks weird, but is it Liz Truss in the middle?
I don’t know why some images are coming out blurry recently?
I think it is because too many pictures are being embedded recently and Vanilla is struggling to cope.
We saw something similar when Vanilla shrank pictures when too many pics were previously embedded.
Surely this is configurable (and might involve crossing Vanilla's palm with silver). I'd rather go back to the shrunk but legible pictures we still get from pasted images rather than the massive but illegible messes; even when clear there is no point displaying a photo which cannot be viewed on screen at once and we need to scroll down to see the dog cat for scale. What else would be handy is if we must have massive images, can they at least be shrunk when quoted? I've no idea whether Vanilla allows this.
Perhaps we could just avoid posting images?
Non!!
I know I sometimes post a lot but they really add interest to the site. I love the travel ones from @IanB2 and @BlancheLivermore etc
They are like illustrations, photos and cartoons in a magazine. They add variety and life. You might be having a dense argument about by elections or Ukraine or - god help us - trans issues, then suddenly there’s a sweet photo of a dog on a cliff in the sun. It lifts the spirit - and leavens the discourse
Ears are handy for pointing out things, like the church…
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
The thing is we know that all the political parties are shit. We have known it for years. But we do expect our public services, particularly the police and other emergency services, to have a basic level of competency and decency irrespective of how underfunded they might be or how poorly served they are by the politicians. We expect that at least some of them might have a modicum of common sense and a basic set of values that we can relate to such as not being anti-semitic, racist or misogynistic.
If they cannot do these basic things then clearly they are not fit for purpose.
I'd look at it differently. They employ tens of thousands of people, some of whom will inevitably be racist, anti-semitic, misogynistic or just plain nasty or stupid.
If we expect them to be "perfect" it becomes difficult for the organisations to admit problems and instead they close ranks and try and deny or deflect them. That is what we have now.
We should actually expect them to make mistakes, sometimes mean or particularly dim mistakes, but to have systems in place where things can get quickly resolved and rogue employees sacked or retrained as appropriate.
Unfortuantely it seems like too big an ask. Their fundamental attitude is opposed to it, and political pressure to ensure it too sporadic to achieve it.
That looks weird, but is it Liz Truss in the middle?
I don’t know why some images are coming out blurry recently?
I think it is because too many pictures are being embedded recently and Vanilla is struggling to cope.
We saw something similar when Vanilla shrank pictures when too many pics were previously embedded.
Surely this is configurable (and might involve crossing Vanilla's palm with silver). I'd rather go back to the shrunk but legible pictures we still get from pasted images rather than the massive but illegible messes; even when clear there is no point displaying a photo which cannot be viewed on screen at once and we need to scroll down to see the dog cat for scale. What else would be handy is if we must have massive images, can they at least be shrunk when quoted? I've no idea whether Vanilla allows this.
Perhaps we could just avoid posting images?
Non!!
I know I sometimes post a lot but they really add interest to the site. I love the travel ones from @IanB2 and @BlancheLivermore etc
They are like illustrations, photos and cartoons in a magazine. They add variety and life. You might be having a dense argument about by elections or Ukraine or - god help us - trans issues, then suddenly there’s a sweet photo of a dog on a cliff in the sun. It lifts the spirit - and leavens the discourse
Ears are handy for pointing out things, like the church…
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
The thing is we know that all the political parties are shit. We have known it for years. But we do expect our public services, particularly the police and other emergency services, to have a basic level of competency and decency irrespective of how underfunded they might be or how poorly served they are by the politicians. We expect that at least some of them might have a modicum of common sense and a basic set of values that we can relate to such as not being anti-semitic, racist or misogynistic.
If they cannot do these basic things then clearly they are not fit for purpose.
I'd look at it differently. They employ tens of thousands of people, some of whom will inevitably be racist, anti-semitic, misogynistic or just plain nasty or stupid.
If we expect them to be "perfect" it becomes difficult for the organisations to admit problems and instead they close ranks and try and deny or deflect them. That is what we have now.
We should actually expect them to make mistakes, sometimes mean or particularly dim mistakes, but to have systems in place where things can get quickly resolved and rogue employees sacked or retrained as appropriate.
But to be fair, since they can't even manage that it doesn't get us much further forward.
I disagree, an acceptance that mistakes, sometimes serious, will be made but the important things are taking corrective action and learning, is a mindset shift that would make it easier for these behemothic organisations to both be more accountable and just improve generally.
A lot of elite sportspeople and coaches say we learn more from mistakes than successes. Currently we try to hide the mistakes away rather than learn from them.
Well, yes. That was my point. They are still falling short of basic minimum expectations.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it could manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
Good question but the Met might point to rum doings in the Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Scottish National Parties in the news over this weekend.
WTF is this, a whataboutery Olympics of how shit organisations are? If a valid defence to a crime is that other people do it too then we are truly fucked.
We rightly desire our political leaders to be of higher ability and probity than the average person, though we tend to not really expect it. They hold a measure of authority over us after all.
We definitely, and also rightly, expect our police to be more upstanding than the average person, and we rightly should hold them to a very high standard. That does make it a tough job, but with people who hold power of arrest, a much more immediate measure of authority, you have to be very tough on them in turn, because any failings can be devastating.
"Restricted Our Software detects that you may be accessing the Betfair website from a country that Betfair does not accept bets from or the traffic from your network was detected as being unusual. If you believe that this detection has occurred in error, please Contact us for further assistance."
. . . Jack Owens, semi-retired surveyor . . . has been advocating for a modern retracing of the border for 20 years now. He says because of those past controversies, Michigan's Ohio and Wisconsin borders were resurveyed in the early 20th century and staked with durable markers of concrete or stone. In contrast, the Indiana border has not. It was last surveyed in 1827. The team placed wooden posts every mile to mark the border, recording the locations using two reference trees and any notable topographic features like lakes or streams. But those posts have long since rotted away, leaving the state border unclear. . . .
SSI - This is to inform PBers that yours truly will soon embark on expedition, to lay claim to the disputed territory, aka the "Indigan Strip" between the great Hoosier State and the great Wolverine State.
ALL that is required, is sufficient investment capital to fully realize the incredible potential of this valuable territory. Which includes prime frontage on Lake Michigan of at least a quarter-mile!
Perhaps someone could provide contact info re: the Fylde Westminster Group?
I really hope one state uses US Survey Feet, and the other the International Foot, just so we can have even more arguments:
"Palestinian civil defence crews retrieve 180 bodies from a mass grave inside the Nasser Medical Complex in Gaza’s Khan Younis, two weeks after Israeli forces withdrew from the area."
. . . Jack Owens, semi-retired surveyor . . . has been advocating for a modern retracing of the border for 20 years now. He says because of those past controversies, Michigan's Ohio and Wisconsin borders were resurveyed in the early 20th century and staked with durable markers of concrete or stone. In contrast, the Indiana border has not. It was last surveyed in 1827. The team placed wooden posts every mile to mark the border, recording the locations using two reference trees and any notable topographic features like lakes or streams. But those posts have long since rotted away, leaving the state border unclear. . . .
SSI - This is to inform PBers that yours truly will soon embark on expedition, to lay claim to the disputed territory, aka the "Indigan Strip" between the great Hoosier State and the great Wolverine State.
ALL that is required, is sufficient investment capital to fully realize the incredible potential of this valuable territory. Which includes prime frontage on Lake Michigan of at least a quarter-mile!
Perhaps someone could provide contact info re: the Fylde Westminster Group?
I really hope one state uses US Survey Feet, and the other the International Foot, just so we can have even more arguments:
. . . Jack Owens, semi-retired surveyor . . . has been advocating for a modern retracing of the border for 20 years now. He says because of those past controversies, Michigan's Ohio and Wisconsin borders were resurveyed in the early 20th century and staked with durable markers of concrete or stone. In contrast, the Indiana border has not. It was last surveyed in 1827. The team placed wooden posts every mile to mark the border, recording the locations using two reference trees and any notable topographic features like lakes or streams. But those posts have long since rotted away, leaving the state border unclear. . . .
SSI - This is to inform PBers that yours truly will soon embark on expedition, to lay claim to the disputed territory, aka the "Indigan Strip" between the great Hoosier State and the great Wolverine State.
ALL that is required, is sufficient investment capital to fully realize the incredible potential of this valuable territory. Which includes prime frontage on Lake Michigan of at least a quarter-mile!
Perhaps someone could provide contact info re: the Fylde Westminster Group?
I really hope one state uses US Survey Feet, and the other the International Foot, just so we can have even more arguments:
That looks weird, but is it Liz Truss in the middle?
I don’t know why some images are coming out blurry recently?
I think it is because too many pictures are being embedded recently and Vanilla is struggling to cope.
We saw something similar when Vanilla shrank pictures when too many pics were previously embedded.
Surely this is configurable (and might involve crossing Vanilla's palm with silver). I'd rather go back to the shrunk but legible pictures we still get from pasted images rather than the massive but illegible messes; even when clear there is no point displaying a photo which cannot be viewed on screen at once and we need to scroll down to see the dog cat for scale. What else would be handy is if we must have massive images, can they at least be shrunk when quoted? I've no idea whether Vanilla allows this.
Perhaps we could just avoid posting images?
Non!!
I know I sometimes post a lot but they really add interest to the site. I love the travel ones from @IanB2 and @BlancheLivermore etc
They are like illustrations, photos and cartoons in a magazine. They add variety and life. You might be having a dense argument about by elections or Ukraine or - god help us - trans issues, then suddenly there’s a sweet photo of a dog on a cliff in the sun. It lifts the spirit - and leavens the discourse
Ears are handy for pointing out things, like the church…
SSI - Until last year (as noted in above story) it was also illegal to pump one's own gas (in at least one way anyway) in Oregon. Just one (less) reason why Washingtonians love to make fun of our neighbors the Ore-goners.
OR is it Ore-goonians? Ask the next time you're in (Around-the-) Bend . . . and find out for yourself!
SSI - Until last year (as noted in above story) it was also illegal to pump one's own gas (in at least one way anyway) in Oregon. Just one (less) reason why Washingtonians love to make fun of our neighbors the Ore-goners.
OR is it Ore-goonians? Ask the next time you're in (Around-the-) Bend . . . and find out for yourself!
https://prophetbettingexchange.com/ is also licensed in New Jersey. I think those two may be it. Betfair used to run a separated US racing exchange, and PredictIt used to do non sports betting, mostly politics but both have left the market.
Why is the Met so unutterably shit? You read a couple of stories, you think surely to God this organisation can’t be as shit as it seems, but it is. It’s a steaming pile of excrement so vast that it’s one use appears to be the ability to provide fertiliser on a scale that could, if properly deployed, alleviate world hunger. But it’s so shit that it couldn’t manage to do that without rampant misogyny and racism.
13 (may be more, even I have lost count) Cyclefree headers over the last 5 years say hello.
. . . Jack Owens, semi-retired surveyor . . . has been advocating for a modern retracing of the border for 20 years now. He says because of those past controversies, Michigan's Ohio and Wisconsin borders were resurveyed in the early 20th century and staked with durable markers of concrete or stone. In contrast, the Indiana border has not. It was last surveyed in 1827. The team placed wooden posts every mile to mark the border, recording the locations using two reference trees and any notable topographic features like lakes or streams. But those posts have long since rotted away, leaving the state border unclear. . . .
SSI - This is to inform PBers that yours truly will soon embark on expedition, to lay claim to the disputed territory, aka the "Indigan Strip" between the great Hoosier State and the great Wolverine State.
ALL that is required, is sufficient investment capital to fully realize the incredible potential of this valuable territory. Which includes prime frontage on Lake Michigan of at least a quarter-mile!
Perhaps someone could provide contact info re: the Fylde Westminster Group?
I really hope one state uses US Survey Feet, and the other the International Foot, just so we can have even more arguments:
Am COUNTING on that, or suchlike, as featured in my upcoming prospectus! Is YOUR check (yet) in the mail?
You'd think Michigan would have a solid claim to Michigan City on the simple grounds of logic. Ditto Kansas.
On what logical grounds, can Kansas lay claim to Michigan City?
BTW (also FYI) Michigan City, Indiana was named for the Lake, not the State. (Ditto the State).
IF you're referring at tail end of your comment, to Kansas City, note that there are TWO (at least) Kansas Cities, one in Kansas, and the other (much bigger) in Missouri.
WIth both being named after the Kansas River, which flows into the Missouri at . . . wait for it . . . Kansas City.
Bonus - Note that Texarkana is also two cities, one in Texas and the other in Arkansas. Same situation in Bristol , Tennessee & Virginia.
Bunch of other examples in USA, but above are the biggest stateline cities.
SSI - Until last year (as noted in above story) it was also illegal to pump one's own gas (in at least one way anyway) in Oregon. Just one (less) reason why Washingtonians love to make fun of our neighbors the Ore-goners.
OR is it Ore-goonians? Ask the next time you're in (Around-the-) Bend . . . and find out for yourself!
"Sorry, this content is not available in your region"
Apparently we’re going to be seeing a lot of Sunak this week . With a host of announcements , news conferences and a visit to Warsaw .
Oh God I can hardly wait !
Expect 25 point leads incoming.
The more I see of Sunak the more I loathe him. I might need the anti-nausea medication to get through the week . I wonder if the vomit inducing spineless gimp will be doing a Lectern moment for the Rwanda Bill.
Here are some more videos from Columbia last night to make the point. One of them chanting “Zionists” aren’t welcome on campus. Another where the mob cornered some Jewish students trying to leave and started throwing stuff at them and yelling at them.
Again, there is a nightly Charlottesville-style rally and you have members of the media and some politicians cheering it on.
Possibly only of interest to @SandyRentool. But the decision to declare Gateshead FC ineligible for the EFL because the Council is unable to offer them a 10 year lease, because they aren't in effective control of their own leisure facilities is absolutely scandalous. A democratically elected authority can't provide a local football club with a perfectly adequate home which meets all the requirements of the EFL, by some distance, because it is having to outsource its ownership to tender, sums up exactly what is wrong with the nation, and why people are so cynical. What was the point of an entire season making the playoffs?
In James Fallows' splendid encomium of former Florida governor and Senator Bob Graham, he notes (quite convincingly) that Gore might well have won the presidency had he picked him for the VP slot.
On topic, afraid I don't quite get the class thing in relation to gambling legislation. If looking for themes I'd suggest legislation has followed after technological changes such as radio, phones, internet as well as a pragmatic attempt at raising tax revenue and limiting profits to organised crime. Broadly it is one area we have regulated better than the vast majority of the rest of the world.
In James Fallows' splendid encomium of former Florida governor and Senator Bob Graham, he notes (quite convincingly) that Gore might well have won the presidency had he picked him for the VP slot.
Joe Lieberman brought zilch to the Al Gore ticket, that AG didn't already have anyway.
Bob Graham would have almost certainly put him (really them) over the top in the Sunshine State, and nobody would ever have heard of the infamous"Butterfly Ballot" (designed by a Democrat!).
In James Fallows' splendid encomium of former Florida governor and Senator Bob Graham, he notes (quite convincingly) that Gore might well have won the presidency had he picked him for the VP slot.
Joe Lieberman brought zilch to the Al Gore ticket, that AG didn't already have anyway.
Bob Graham would have almost certainly put him (really them) over the top in the Sunshine State, and nobody would ever have heard of the infamous"Butterfly Ballot" (designed by a Democrat!).
And Iraq would not have happened.
Both of them voted, and spoke eloquently against it.
This article in the Sunday Times about the blood contamination scandal really deserves to be read.
"Despite the scandal being the deadliest man-made disaster in postwar British history, no organisation or individual has been held to account. A patchwork system of payouts has failed to compensate for the lives lost or destroyed.
While other countries grappling with the same horrors made attempts to rectify the wrongs wrought on their citizens, Britain chose a different path. Successive governments under 11 prime ministers have kicked the can down the road.
Why five decades have passed without justice is difficult to answer. One possible explanation is the presence of the NHS at the heart of this scandal. The institution, a totemic part of British life, is the largest publicly funded health service in the world. There would have been calamitous financial liabilities for the British state.
There is also the secretive nature of the state which, as in the Post Office scandal, has allowed those in authority to use their power to protect themselves, or their institution."
The bit highlighted in bold = British exceptionalism.
Comments
Just wondering, this video with the Jewish bloke, why is pc plod's face now being censored in BBC / Sky? Is there some legal reason for this? Other officers faces haven't been blurred, including others who conversed with him (including a more senior officer).
Your day-to-day presence I'm sure inhibits them from ... well...
Being as brown as Brown
Being as ghastly as Truss
Being as shabby as Boris
Being as disappointing as Sunak
Being as dismaying as May
I quite like Cameron though too.
Reason that charging opponent with being AWOL is that it resonates - or rather repels - voters across the board, regardless of party, ideology or shoe size.
One once-touted candidate for WA State Attorney General, found that his poor attendance record as King Co Councilmember (his full-time day job then, and still today) was a bigger problem than he'd (obviously) ever anticipated.
Interestingly, he lost the general election to ANOTHER member of KC Council (with WAY better attendance) namely Bob Ferguson, who was re-elected as AG twice, and is in 2024 the leading candidate for Governor.
I know that’s completely insane but we could give that a go…
()
Heading into the thick of the 2024 election cycle, Semi Bird fired up the Republican crowd but moderates have doubts he and other candidates the party is backing can win.
SPOKANE – Semi Bird [candidate for Governor] got his moment. [Former Congresswoman] Jaime Herrera Beutler got rebuffed [for state Commissioner of Public Lands]. [US Rep] Dan Newhouse continues to pay a price for his vote to impeach the former president [ditto Herrera Beutler].
And leaders of the Washington State Republican Party will leave Spokane Saturday evening with an endorsed slate of candidates but also continued discord in their ranks. . . .
Tensions center on whether delegates are backing candidates who might check certain boxes – supporting Donald Trump, eschewing the establishment, committing to more conservative positions – at the expense of electability in a state that’s tilted increasingly Democratic.
Republicans hold zero statewide offices in Washington, are minorities in both chambers of the Legislature, and control just two of the state’s 10 U.S. House seats.
Bird, as expected, got the official party endorsement for governor, garnering 72% of votes cast by the roughly 1,800 delegates. He’s a military veteran and former Richland School Board member, recalled after his opposition to state masking policies during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Dave Reichert, the other GOP candidate, who served 14 years in Congress before not seeking reelection in 2018, withdrew his name from consideration Friday after blasting his party’s endorsement process as a “chaotic mess.”
Meanwhile, Herrera Beutler and Newhouse failed to get endorsements, a sign there’s no forgiving or forgetting their votes to impeach Donald Trump in 2021.
https://washingtonstatestandard.com/2024/04/20/endorsements-and-discord-wa-gop-wraps-up-spokane-convention/
SSI - Turns out that the endorsed Republican for WA Secretary of State is Dale Whitaker of Spokane, who was born & raised in Newcastle, England (and NOT Newcastle, Washington).
My own fearless prediction is that RW will NOT be elected SOS; instead, the incumbent Democratic, Steve Hobbs, being highly likely to be re-elected as state's chief elections officer.
More than one in five Londoners attacked or threatened in past five years
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/21/london-crime-statistics-stop-search-knife-gun-sadiq-khan/
“My colleagues are feeling very restless,” admits one moderate Tory MP. “Rishi needs to show us that the general election isn’t already lost. If we lose the mayoralties in May then I’m afraid we could be on course for a total wipeout. It could be very dangerous for him.”
The Tories have already priced in heavy losses in the council elections, with experts predicting they face defeat in as many as half of their contested seats.
“If your constituency chair is on the phone telling you that your local association has been wiped out, it’s quite difficult to defend ‘priced in’,” they said. “MPs aren’t on the battlefield this time, it’s like the Somme without the generals.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/21/like-the-somme-without-the-generals-tory-nerves-grow-as-local-elections-loom
If they cannot do these basic things then clearly they are not fit for purpose.
It involves forming them up in a long line and advancing at a slow walk towards Moscow. Armed with really sharp fruit.
I think Sunak has actually a slightly higher bar to surmount of the two.
The problem, as ever, is the structure of the Met and it being both a national and local police force. If you separated out both you'd get much better accountability and it would be clear who the buck stopped with in each case.
Do you like Beethoven? Let me play you some….
https://www.npr.org/2022/06/01/1102486126/solving-the-michigan-indiana-border-confusion
. . . Jack Owens, semi-retired surveyor . . . has been advocating for a modern retracing of the border for 20 years now. He says because of those past controversies, Michigan's Ohio and Wisconsin borders were resurveyed in the early 20th century and staked with durable markers of concrete or stone. In contrast, the Indiana border has not. It was last surveyed in 1827. The team placed wooden posts every mile to mark the border, recording the locations using two reference trees and any notable topographic features like lakes or streams. But those posts have long since rotted away, leaving the state border unclear. . . .
SSI - This is to inform PBers that yours truly will soon embark on expedition, to lay claim to the disputed territory, aka the "Indigan Strip" between the great Hoosier State and the great Wolverine State.
ALL that is required, is sufficient investment capital to fully realize the incredible potential of this valuable territory. Which includes prime frontage on Lake Michigan of at least a quarter-mile!
Perhaps someone could provide contact info re: the Fylde Westminster Group?
If we expect them to be "perfect" it becomes difficult for the organisations to admit problems and instead they close ranks and try and deny or deflect them. That is what we have now.
We should actually expect them to make mistakes, sometimes mean or particularly dim mistakes, but to have systems in place where things can get quickly resolved and rogue employees sacked or retrained as appropriate.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange
A lot of elite sportspeople and coaches say we learn more from mistakes than successes. Currently we try to hide the mistakes away rather than learn from them.
We definitely, and also rightly, expect our police to be more upstanding than the average person, and we rightly should hold them to a very high standard. That does make it a tough job, but with people who hold power of arrest, a much more immediate measure of authority, you have to be very tough on them in turn, because any failings can be devastating.
Our Software detects that you may be accessing the Betfair website from a country that Betfair does not accept bets from or the traffic from your network was detected as being unusual. If you believe that this detection has occurred in error, please Contact us for further assistance."
https://getsporttrade.com/about/
Oh God I can hardly wait !
https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/geodesy/international-foot.html
"Palestinian civil defence crews retrieve 180 bodies from a mass grave inside the Nasser Medical Complex in Gaza’s Khan Younis, two weeks after Israeli forces withdrew from the area."
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/4/21/israels-war-on-gaza-live-mother-child-among-killed-in-new-rafah-strike
Rachel never married. She had a son by Alexandre Walewski, who was the son of Napoleon and Marie Walewska.
She also had affairs with Napoleon III and the Tsar of Russia.
My grandmother remembered meeting one of her sisters, Sarah Felix, when she was a very old lady.
https://www.kcra.com/article/state-illegal-to-pump-your-own-gas/44775222#
SSI - Until last year (as noted in above story) it was also illegal to pump one's own gas (in at least one way anyway) in Oregon. Just one (less) reason why Washingtonians love to make fun of our neighbors the Ore-goners.
OR is it Ore-goonians? Ask the next time you're in (Around-the-) Bend . . . and find out for yourself!
BTW (also FYI) Michigan City, Indiana was named for the Lake, not the State. (Ditto the State).
IF you're referring at tail end of your comment, to Kansas City, note that there are TWO (at least) Kansas Cities, one in Kansas, and the other (much bigger) in Missouri.
WIth both being named after the Kansas River, which flows into the Missouri at . . . wait for it . . . Kansas City.
Bonus - Note that Texarkana is also two cities, one in Texas and the other in Arkansas. Same situation in Bristol , Tennessee & Virginia.
Bunch of other examples in USA, but above are the biggest stateline cities.
Apparently the next European Political Community meeting is at Blenheim in July.
Into Post Office suspense accounts and then to their bottom line.
But, intriguingly, one SPM may have evidence of theft from her branch by those operating Horizon's back office remote access.
https://www.postofficescandal.uk/post/pennys-printouts/
https://x.com/aghamilton29/status/1782043574076387782
Here are some more videos from Columbia last night to make the point. One of them chanting “Zionists” aren’t welcome on campus. Another where the mob cornered some Jewish students trying to leave and started throwing stuff at them and yelling at them.
Again, there is a nightly Charlottesville-style rally and you have members of the media and some politicians cheering it on.
The Allman Brothers Band - Ramblin' Man - 11/2/1972 - Hofstra University
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUTORC4eoGc
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumpf
However, once spent the night in Muff, Ireland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muff,_County_Donegal
(NOT as exciting as you might imagine.)
Emily Maitlis joining Krishnan Guru-Murthy, Alastair Campbell, Rory Stewart, Clare Balding and #Gogglebox stars.
https://www.tvzoneuk.com/post/c4-generalelection2024-ann1
But the decision to declare Gateshead FC ineligible for the EFL because the Council is unable to offer them a 10 year lease, because they aren't in effective control of their own leisure facilities is absolutely scandalous.
A democratically elected authority can't provide a local football club with a perfectly adequate home which meets all the requirements of the EFL, by some distance, because it is having to outsource its ownership to tender, sums up exactly what is wrong with the nation, and why people are so cynical.
What was the point of an entire season making the playoffs?
Political memories fade. Bob Graham's unusual, inspiring story should live on.
https://fallows.substack.com/p/election-countdown-198-days-to-go
As a general rule, it seems sensible to think that anybody who Braverman thinks should go is probably not doing that bad a job.
He's utterly determined to see that Tory-Reform polling crossover isn't he?
Bob Graham would have almost certainly put him (really them) over the top in the Sunshine State, and nobody would ever have heard of the infamous"Butterfly Ballot" (designed by a Democrat!).
Both of them voted, and spoke eloquently against it.
https://x.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1781348369991901200
"Despite the scandal being the deadliest man-made disaster in postwar British history, no organisation or individual has been held to account. A patchwork system of payouts has failed to compensate for the lives lost or destroyed.
While other countries grappling with the same horrors made attempts to rectify the wrongs wrought on their citizens, Britain chose a different path. Successive governments under 11 prime ministers have kicked the can down the road.
Why five decades have passed without justice is difficult to answer. One possible explanation is the presence of the NHS at the heart of this scandal. The institution, a totemic part of British life, is the largest publicly funded health service in the world. There would have been calamitous financial liabilities for the British state.
There is also the secretive nature of the state which, as in the Post Office scandal, has allowed those in authority to use their power to protect themselves, or their institution."
The bit highlighted in bold = British exceptionalism.