OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
Same here. I once tried giving books away - literally leaving them outside my then-house for people to take what they want. Still had plenty left
About a year ago I resorted to actually dumping books in the paper recycling which felt so sad and wrong I moved to e-books. It was a great decision - they are so much more convenient. I love my Kindles - and all that weight from my luggage is gone. I now only buy physical books on the very rare occasions I read a book on Kindle which is so good I want the paper version
It’s happened once, this year. Zamoyski’s biography of Napoleon
I also sync my ebooks with Audible whenever possible, so I can keep “reading” even when driving round France, &c
Yeah, I got rid of all my physical books a few years ago. I was paying a fortune to cart them around every time I moved, and even more to keep them in storage when I was living in places that didn't have room for them. It got to the point where it would have been cheaper to buy them all anew than continue to hoard them for another decade. I didn't try to sell any of them, just got a recycling service to collect them - think they charged around £80 for 40 medium boxes, which I thought was pretty decent.
Besides, the proper e-Ink Kindles are simply a better reading experience - better print quality than a mass-market paperback, much easier on the eyes than a normal tablet screen, equally readable in the dark or direct sunshine, and the page always stays the right way up which is handy for reading in bed.
It's just a pity that Amazon seem to have lost interest in them - they've cut the size of the team working on them, there've been no particularly noteworthy new features in the past few years, and there's still no direct replacement for the Kindle Oasis. Mine is five years old - the leather case is falling apart, the battery has worn down to the point where it only lasts for a few days when used heavily, and it's the only device I own that still uses old-school micro-usb. I'd like a more modern version, but Amazon don't have one to sell me.
Has anyone here got opinions about alternatives? I know there are devices from Onyx and Kobo that are meant to be pretty good...
I had an 2018 Oasis and my solution was to get a 2019 Oasis to keep things going for a while longer.
The Scribe is a great device but no good for reading in bed and because I like physical buttons the paperwhite isn't for me.
Edit to add the problem with Onyx / Kobo is that the Kindle purchase / delivery path is so simple and I have an awful lot of books that I've bought over the years so the sunk cost of moving is just too much.
I like physical buttons too, but the new Paperwhite is excellent. Sure, it's not quite as "premium" as the old Oasis, but the screen is amazing, the battery lasts weeks, and it charges over USB C.
Trump is looking as deflated as one of those Christmas balloons you find behind the sofa in April.....
There's plenty of time for the Dems to do a Hillary 2016.
There is time, but there is no interest for the Dems to do a Hillary.
Hillary was full of hubris and acted like she was owed the Presidency and flew over the flyover states.
Harris is not making that mistake. She has a laser focus on winning.
Not so laser enough to pick the governor of PA as her running mate though, so RCP has PA still going red
You can be damn sure Shapiro is laser focused on delivering PA for the Harris ticket. His presidential chances in 2028 or 2032 depend on it. Lose, and his bright prospects are tarnished.
There is a load of potential competition for leader of the next generation of Democrats. This election is as make or break for them individually as it is for the party.
They aren't, if Harris and Walz lose Shapiro and Buttigieg are prime contenders to be Dem nominee in 2028 to take on VP Vance.
If Harris wins however she can run again in 2028 and then plenty more governors and senators would be in the frame for 2032 if Harris were re elected and VP Walz declined to run
Hilarious. You think there's going to be an election in 2028 if Trump wins this November?
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
Certainly with fertility rates now below replacement level in the UK and USA
Sadly, reproductive services are something that the NHS have all but abandoned.
Technically, they still aim to offer three cycles to under-40s, and one to those aged 40 and 41 - but in most of the country are nowhere close to achieving this. The usual pattern is to mange the problem by delaying long enough that people age out of eligibility, so if you're in your mid 30s they'll drag it out so you get one cycle at 38 or 39, and another a couple of years later. And that's only if you're very persistent.
In reality, most people on average need around four cycles, with some trying up to six before giving up. Each cycle typically costs around £10k.
Fertility rapidly declines once you hit your late 20s, but as a society we've set ourselves up so that people are unable to even consider having children until a decade later. So we're effectively expecting people to pay £20k or so on average to be able to have children, and that's before you even get on to the nightmarish situation that NHS maternity services are in.
Agreed, though there is the freezing eggs option too.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
I agree.
Not least because we have a demographic problem.
If people want their state pensions to be paid, they'd better start getting behind pro natal policies and non-doms staying in the UK.
Better to import 21 year olds, so that some other country has to cover the cost of their education and their parents' maternity and paternity leave.
And if you can persuade them to return home when they get to about 60, then it's win-win: some other country pays for the education, healthcare and retirement.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
Suggesting the utterly charming Hope Walz has taken up the job of a hit man.
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
Same here. I once tried giving books away - literally leaving them outside my then-house for people to take what they want. Still had plenty left
About a year ago I resorted to actually dumping books in the paper recycling which felt so sad and wrong I moved to e-books. It was a great decision - they are so much more convenient. I love my Kindles - and all that weight from my luggage is gone. I now only buy physical books on the very rare occasions I read a book on Kindle which is so good I want the paper version
It’s happened once, this year. Zamoyski’s biography of Napoleon
I also sync my ebooks with Audible whenever possible, so I can keep “reading” even when driving round France, &c
Yeah, I got rid of all my physical books a few years ago. I was paying a fortune to cart them around every time I moved, and even more to keep them in storage when I was living in places that didn't have room for them. It got to the point where it would have been cheaper to buy them all anew than continue to hoard them for another decade. I didn't try to sell any of them, just got a recycling service to collect them - think they charged around £80 for 40 medium boxes, which I thought was pretty decent.
Besides, the proper e-Ink Kindles are simply a better reading experience - better print quality than a mass-market paperback, much easier on the eyes than a normal tablet screen, equally readable in the dark or direct sunshine, and the page always stays the right way up which is handy for reading in bed.
It's just a pity that Amazon seem to have lost interest in them - they've cut the size of the team working on them, there've been no particularly noteworthy new features in the past few years, and there's still no direct replacement for the Kindle Oasis. Mine is five years old - the leather case is falling apart, the battery has worn down to the point where it only lasts for a few days when used heavily, and it's the only device I own that still uses old-school micro-usb. I'd like a more modern version, but Amazon don't have one to sell me.
Has anyone here got opinions about alternatives? I know there are devices from Onyx and Kobo that are meant to be pretty good...
I like the physical page-turn buttons, and the free worldwide 3g connectivity on the Oasis has been surprisingly useful. It's great for buying new books when on the road, okay for checking email in a pinch, and you can just about use it for Google Maps - it takes about ten minutes, but it does eventually load - which turned out to be pretty important when I got lost on the back-roads of Mozambique without a local SIM card...
For those with more knowledge of US political culture, who are the 6% that intends to vote for RFK Jr? What's his base?
Antivaxxers, conspiracy theorists and people still obsessed with lockdowns.
If he weren't in the race, I think they'd be voting Trump.
I don't think he'll poll 6% in the election. It's a vanity project and he'll call time on it if he has any sense.
If/when he pulls out, it's probably worth a couple of points to Trump, especially if he endorses Trump - no doubt Trump has already tried (or managed) to buy him off: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c134p2k24nzo "17 July 2024 Robert F Kennedy Jr has apologised after a video was leaked of a private phone call in which Donald Trump is heard apparently trying to coax the independent presidential candidate to support him."
Even if he doesn't pull out, he likely won't get 6% even where he is on the ballot, so should probably still add a point to Trump on the 3-way polling.
Trump is looking as deflated as one of those Christmas balloons you find behind the sofa in April.....
There's plenty of time for the Dems to do a Hillary 2016.
There is time, but there is no interest for the Dems to do a Hillary.
Hillary was full of hubris and acted like she was owed the Presidency and flew over the flyover states.
Harris is not making that mistake. She has a laser focus on winning.
Not so laser enough to pick the governor of PA as her running mate though, so RCP has PA still going red
You can be damn sure Shapiro is laser focused on delivering PA for the Harris ticket. His presidential chances in 2028 or 2032 depend on it. Lose, and his bright prospects are tarnished.
There is a load of potential competition for leader of the next generation of Democrats. This election is as make or break for them individually as it is for the party.
They aren't, if Harris and Walz lose Shapiro and Buttigieg are prime contenders to be Dem nominee in 2028 to take on VP Vance.
If Harris wins however she can run again in 2028 and then plenty more governors and senators would be in the frame for 2032 if Harris were re elected and VP Walz declined to run
Hilarious. You think there's going to be an election in 2028 if Trump wins this November?
I suppose Trump could argue if he wins in November that although he is limited to 2 terms under the 22nd amendment if he does not allow another presidential election then he could continue his second term for life (constitutionally the constitution gives the Electoral College the decision on who is elected President but does not say a presidential election has to be held every 4 years).
Though he would need the army on side to enforce that as well as the SC given the inevitable riots in Democratic cities
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
Suggesting the utterly charming Hope Walz has taken up the job of a hit man.
Nobody is this wholesome, he must have some kind of dark secret.
He puts pineapples on his pizza.
What is your opinion of pineapple fritters?
Never heard of them until today, I shall have to investigate.
You have them as a side with fish and chips.
They are deep-fried pineapple rings.
Known to every true Yorkshireman. I claim.
You're in for a treat - they're delicious. They are (imo) a dessert item though, so not as sacreligious as being added to a pizza.
True. But as a dessert I'd recommend with maple syrup, as one would for a dessert Yorkshire pudding - although that works really well with sweet-n-sour such as Blackberry Vinegar.
That sounds delicious. On the rare occasion I have them (cannot remember the last time) it's been with vanilla ice cream.
Still reckon Sunil would have been a gold medal winner - if only his mum had forced him into it.
There are some world-class Indian javelin throwers, a by-product of their fast bowling programme.
Yes, Neeraj Chopra was their only Gold of Tokyo 2021. Although most of their medals have been in hockey or shooting. They've won 3 Bronzes in Paris so far, all shooting.
Meanwhile, next door Bangladesh is the country with the largest population never to have won a medal.
Still reckon Sunil would have been a gold medal winner - if only his mum had forced him into it.
There are some world-class Indian javelin throwers, a by-product of their fast bowling programme.
Yes, Neeraj Chopra was their only Gold of Tokyo 2021. Although most of their medals have been in hockey or shooting. They've won 3 Bronzes in Paris so far, all shooting.
Meanwhile, next door Bangladesh is the country with the largest population never to have won a medal.
They had a wrestler disqualified yesterday before the semi final, because they didn't make the weight. Now. That seems pretty basic, for a nation of scientists and doctors. Suggesting they haven't got a halfway professional support structure.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
I agree.
Not least because we have a demographic problem.
If people want their state pensions to be paid, they'd better start getting behind pro natal policies and non-doms staying in the UK.
Better to import 21 year olds, so that some other country has to cover the cost of their education and their parents' maternity and paternity leave.
Given most of the western world and the Far East has the same demographic problems that means African or South Asian 21 year olds mainly and if some are Islamic radicals even more riots and far right extremism
HYUFD, you don't understand far right extremism. Far right extremists aren't reacting against Islamic radicals. Far right extremists will always find some excuse to detest the other. Jews in 1930s Germany were extremely integrated into German society and the far right extremists still decided they were the enemy.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
I agree.
Not least because we have a demographic problem.
If people want their state pensions to be paid, they'd better start getting behind pro natal policies and non-doms staying in the UK.
Better to import 21 year olds, so that some other country has to cover the cost of their education and their parents' maternity and paternity leave.
Given most of the western world and the Far East has the same demographic problems that means African or South Asian 21 year olds mainly and if some are Islamic radicals even more riots and far right extremism
HYUFD, you don't understand far right extremism. Far right extremists aren't reacting against Islamic radicals. Far right extremists will always find some excuse to detest the other. Jews in 1930s Germany were extremely integrated into German society and the far right extremists still decided they were the enemy.
Many Jews in 1930s Germany were very will integrated, but not all. In particular, Jews who fled Russia in the late 19th and early 20th century were much less likely to be integrated.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
Certainly with fertility rates now below replacement level in the UK and USA
Sadly, reproductive services are something that the NHS have all but abandoned.
Technically, they still aim to offer three cycles to under-40s, and one to those aged 40 and 41 - but in most of the country are nowhere close to achieving this. The usual pattern is to mange the problem by delaying long enough that people age out of eligibility, so if you're in your mid 30s they'll drag it out so you get one cycle at 38 or 39, and another a couple of years later. And that's only if you're very persistent.
In reality, most people on average need around four cycles, with some trying up to six before giving up. Each cycle typically costs around £10k.
Fertility rapidly declines once you hit your late 20s, but as a society we've set ourselves up so that people are unable to even consider having children until a decade later. So we're effectively expecting people to pay £20k or so on average to be able to have children, and that's before you even get on to the nightmarish situation that NHS maternity services are in.
Agreed, though there is the freezing eggs option too.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
Egg-freezing is £20k and only works about half the time. It's also less likely to be covered by private health insurance than IVF, though some employers do explicitly fund it separately.
As for it being a lifestyle choice, I think it's a bit stronger than that. It's a choice between building your career, being able to rent a flat by yourself, and generally having a stable life that you control before getting pregnant - or having kids in your 20s, and hoping that the state will provide an adequate safety net if things go wrong.
Not many people trust that safety net these days, and I don't think it's fair to blame them for that.
As with so much else, the best way to fix this would be to ease the pressure on housing. If the best a 20-something at the start of a professional career can expect is to live in a houseshare for the next decade, then is it any wonder why they're not settling down and having kids?
The underlying issue absolutely has not gone away; it will likely worsen
Yeah the "racism defeated" cheering this morning is daft. In reality an already toxic but real issue, mass immigration, has now been weaponised by malign actors on social media, almost certianly in part by our foes in Russia. That they can cause widespread unrest in the UK so easily is a very big problem. It's not hard to think of scenarios where things go south very quickly and turn out a lot worse. About the only "ideas" anyone has had are all kinds of mad illiberal bans on language, free movement, access to the internet and so on. Most of which would likely not work and also prove to be counter-productive. Good luck to whoever has to figure out how to prevent repeats of this.
How you prevent repeats is how you prevent all crime. You send the criminals to jail. If anyone thinks setting a police van on fire or trying to intimidate asylum seekers is worth spending three years in jail then I think we'd all be better off without them. I'm curious to know from posters who feel this anger with immigrants and foreigners why? Maybe you and Leon can explain it?
Trump is looking as deflated as one of those Christmas balloons you find behind the sofa in April.....
There's plenty of time for the Dems to do a Hillary 2016.
There is time, but there is no interest for the Dems to do a Hillary.
Hillary was full of hubris and acted like she was owed the Presidency and flew over the flyover states.
Harris is not making that mistake. She has a laser focus on winning.
Not so laser enough to pick the governor of PA as her running mate though, so RCP has PA still going red
You can be damn sure Shapiro is laser focused on delivering PA for the Harris ticket. His presidential chances in 2028 or 2032 depend on it. Lose, and his bright prospects are tarnished.
There is a load of potential competition for leader of the next generation of Democrats. This election is as make or break for them individually as it is for the party.
They aren't, if Harris and Walz lose Shapiro and Buttigieg are prime contenders to be Dem nominee in 2028 to take on VP Vance.
If Harris wins however she can run again in 2028 and then plenty more governors and senators would be in the frame for 2032 if Harris were re elected and VP Walz declined to run
Hilarious. You think there's going to be an election in 2028 if Trump wins this November?
Surely there will be. It would require a takeover of all levels of government in the country to really prevent it. I don’t think Trump and the MAGA crew have anything like the influence to do that.
I would rather we didn’t test it out, but I think what is far more likely is we get significant politicisation of the civil service, a distain for convention and a weakening of democratic norms. All of which would be bad enough, but would also set the US on a path to autocracy in the coming years. 2028 wouldn’t necessarily not happen, it’s just the system would have been rather heavily influenced by that point and whoever took over from Trump (perhaps with him sat on their shoulder like Putin/Medvedev) could keep chipping away.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
Certainly with fertility rates now below replacement level in the UK and USA
Sadly, reproductive services are something that the NHS have all but abandoned.
Technically, they still aim to offer three cycles to under-40s, and one to those aged 40 and 41 - but in most of the country are nowhere close to achieving this. The usual pattern is to mange the problem by delaying long enough that people age out of eligibility, so if you're in your mid 30s they'll drag it out so you get one cycle at 38 or 39, and another a couple of years later. And that's only if you're very persistent.
In reality, most people on average need around four cycles, with some trying up to six before giving up. Each cycle typically costs around £10k.
Fertility rapidly declines once you hit your late 20s, but as a society we've set ourselves up so that people are unable to even consider having children until a decade later. So we're effectively expecting people to pay £20k or so on average to be able to have children, and that's before you even get on to the nightmarish situation that NHS maternity services are in.
Agreed, though there is the freezing eggs option too.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
Egg-freezing is £20k and only works about half the time. It's also less likely to be covered by private health insurance than IVF, though some employers do explicitly fund it separately.
As for it being a lifestyle choice, I think it's a bit stronger than that. It's a choice between building your career, being able to rent a flat by yourself, and generally having a stable life that you control before getting pregnant - or having kids in your 20s, and hoping that the state will provide an adequate safety net if things go wrong.
Not many people trust that safety net these days, and I don't think it's fair to blame them for that.
As with so much else, the best way to fix this would be to ease the pressure on housing. If the best a 20-something at the start of a professional career can expect is to live in a houseshare for the next decade, then is it any wonder why they're not settling down and having kids?
or as with the Guardian article posted earlier today opting out of the rat race altogether...
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
Same here. I once tried giving books away - literally leaving them outside my then-house for people to take what they want. Still had plenty left
About a year ago I resorted to actually dumping books in the paper recycling which felt so sad and wrong I moved to e-books. It was a great decision - they are so much more convenient. I love my Kindles - and all that weight from my luggage is gone. I now only buy physical books on the very rare occasions I read a book on Kindle which is so good I want the paper version
It’s happened once, this year. Zamoyski’s biography of Napoleon
I also sync my ebooks with Audible whenever possible, so I can keep “reading” even when driving round France, &c
Yeah, I got rid of all my physical books a few years ago. I was paying a fortune to cart them around every time I moved, and even more to keep them in storage when I was living in places that didn't have room for them. It got to the point where it would have been cheaper to buy them all anew than continue to hoard them for another decade. I didn't try to sell any of them, just got a recycling service to collect them - think they charged around £80 for 40 medium boxes, which I thought was pretty decent.
Besides, the proper e-Ink Kindles are simply a better reading experience - better print quality than a mass-market paperback, much easier on the eyes than a normal tablet screen, equally readable in the dark or direct sunshine, and the page always stays the right way up which is handy for reading in bed.
It's just a pity that Amazon seem to have lost interest in them - they've cut the size of the team working on them, there've been no particularly noteworthy new features in the past few years, and there's still no direct replacement for the Kindle Oasis. Mine is five years old - the leather case is falling apart, the battery has worn down to the point where it only lasts for a few days when used heavily, and it's the only device I own that still uses old-school micro-usb. I'd like a more modern version, but Amazon don't have one to sell me.
Has anyone here got opinions about alternatives? I know there are devices from Onyx and Kobo that are meant to be pretty good...
I like the physical page-turn buttons, and the free worldwide 3g connectivity on the Oasis has been surprisingly useful. It's great for buying new books when on the road, okay for checking email in a pinch, and you can just about use it for Google Maps - it takes about ten minutes, but it does eventually load - which turned out to be pretty important when I got lost on the back-roads of Mozambique without a local SIM card...
Yes the one downer of the Kindle Paperwhite is the slightly fiddly WiFi connection which you need to download books. However location is not a problem as you can use your smartphone as a wifi hotspot
A great thing about the kindle is that it will sync with your kindle apps on iPad and iPhone and also with audible - so you can swap seamlessly between all of them
And kindle on iPad is better when you need vivid colour - eg guide books
Still reckon Sunil would have been a gold medal winner - if only his mum had forced him into it.
There are some world-class Indian javelin throwers, a by-product of their fast bowling programme.
Yes, Neeraj Chopra was their only Gold of Tokyo 2021. Although most of their medals have been in hockey or shooting. They've won 3 Bronzes in Paris so far, all shooting.
Meanwhile, next door Bangladesh is the country with the largest population never to have won a medal.
They had a wrestler disqualified yesterday before the semi final, because they didn't make the weight. Now. That seems pretty basic, for a nation of scientists and doctors. Suggesting they haven't got a halfway professional support structure.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
Certainly with fertility rates now below replacement level in the UK and USA
Sadly, reproductive services are something that the NHS have all but abandoned.
Technically, they still aim to offer three cycles to under-40s, and one to those aged 40 and 41 - but in most of the country are nowhere close to achieving this. The usual pattern is to mange the problem by delaying long enough that people age out of eligibility, so if you're in your mid 30s they'll drag it out so you get one cycle at 38 or 39, and another a couple of years later. And that's only if you're very persistent.
In reality, most people on average need around four cycles, with some trying up to six before giving up. Each cycle typically costs around £10k.
Fertility rapidly declines once you hit your late 20s, but as a society we've set ourselves up so that people are unable to even consider having children until a decade later. So we're effectively expecting people to pay £20k or so on average to be able to have children, and that's before you even get on to the nightmarish situation that NHS maternity services are in.
Agreed, though there is the freezing eggs option too.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
Egg-freezing is £20k and only works about half the time. It's also less likely to be covered by private health insurance than IVF, though some employers do explicitly fund it separately.
As for it being a lifestyle choice, I think it's a bit stronger than that. It's a choice between building your career, being able to rent a flat by yourself, and generally having a stable life that you control before getting pregnant - or having kids in your 20s, and hoping that the state will provide an adequate safety net if things go wrong.
Not many people trust that safety net these days, and I don't think it's fair to blame them for that.
As with so much else, the best way to fix this would be to ease the pressure on housing. If the best a 20-something at the start of a professional career can expect is to live in a houseshare for the next decade, then is it any wonder why they're not settling down and having kids?
Absolutely!
And this is another reason why too everyone who is working ought to be able to afford a home of their own, from their own efforts, with no inheritance in their twenties as was achievable in the past and could be again if the prices were more appropriate.
An inheritance if you get one (and many won't) is likely to come in your sixties or later nowadays and won't get you on the housing ladder in your twenties.
The underlying issue absolutely has not gone away; it will likely worsen
Yeah the "racism defeated" cheering this morning is daft. In reality an already toxic but real issue, mass immigration, has now been weaponised by malign actors on social media, almost certianly in part by our foes in Russia. That they can cause widespread unrest in the UK so easily is a very big problem. It's not hard to think of scenarios where things go south very quickly and turn out a lot worse. About the only "ideas" anyone has had are all kinds of mad illiberal bans on language, free movement, access to the internet and so on. Most of which would likely not work and also prove to be counter-productive. Good luck to whoever has to figure out how to prevent repeats of this.
We can start by pointing and laughing at racists of all ilks and colours; not just ones that look different. There is too much casual acceptance of racism in society, and making it socially unacceptable would be a great start.
If someone says something racist, whoever they are, tell them. Don't shut up because you don't want to create a fuss.
Anti Muslim sentiment in particular seems to be expressed quite brazenly as if it's on a par with "I prefer my eggs scrambled". Usually if a person is going to proffer a sweeping negative opinion about a minority group along the lines of the problem with "them" is this or that, that "they" are prone to (insert bad thing here) etc, the person will take a deep breath before saying it, they'll be a bit nervous, will probably look around first and check they're in a safe space, it'll all be rather furtive is what I mean, but when it comes to slagging off Muslims, not so much. It comes easy. That's my sense anyway.
Lucy, from Shenfield, Essex – who was the first in her family to go to university, gaining a maths degree in 2007 – worked briefly in graduate roles as a transport planner and in private equity. But on an annual salary of £20,000, she felt her student debt was hanging over her. She moved back to her parents’ house and has been in part-time minimum-wage jobs since she was 25. For the past six years, she has been a taxi controller, earning £19,000 last year.
“My student debt makes me not want to earn more, as my equivalent rate of tax would be 38%,” she said. “I see not repaying my loan as an act of defiance.”
If she got a degree in 2007, she didn't pay more than £1,200 a year in fees. Also, the first two years would have been paid up front.
What the hell was she doing working in private equity that paid £20k - cleaning the office? The receptionist or the most junior of junior analysts would have been on way more than £20k in 2009.
It doesn't pass the smell test does it....
It doesn’t, there was a Telegraph article a while back that had a story about a graduate from a Red Brick with a first in maths struggling to obtain a mortgage as he only earned £36k.
It was only when you got to the bottom of the article that you found out he worked that he worked 3 days a week.
Trump is looking as deflated as one of those Christmas balloons you find behind the sofa in April.....
There's plenty of time for the Dems to do a Hillary 2016.
There is time, but there is no interest for the Dems to do a Hillary.
Hillary was full of hubris and acted like she was owed the Presidency and flew over the flyover states.
Harris is not making that mistake. She has a laser focus on winning.
Not so laser enough to pick the governor of PA as her running mate though, so RCP has PA still going red
You can be damn sure Shapiro is laser focused on delivering PA for the Harris ticket. His presidential chances in 2028 or 2032 depend on it. Lose, and his bright prospects are tarnished.
There is a load of potential competition for leader of the next generation of Democrats. This election is as make or break for them individually as it is for the party.
They aren't, if Harris and Walz lose Shapiro and Buttigieg are prime contenders to be Dem nominee in 2028 to take on VP Vance.
If Harris wins however she can run again in 2028 and then plenty more governors and senators would be in the frame for 2032 if Harris were re elected and VP Walz declined to run
Hilarious. You think there's going to be an election in 2028 if Trump wins this November?
Authoritarians in the Putin / Orban model have elections. They use violence and threats of violence to discourage opposition, abuse government power to intimidate or shut down critical media, and gradually expand control of the judiciary. I think this is clearly what Trump would try to do, although we can't say how fast or how successfully he'd do it.
For those with more knowledge of US political culture, who are the 6% that intends to vote for RFK Jr? What's his base?
Antivaxxers, conspiracy theorists and people still obsessed with lockdowns.
If he weren't in the race, I think they'd be voting Trump.
I don't think he'll poll 6% in the election. It's a vanity project and he'll call time on it if he has any sense.
If/when he pulls out, it's probably worth a couple of points to Trump, especially if he endorses Trump - no doubt Trump has already tried (or managed) to buy him off: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c134p2k24nzo "17 July 2024 Robert F Kennedy Jr has apologised after a video was leaked of a private phone call in which Donald Trump is heard apparently trying to coax the independent presidential candidate to support him."
Even if he doesn't pull out, he likely won't get 6% even where he is on the ballot, so should probably still add a point to Trump on the 3-way polling.
Oh well if he's (net) hurting Trump I take it back and hope he stays in.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
Suggesting the utterly charming Hope Walz has taken up the job of a hit man.
Nobody is this wholesome, he must have some kind of dark secret.
He puts pineapples on his pizza.
What is your opinion of pineapple fritters?
Never heard of them until today, I shall have to investigate.
You have them as a side with fish and chips.
They are deep-fried pineapple rings.
Known to every true Yorkshireman. I claim.
You're in for a treat - they're delicious. They are (imo) a dessert item though, so not as sacreligious as being added to a pizza.
True. But as a dessert I'd recommend with maple syrup, as one would for a dessert Yorkshire pudding - although that works really well with sweet-n-sour such as Blackberry Vinegar.
That sounds delicious. On the rare occasion I have them (cannot remember the last time) it's been with vanilla ice cream.
I have the biggest blackberry bush in the world in my back garden - a Himalayan Giant.
I've been back out this year for the first time for some time, and I find it's grown a companion or two.
The thing with Yorkshires (and frozen Yorkshires from Aldi work really well air-fried) is to do three extra for dessert. Really a Yorkshire is just an inflated (hopefully) pancake.
The underlying issue absolutely has not gone away; it will likely worsen
Yeah the "racism defeated" cheering this morning is daft. In reality an already toxic but real issue, mass immigration, has now been weaponised by malign actors on social media, almost certianly in part by our foes in Russia. That they can cause widespread unrest in the UK so easily is a very big problem. It's not hard to think of scenarios where things go south very quickly and turn out a lot worse. About the only "ideas" anyone has had are all kinds of mad illiberal bans on language, free movement, access to the internet and so on. Most of which would likely not work and also prove to be counter-productive. Good luck to whoever has to figure out how to prevent repeats of this.
We can start by pointing and laughing at racists of all ilks and colours; not just ones that look different. There is too much casual acceptance of racism in society, and making it socially unacceptable would be a great start.
If someone says something racist, whoever they are, tell them. Don't shut up because you don't want to create a fuss.
Anti Muslim sentiment in particular seems to be expressed quite brazenly as if it's on a par with "I prefer my eggs scrambled". Usually if a person is going to proffer a sweeping negative opinion about a minority group along the lines of the problem with "them" is this or that, that "they" are prone to (insert bad thing here) etc, the person will take a deep breath before saying it, they'll be a bit nervous, will probably look around first and check they're in a safe space, it'll all be rather furtive is what I mean, but when it comes to slagging off Muslims, not so much. It comes easy. That's my sense anyway.
Religion is a belief system and there's no reason to be furtive about disliking any belief systems.
Slagging off the adherents is a different matter.
I'd quite happily say I don't like Christianity and Islam, I would not say that I dislike Christians and Muslims.
Sadly many people are too thick to understand the difference.
The underlying issue absolutely has not gone away; it will likely worsen
Yeah the "racism defeated" cheering this morning is daft. In reality an already toxic but real issue, mass immigration, has now been weaponised by malign actors on social media, almost certianly in part by our foes in Russia. That they can cause widespread unrest in the UK so easily is a very big problem. It's not hard to think of scenarios where things go south very quickly and turn out a lot worse. About the only "ideas" anyone has had are all kinds of mad illiberal bans on language, free movement, access to the internet and so on. Most of which would likely not work and also prove to be counter-productive. Good luck to whoever has to figure out how to prevent repeats of this.
How you prevent repeats is how you prevent all crime. You send the criminals to jail. If anyone thinks setting a police van on fire or trying to intimidate asylum seekers is worth spending three years in jail then I think we'd all be better off without them. I'm curious to know from posters who feel this anger with immigrants and foreigners why? Maybe you and Leon can explain it?
Why on earth do you think I want to discuss a complex subject like this with a retired tampon ad executive like you? It won’t benefit either of us. You won’t understand anything I’m talking about and I will just get frustrated with your mulish stupidity
I might as well engage my neighbour’s pet rabbit in a debate about eurocommunism, then start angrily hitting it with a carrot when it doesn’t grasp my nuanced point about Antonio Gramsci
Trump is looking as deflated as one of those Christmas balloons you find behind the sofa in April.....
There's plenty of time for the Dems to do a Hillary 2016.
There is time, but there is no interest for the Dems to do a Hillary.
Hillary was full of hubris and acted like she was owed the Presidency and flew over the flyover states.
Harris is not making that mistake. She has a laser focus on winning.
Not so laser enough to pick the governor of PA as her running mate though, so RCP has PA still going red
You can be damn sure Shapiro is laser focused on delivering PA for the Harris ticket. His presidential chances in 2028 or 2032 depend on it. Lose, and his bright prospects are tarnished.
There is a load of potential competition for leader of the next generation of Democrats. This election is as make or break for them individually as it is for the party.
They aren't, if Harris and Walz lose Shapiro and Buttigieg are prime contenders to be Dem nominee in 2028 to take on VP Vance.
If Harris wins however she can run again in 2028 and then plenty more governors and senators would be in the frame for 2032 if Harris were re elected and VP Walz declined to run
What struck me as unusual about both Shapiro and Walz is both men wear glasses. The time to back Shapiro for President is when he books himself into the laser clinic.
I think the point about hypothetical polling is really important.
I don't think I quite understand why Harris is polling so much better in reality than in the hypothetical polls. If I'd been forced to guess I might have thought that the hypothetical polls would be wrong because she would poll worse.
One idea I'm considering is that the disconnect between voters' view of reality and political rhetoric has been growing, and this was a rare instance of the politicians reacting to reality as the voters saw it - that Biden was too old for another four years.
The feeling that the politicians get it and are listening is quite exciting in the context of them not doing so, and speaking in some alien language of avoiding gotchas and recycling cliches for so long.
Not convinced it's necessarily going to carry Harris all the way to election day though.
Lucy, from Shenfield, Essex – who was the first in her family to go to university, gaining a maths degree in 2007 – worked briefly in graduate roles as a transport planner and in private equity. But on an annual salary of £20,000, she felt her student debt was hanging over her. She moved back to her parents’ house and has been in part-time minimum-wage jobs since she was 25. For the past six years, she has been a taxi controller, earning £19,000 last year.
“My student debt makes me not want to earn more, as my equivalent rate of tax would be 38%,” she said. “I see not repaying my loan as an act of defiance.”
If she got a degree in 2007, she didn't pay more than £1,200 a year in fees. Also, the first two years would have been paid up front.
What the hell was she doing working in private equity that paid £20k - cleaning the office? The receptionist or the most junior of junior analysts would have been on way more than £20k in 2009.
It doesn't pass the smell test does it....
It doesn’t, there was a Telegraph article a while back that had a story about a graduate from a Red Brick with a first in maths struggling to obtain a mortgage as he only earned £36k.
It was only when you got to the bottom of the article that you found out he worked that he worked 3 days a week.
And most academy chains deliberately screw Early Career Teachers by offering them contracts just under the minimum length of time needed to advance to the next pay band.
So they're now both kept at the bottom of the pay scale for longer, and are more likely to find themselves at the end of a contract at an awkward time when no other schools are hiring - cutting their effective annual income still further.
A small cost saving for the academy chain, but it now means that teachers can't expect to be financially stable until they're in their mid 30s or later.
Trump is looking as deflated as one of those Christmas balloons you find behind the sofa in April.....
There's plenty of time for the Dems to do a Hillary 2016.
There is time, but there is no interest for the Dems to do a Hillary.
Hillary was full of hubris and acted like she was owed the Presidency and flew over the flyover states.
Harris is not making that mistake. She has a laser focus on winning.
Not so laser enough to pick the governor of PA as her running mate though, so RCP has PA still going red
You can be damn sure Shapiro is laser focused on delivering PA for the Harris ticket. His presidential chances in 2028 or 2032 depend on it. Lose, and his bright prospects are tarnished.
There is a load of potential competition for leader of the next generation of Democrats. This election is as make or break for them individually as it is for the party.
They aren't, if Harris and Walz lose Shapiro and Buttigieg are prime contenders to be Dem nominee in 2028 to take on VP Vance.
If Harris wins however she can run again in 2028 and then plenty more governors and senators would be in the frame for 2032 if Harris were re elected and VP Walz declined to run
What struck me as unusual about both Shapiro and Walz is both men wear glasses. The time to back Shapiro for President is when he books himself into the laser clinic.
President George HW Bush wore glasses much of the time too, as did President Truman
Kate Hoey was an MP for 30 years and is currently a member of the House of Lords. How can she pretend not to know this stuff?
Pretty sure she does know this stuff but wants to keep the 2 tier Keir thing going. Last night would have been a massive disappointment to Hoey as the people who want their country didn’t make double figures in most places.
Labour councillor demands that we “cut all their throats” (he means the far right protestors I think) - he is applauded, then the crowd breaks into Free Free Palestine
I disagree with the header. I don't think it's a 50/50 race anymore.
At the moment, it's between a narrow win and a big win.
I think I am still scarred by 2016.
I realised over the weekend I am more emotionally invested in the 2024 US Presidential election than I have ever been in any UK general election or Brexit referendum/Scottish independence referendum and I was pretty emotionally invested in the those too.
Whilst I understand the point, and your investment is shared by many on PB, it is another example of people living on the Internet instead of on the ground. Unless you have plans you have not announced, you live in the UK and do not plan to move to the US. The activities of the UK govt will affect you a lot more than any US govt, regardless of its greater magnitude. Yet Trump v Harris matters more to you (and most of PB) emotionally.
The underlying issue absolutely has not gone away; it will likely worsen
Yeah the "racism defeated" cheering this morning is daft. In reality an already toxic but real issue, mass immigration, has now been weaponised by malign actors on social media, almost certianly in part by our foes in Russia. That they can cause widespread unrest in the UK so easily is a very big problem. It's not hard to think of scenarios where things go south very quickly and turn out a lot worse. About the only "ideas" anyone has had are all kinds of mad illiberal bans on language, free movement, access to the internet and so on. Most of which would likely not work and also prove to be counter-productive. Good luck to whoever has to figure out how to prevent repeats of this.
We can start by pointing and laughing at racists of all ilks and colours; not just ones that look different. There is too much casual acceptance of racism in society, and making it socially unacceptable would be a great start.
If someone says something racist, whoever they are, tell them. Don't shut up because you don't want to create a fuss.
Anti Muslim sentiment in particular seems to be expressed quite brazenly as if it's on a par with "I prefer my eggs scrambled". Usually if a person is going to proffer a sweeping negative opinion about a minority group along the lines of the problem with "them" is this or that, that "they" are prone to (insert bad thing here) etc, the person will take a deep breath before saying it, they'll be a bit nervous, will probably look around first and check they're in a safe space, it'll all be rather furtive is what I mean, but when it comes to slagging off Muslims, not so much. It comes easy. That's my sense anyway.
Anti Muslim sentiment is woven through public discourse, from mouth breathing thugs on the streets right up to politicians and other members of so called polite society, in much the same way that antisemitism was completely mainstream prior to WW2. Jenrick's jaw dropping comments the other day are a case in point. It doesn't take too much imagination to appreciate the dangers here.
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
There's one specialist in Edinburgh, but I have rather too many books for that to be convenient, so your post may turn out to be a lifesaver!
Still reckon Sunil would have been a gold medal winner - if only his mum had forced him into it.
There are some world-class Indian javelin throwers, a by-product of their fast bowling programme.
Yes, Neeraj Chopra was their only Gold of Tokyo 2021. Although most of their medals have been in hockey or shooting. They've won 3 Bronzes in Paris so far, all shooting.
Meanwhile, next door Bangladesh is the country with the largest population never to have won a medal.
Bangladesh has never won a major cricket trophy (The national sport I suppose) and have only won one gold at the asian games and 14 total medals. It's an amazingly poor sporting heritage for a nation of 170 million people.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
Certainly with fertility rates now below replacement level in the UK and USA
Sadly, reproductive services are something that the NHS have all but abandoned.
Technically, they still aim to offer three cycles to under-40s, and one to those aged 40 and 41 - but in most of the country are nowhere close to achieving this. The usual pattern is to mange the problem by delaying long enough that people age out of eligibility, so if you're in your mid 30s they'll drag it out so you get one cycle at 38 or 39, and another a couple of years later. And that's only if you're very persistent.
In reality, most people on average need around four cycles, with some trying up to six before giving up. Each cycle typically costs around £10k.
Fertility rapidly declines once you hit your late 20s, but as a society we've set ourselves up so that people are unable to even consider having children until a decade later. So we're effectively expecting people to pay £20k or so on average to be able to have children, and that's before you even get on to the nightmarish situation that NHS maternity services are in.
Agreed, though there is the freezing eggs option too.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
Egg-freezing is £20k and only works about half the time. It's also less likely to be covered by private health insurance than IVF, though some employers do explicitly fund it separately.
As for it being a lifestyle choice, I think it's a bit stronger than that. It's a choice between building your career, being able to rent a flat by yourself, and generally having a stable life that you control before getting pregnant - or having kids in your 20s, and hoping that the state will provide an adequate safety net if things go wrong.
Not many people trust that safety net these days, and I don't think it's fair to blame them for that.
As with so much else, the best way to fix this would be to ease the pressure on housing. If the best a 20-something at the start of a professional career can expect is to live in a houseshare for the next decade, then is it any wonder why they're not settling down and having kids?
Absolutely!
And this is another reason why too everyone who is working ought to be able to afford a home of their own, from their own efforts, with no inheritance in their twenties as was achievable in the past and could be again if the prices were more appropriate.
An inheritance if you get one (and many won't) is likely to come in your sixties or later nowadays and won't get you on the housing ladder in your twenties.
Most people rented 100 years ago, they still managed to have children in their 20s
I disagree with the header. I don't think it's a 50/50 race anymore.
At the moment, it's between a narrow win and a big win.
I think I am still scarred by 2016.
I realised over the weekend I am more emotionally invested in the 2024 US Presidential election than I have ever been in any UK general election or Brexit referendum/Scottish independence referendum and I was pretty emotionally invested in the those too.
Whilst I understand the point, and your investment is shared by many on PB, it is another example of people living on the Internet instead of on the ground. Unless you have plans you have not announced, you live in the UK and do not plan to move to the US. The activities of the UK govt will affect you a lot more than any US govt, regardless of its greater magnitude. Yet Trump v Harris matters more to you (and most of PB) emotionally.
I’ve got friends in America.
I think Trump withdrawing from NATO/selling out Ukraine will do more damage to the UK than anything Starmer will manage.
I think the point about hypothetical polling is really important.
I don't think I quite understand why Harris is polling so much better in reality than in the hypothetical polls. If I'd been forced to guess I might have thought that the hypothetical polls would be wrong because she would poll worse.
One idea I'm considering is that the disconnect between voters' view of reality and political rhetoric has been growing, and this was a rare instance of the politicians reacting to reality as the voters saw it - that Biden was too old for another four years.
The feeling that the politicians get it and are listening is quite exciting in the context of them not doing so, and speaking in some alien language of avoiding gotchas and recycling cliches for so long.
Not convinced it's necessarily going to carry Harris all the way to election day though.
I think the other thing is that Harris has really struggled to make a success of the VP role. I think there are a number of reasons for this and could write about it at length, but broadly these come down to two things: 1. Harris isn’t very good at the folksy stuff and 2. the administration has not used her effectively at all.
She has had to sit there for 3 years and essentially allow her opponents to portray her as useless, clueless, woke, unintelligent and patronising. No wonder her ratings were poor. Hypotheticals would have factored all this in.
The fact is, and I’ve been saying this for some time, Harris isn’t a bad politician. She just needs to play to her strengths. And perhaps being at the top of the ticket and having the platform and agency to do what she wants actually suits her far more than being an understudy. Hence now a lot of people are seeing her and thinking “actually, she’s not anywhere near as bad as she’s been made out to be, maybe I’ll give her a look.”
A final thought - someone seems to finally have told her that her weird, rambling, pseudo-intellectual pronouncements aren’t a great look. I hope that continues.
Labour councillor demands that we “cut all their throats” (he means the far right protestors I think) - he is applauded, then the crowd breaks into Free Free Palestine
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
Certainly with fertility rates now below replacement level in the UK and USA
Sadly, reproductive services are something that the NHS have all but abandoned.
Technically, they still aim to offer three cycles to under-40s, and one to those aged 40 and 41 - but in most of the country are nowhere close to achieving this. The usual pattern is to mange the problem by delaying long enough that people age out of eligibility, so if you're in your mid 30s they'll drag it out so you get one cycle at 38 or 39, and another a couple of years later. And that's only if you're very persistent.
In reality, most people on average need around four cycles, with some trying up to six before giving up. Each cycle typically costs around £10k.
Fertility rapidly declines once you hit your late 20s, but as a society we've set ourselves up so that people are unable to even consider having children until a decade later. So we're effectively expecting people to pay £20k or so on average to be able to have children, and that's before you even get on to the nightmarish situation that NHS maternity services are in.
Agreed, though there is the freezing eggs option too.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
Egg-freezing is £20k and only works about half the time. It's also less likely to be covered by private health insurance than IVF, though some employers do explicitly fund it separately.
As for it being a lifestyle choice, I think it's a bit stronger than that. It's a choice between building your career, being able to rent a flat by yourself, and generally having a stable life that you control before getting pregnant - or having kids in your 20s, and hoping that the state will provide an adequate safety net if things go wrong.
Not many people trust that safety net these days, and I don't think it's fair to blame them for that.
As with so much else, the best way to fix this would be to ease the pressure on housing. If the best a 20-something at the start of a professional career can expect is to live in a houseshare for the next decade, then is it any wonder why they're not settling down and having kids?
We need more affordable homes to buy and rent (especially in London and the Home Counties) but also tighter immigration controls to reduce demand and more tax breaks for marriage and increased child benefit like Meloni is pushing in Italy
Catalan police have launched an operation to find and arrest Carles Puigdemont after the fugitive former regional president returned to Spain for the first time in seven years to address a crowd of several thousand in Barcelona before disappearing again.
Speaking on a stage at the Arc de Triomf, symbolically close to the law courts and the Catalan parliament, he told the crowd of mainly older supporters: “I’ve come here today to remind you that we’re still here. We don’t have the right to give in, the right to self-determination belongs to the people. Catalonia must be allowed to decide its future.
“I don’t know when I’ll see you again but, whatever happens, when we see each other again we can once again shout out Viva! Free Catalonia!”
Puigdemont was then whisked away, surrounded by members of his Together for Catalonia party, in the direction of the parliament building. However, when the group arrived at parliament, he was not among them.
Catalan police are stopping and searching vehicles heading towards the French border and there are traffic controls around the city centre following reports that Puigdemont was seen leaving in a car.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
I agree.
Not least because we have a demographic problem.
If people want their state pensions to be paid, they'd better start getting behind pro natal policies and non-doms staying in the UK.
There's also the fact that parents who are invested enough to go through the hassle of IVF are likely to be caring parents who go on to raise well-adjusted and productive children.
Trump is looking as deflated as one of those Christmas balloons you find behind the sofa in April.....
There's plenty of time for the Dems to do a Hillary 2016.
There is time, but there is no interest for the Dems to do a Hillary.
Hillary was full of hubris and acted like she was owed the Presidency and flew over the flyover states.
Harris is not making that mistake. She has a laser focus on winning.
Not so laser enough to pick the governor of PA as her running mate though, so RCP has PA still going red
You can be damn sure Shapiro is laser focused on delivering PA for the Harris ticket. His presidential chances in 2028 or 2032 depend on it. Lose, and his bright prospects are tarnished.
There is a load of potential competition for leader of the next generation of Democrats. This election is as make or break for them individually as it is for the party.
They aren't, if Harris and Walz lose Shapiro and Buttigieg are prime contenders to be Dem nominee in 2028 to take on VP Vance.
If Harris wins however she can run again in 2028 and then plenty more governors and senators would be in the frame for 2032 if Harris were re elected and VP Walz declined to run
What struck me as unusual about both Shapiro and Walz is both men wear glasses. The time to back Shapiro for President is when he books himself into the laser clinic.
President George HW Bush wore glasses much of the time too, as did President Truman
Trump spends much of his time making a spectacle of himself.
Labour councillor demands that we “cut all their throats” (he means the far right protestors I think) - he is applauded, then the crowd breaks into Free Free Palestine
Kate Hoey was an MP for 30 years and is currently a member of the House of Lords. How can she pretend not to know this stuff?
That is extraordinary. One of the excellent features of the HoL is that its members have a voice but are not required to talk populist nonsense for fear of the dimmer voters.
Catalan police have launched an operation to find and arrest Carles Puigdemont after the fugitive former regional president returned to Spain for the first time in seven years to address a crowd of several thousand in Barcelona before disappearing again.
Speaking on a stage at the Arc de Triomf, symbolically close to the law courts and the Catalan parliament, he told the crowd of mainly older supporters: “I’ve come here today to remind you that we’re still here. We don’t have the right to give in, the right to self-determination belongs to the people. Catalonia must be allowed to decide its future.
“I don’t know when I’ll see you again but, whatever happens, when we see each other again we can once again shout out Viva! Free Catalonia!”
Puigdemont was then whisked away, surrounded by members of his Together for Catalonia party, in the direction of the parliament building. However, when the group arrived at parliament, he was not among them.
Catalan police are stopping and searching vehicles heading towards the French border and there are traffic controls around the city centre following reports that Puigdemont was seen leaving in a car.
The chancellor, Rachel Reeves, met the bosses of Canada’s big retirement schemes in Toronto on Wednesday, prompting speculation that Labour is planning to bring the country’s public pension model to the UK.
Thames Water is a third owned by Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement Scheme.
Everyone seems to quote that figure but I always think the more relevant one would be "what percentage of OMARS total assets is their Thames Water investment?". It makes a massive difference whether TW is 10%, 1% or 0.1% of the fund (one end being "what were they thinking" mismanagement and the other being "unsurprising they have some money spread around more risky investments"), whereas it doesn't really make much difference to the fund whether they owned 30% or 3% of Thames Water -- they had to write off their investment earlier this year either way.
OMARS wrote down the full value of its stake in Thames’s parent company in May - essentially nil value as an asset.
Kate Hoey was an MP for 30 years and is currently a member of the House of Lords. How can she pretend not to know this stuff?
That is extraordinary. One of the excellent features of the HoL is that its members have a voice but are not required to talk populist nonsense for fear of the dimmer voters.
One of its less excellent features is that many of its denizens spent their previous career doing precisely that.
Kate Hoey was an MP for 30 years and is currently a member of the House of Lords. How can she pretend not to know this stuff?
Pretty sure she does know this stuff but wants to keep the 2 tier Keir thing going. Last night would have been a massive disappointment to Hoey as the people who want their country didn’t make double figures in most places.
I was reading Warship 2024 in bed last night as one does. One piece was an interesting review of the development of the RN Fisheries Squadrons, very much on the hind teat on the whole. The run down in the big long range fishing fleet happened early - basically started with the 1950s changes in economic zones and the Icelanders and Norwegians getting their seas back so to speak, well before UK joining the CM. By the 2010s and 2020s HMG evidently couldn't be arsed to do much to protect what was left, as they reckoned the induistry was so pathetically trivial* and it was more important to do other things.. Hence wholesale disposals and sending the remaining supposed fishery protection ships all over the globe as if it was Drake and Anson and Cook time again. Also crap privatisation contracts rather than reusing the excellent in house design they had.
Certainly put Hoey's noises before and after Brexit into a new context. Not to mention those of her Tory allies, some in those same governments.
Also that in many cases "fishery protection" meant bullying other people's fishery protectors. As in cod wars. Some interesting stuff on the damage done to RN ships (ansd their crews) which had better things to do than bash around in those wars. Much done by Neptune and Aeolus, never mind the Icelander coastguard boats with their ice-reinforced structures.
*noit something I agree with, for reasons of food security and environmental maintenance.
I disagree with the header. I don't think it's a 50/50 race anymore.
At the moment, it's between a narrow win and a big win.
I think I am still scarred by 2016.
I realised over the weekend I am more emotionally invested in the 2024 US Presidential election than I have ever been in any UK general election or Brexit referendum/Scottish independence referendum and I was pretty emotionally invested in the those too.
Whilst I understand the point, and your investment is shared by many on PB, it is another example of people living on the Internet instead of on the ground. Unless you have plans you have not announced, you live in the UK and do not plan to move to the US. The activities of the UK govt will affect you a lot more than any US govt, regardless of its greater magnitude. Yet Trump v Harris matters more to you (and most of PB) emotionally.
I’ve got friends in America.
I think Trump withdrawing from NATO/selling out Ukraine will do more damage to the UK than anything Starmer will manage.
Heck the same applies to Trump’s tariffs.
While not advisable at most Trump would do a peace deal with Putin and tell Zelensky to give Russia the land they now still occupy in Ukraine. Given for most of the last 100 years Ukraine was part of the USSR anyway it wouldn't be a massive issue for the UK though obviously not great for Ukranians self determination and freedom.
Trump's tariffs would be focused at China and the EU rather than the UK, not sure we would want a trade deal with him though now as even if offered it would be US biased
Kate Hoey was an MP for 30 years and is currently a member of the House of Lords. How can she pretend not to know this stuff?
Sometimes people can be really thick.
Kate Hoey does have half a point, though, since the trial will not start until next year, and many lesser crimes will see longer delays.
For prosecution and defence to prepare properly for a trial in which a 'whole life' order is a major prospect, and where mental states may be crucial to the nature of the defence is going to take time, as is the mere preparation of forensic evidence and all that. Every eventuality has to be covered even though to the uninformed mind it may seem simple and cut and dried. Add to that thata lot of the potential witnesses are aged about 7.
Kate Hoey was an MP for 30 years and is currently a member of the House of Lords. How can she pretend not to know this stuff?
That is extraordinary. One of the excellent features of the HoL is that its members have a voice but are not required to talk populist nonsense for fear of the dimmer voters.
I always thought the HoL needed a few idiots to fill in the role of the village idiot. Hoey seems to have decided to perform that task..
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
There's one specialist in Edinburgh, but I have rather too many books for that to be convenient, so your post may turn out to be a lifesaver!
I've got rather a lot of inherited books to lose, too, but I'm really not keen on Oxfam.
Anyone want a collection of political biographies? Most of them were probably remaindered immediately.
Or a large collection of 1950/60s? pulp fiction (John Creasey, Ian Fleming et al)?
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
There's one specialist in Edinburgh, but I have rather too many books for that to be convenient, so your post may turn out to be a lifesaver!
I've got rather a lot of inherited books to lose, too, but I'm really not keen on Oxfam.
Anyone want a collection of political biographies? Most of them were probably remaindered immediately.
Or a large collection of 1950/60s? pulp fiction (John Creasey, Ian Fleming et al)?
Probably all destined for recycling, I suppose.
Pulps are a HUGE collecting field now. Check out eBay. Fleming especially should do well.
Quite a startling statistic deep in the YouGov polling on all the recent troubles. The British people rightly abhor the riots and violence - lock ‘em up - but they are much more sympathetic on the sentiments behind the initial and peaceful Southport protests
“Sympathies with the views of those taking part in the protests are somewhat broader – six in ten Britons (58%) say they have a great deal or fair amount of sympathy for the views of those peacefully taking part in demonstrations that were ostensibly triggered by the Southport murders. This includes majorities of Labour and Lib Dem voters (53-56%), as well as two-thirds of Conservatives (64%), with Reform voters are most sympathetic at 83%.”
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
Certainly with fertility rates now below replacement level in the UK and USA
Sadly, reproductive services are something that the NHS have all but abandoned.
Technically, they still aim to offer three cycles to under-40s, and one to those aged 40 and 41 - but in most of the country are nowhere close to achieving this. The usual pattern is to mange the problem by delaying long enough that people age out of eligibility, so if you're in your mid 30s they'll drag it out so you get one cycle at 38 or 39, and another a couple of years later. And that's only if you're very persistent.
In reality, most people on average need around four cycles, with some trying up to six before giving up. Each cycle typically costs around £10k.
Fertility rapidly declines once you hit your late 20s, but as a society we've set ourselves up so that people are unable to even consider having children until a decade later. So we're effectively expecting people to pay £20k or so on average to be able to have children, and that's before you even get on to the nightmarish situation that NHS maternity services are in.
Agreed, though there is the freezing eggs option too.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
Egg-freezing is £20k and only works about half the time. It's also less likely to be covered by private health insurance than IVF, though some employers do explicitly fund it separately.
As for it being a lifestyle choice, I think it's a bit stronger than that. It's a choice between building your career, being able to rent a flat by yourself, and generally having a stable life that you control before getting pregnant - or having kids in your 20s, and hoping that the state will provide an adequate safety net if things go wrong.
Not many people trust that safety net these days, and I don't think it's fair to blame them for that.
As with so much else, the best way to fix this would be to ease the pressure on housing. If the best a 20-something at the start of a professional career can expect is to live in a houseshare for the next decade, then is it any wonder why they're not settling down and having kids?
Absolutely!
And this is another reason why too everyone who is working ought to be able to afford a home of their own, from their own efforts, with no inheritance in their twenties as was achievable in the past and could be again if the prices were more appropriate.
An inheritance if you get one (and many won't) is likely to come in your sixties or later nowadays and won't get you on the housing ladder in your twenties.
Most people rented 100 years ago, they still managed to have children in their 20s
'Managed' is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
Society was organised entirely differently, and there were little to no reliable forms of contraception.
I am staggered by those who stagger through life waiting for an inheritance.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
Certainly with fertility rates now below replacement level in the UK and USA
Sadly, reproductive services are something that the NHS have all but abandoned.
Technically, they still aim to offer three cycles to under-40s, and one to those aged 40 and 41 - but in most of the country are nowhere close to achieving this. The usual pattern is to mange the problem by delaying long enough that people age out of eligibility, so if you're in your mid 30s they'll drag it out so you get one cycle at 38 or 39, and another a couple of years later. And that's only if you're very persistent.
In reality, most people on average need around four cycles, with some trying up to six before giving up. Each cycle typically costs around £10k.
Fertility rapidly declines once you hit your late 20s, but as a society we've set ourselves up so that people are unable to even consider having children until a decade later. So we're effectively expecting people to pay £20k or so on average to be able to have children, and that's before you even get on to the nightmarish situation that NHS maternity services are in.
Agreed, though there is the freezing eggs option too.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
Egg-freezing is £20k and only works about half the time. It's also less likely to be covered by private health insurance than IVF, though some employers do explicitly fund it separately.
As for it being a lifestyle choice, I think it's a bit stronger than that. It's a choice between building your career, being able to rent a flat by yourself, and generally having a stable life that you control before getting pregnant - or having kids in your 20s, and hoping that the state will provide an adequate safety net if things go wrong.
Not many people trust that safety net these days, and I don't think it's fair to blame them for that.
As with so much else, the best way to fix this would be to ease the pressure on housing. If the best a 20-something at the start of a professional career can expect is to live in a houseshare for the next decade, then is it any wonder why they're not settling down and having kids?
Absolutely!
And this is another reason why too everyone who is working ought to be able to afford a home of their own, from their own efforts, with no inheritance in their twenties as was achievable in the past and could be again if the prices were more appropriate.
An inheritance if you get one (and many won't) is likely to come in your sixties or later nowadays and won't get you on the housing ladder in your twenties.
Most people rented 100 years ago, they still managed to have children in their 20s
'Managed' is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
Society was organised entirely differently, and there were little to no reliable forms of contraception.
I am staggered by those who stagger through life waiting for an inheritance.
You have little choice if you live down south and 40% of your take home pay gets you a room in a shared house...
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
Certainly with fertility rates now below replacement level in the UK and USA
Sadly, reproductive services are something that the NHS have all but abandoned.
Technically, they still aim to offer three cycles to under-40s, and one to those aged 40 and 41 - but in most of the country are nowhere close to achieving this. The usual pattern is to mange the problem by delaying long enough that people age out of eligibility, so if you're in your mid 30s they'll drag it out so you get one cycle at 38 or 39, and another a couple of years later. And that's only if you're very persistent.
In reality, most people on average need around four cycles, with some trying up to six before giving up. Each cycle typically costs around £10k.
Fertility rapidly declines once you hit your late 20s, but as a society we've set ourselves up so that people are unable to even consider having children until a decade later. So we're effectively expecting people to pay £20k or so on average to be able to have children, and that's before you even get on to the nightmarish situation that NHS maternity services are in.
Agreed, though there is the freezing eggs option too.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
Egg-freezing is £20k and only works about half the time. It's also less likely to be covered by private health insurance than IVF, though some employers do explicitly fund it separately.
As for it being a lifestyle choice, I think it's a bit stronger than that. It's a choice between building your career, being able to rent a flat by yourself, and generally having a stable life that you control before getting pregnant - or having kids in your 20s, and hoping that the state will provide an adequate safety net if things go wrong.
Not many people trust that safety net these days, and I don't think it's fair to blame them for that.
As with so much else, the best way to fix this would be to ease the pressure on housing. If the best a 20-something at the start of a professional career can expect is to live in a houseshare for the next decade, then is it any wonder why they're not settling down and having kids?
Absolutely!
And this is another reason why too everyone who is working ought to be able to afford a home of their own, from their own efforts, with no inheritance in their twenties as was achievable in the past and could be again if the prices were more appropriate.
An inheritance if you get one (and many won't) is likely to come in your sixties or later nowadays and won't get you on the housing ladder in your twenties.
Most people rented 100 years ago, they still managed to have children in their 20s
'Managed' is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
Society was organised entirely differently, and there were little to no reliable forms of contraception.
I am staggered by those who stagger through life waiting for an inheritance.
On HYUFD's logic, we should increase IHT quite happily - and certainly abolish the house-to-direct-children pampering. Most people didn't pay IHT then.
Quite a startling statistic deep in the YouGov polling on all the recent troubles. The British people rightly abhor the riots and violence - lock ‘em up - but they are much more sympathetic on the sentiments behind the initial and peaceful Southport protests
“Sympathies with the views of those taking part in the protests are somewhat broader – six in ten Britons (58%) say they have a great deal or fair amount of sympathy for the views of those peacefully taking part in demonstrations that were ostensibly triggered by the Southport murders. This includes majorities of Labour and Lib Dem voters (53-56%), as well as two-thirds of Conservatives (64%), with Reform voters are most sympathetic at 83%.”
Kate Hoey was an MP for 30 years and is currently a member of the House of Lords. How can she pretend not to know this stuff?
Sometimes people can be really thick.
Kate Hoey does have half a point, though, since the trial will not start until next year, and many lesser crimes will see longer delays.
For prosecution and defence to prepare properly for a trial in which a 'whole life' order is a major prospect, and where mental states may be crucial to the nature of the defence is going to take time, as is the mere preparation of forensic evidence and all that. Every eventuality has to be covered even though to the uninformed mind it may seem simple and cut and dried. Add to that thata lot of the potential witnesses are aged about 7.
I am not sure what the prosecution and defence can do in a year that they can't do in the space of weeks. If justice can be (rightly) sped up for rioters, there's no reason why the same cannot happen to this murder trial.
I disagree with the header. I don't think it's a 50/50 race anymore.
At the moment, it's between a narrow win and a big win.
I think I am still scarred by 2016.
I realised over the weekend I am more emotionally invested in the 2024 US Presidential election than I have ever been in any UK general election or Brexit referendum/Scottish independence referendum and I was pretty emotionally invested in the those too.
Whilst I understand the point, and your investment is shared by many on PB, it is another example of people living on the Internet instead of on the ground. Unless you have plans you have not announced, you live in the UK and do not plan to move to the US. The activities of the UK govt will affect you a lot more than any US govt, regardless of its greater magnitude. Yet Trump v Harris matters more to you (and most of PB) emotionally.
I’ve got friends in America.
I think Trump withdrawing from NATO/selling out Ukraine will do more damage to the UK than anything Starmer will manage.
Heck the same applies to Trump’s tariffs.
While not advisable at most Trump would do a peace deal with Putin and tell Zelensky to give Russia the land they now still occupy in Ukraine. Given for most of the last 100 years Ukraine was part of the USSR anyway it wouldn't be a massive issue for the UK though obviously not great for Ukranians self determination and freedom.
Trump's tariffs would be focused at China and the EU rather than the UK, not sure we would want a trade deal with him though now as even if offered it would be US biased
Trump's stated policy is to put a 10% tariff on all imports, including imports from the UK. I expect the UK would reciprocate, and there would just be less US-UK trade.
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
There's one specialist in Edinburgh, but I have rather too many books for that to be convenient, so your post may turn out to be a lifesaver!
I've got rather a lot of inherited books to lose, too, but I'm really not keen on Oxfam.
Anyone want a collection of political biographies? Most of them were probably remaindered immediately.
Or a large collection of 1950/60s? pulp fiction (John Creasey, Ian Fleming et al)?
Probably all destined for recycling, I suppose.
I think a fair amount of second hand books donated to charity shops end up being sold on to online outfits that have the scale to sell unpopular books to the rare people who want them. You might be able to sell to them directly.
One such outfit in Ireland will buy books via ziffit.com - might be worth a try.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
Suggesting the utterly charming Hope Walz has taken up the job of a hit man.
Nobody is this wholesome, he must have some kind of dark secret.
He puts pineapples on his pizza.
What is your opinion of pineapple fritters?
Never heard of them until today, I shall have to investigate.
You have them as a side with fish and chips.
They are deep-fried pineapple rings.
Known to every true Yorkshireman. I claim.
You're in for a treat - they're delicious. They are (imo) a dessert item though, so not as sacreligious as being added to a pizza.
True. But as a dessert I'd recommend with maple syrup, as one would for a dessert Yorkshire pudding - although that works really well with sweet-n-sour such as Blackberry Vinegar.
That sounds delicious. On the rare occasion I have them (cannot remember the last time) it's been with vanilla ice cream.
I have the biggest blackberry bush in the world in my back garden - a Himalayan Giant.
I've been back out this year for the first time for some time, and I find it's grown a companion or two.
The thing with Yorkshires (and frozen Yorkshires from Aldi work really well air-fried) is to do three extra for dessert. Really a Yorkshire is just an inflated (hopefully) pancake.
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
There's one specialist in Edinburgh, but I have rather too many books for that to be convenient, so your post may turn out to be a lifesaver!
I've got rather a lot of inherited books to lose, too, but I'm really not keen on Oxfam.
Anyone want a collection of political biographies? Most of them were probably remaindered immediately.
Or a large collection of 1950/60s? pulp fiction (John Creasey, Ian Fleming et al)?
Probably all destined for recycling, I suppose.
Didn't one of our PBers open a second hand bookshop ?
Kate Hoey was an MP for 30 years and is currently a member of the House of Lords. How can she pretend not to know this stuff?
Sometimes people can be really thick.
Kate Hoey does have half a point, though, since the trial will not start until next year, and many lesser crimes will see longer delays.
For prosecution and defence to prepare properly for a trial in which a 'whole life' order is a major prospect, and where mental states may be crucial to the nature of the defence is going to take time, as is the mere preparation of forensic evidence and all that. Every eventuality has to be covered even though to the uninformed mind it may seem simple and cut and dried. Add to that thata lot of the potential witnesses are aged about 7.
I am not sure what the prosecution and defence can do in a year that they can't do in the space of weeks. If justice can be (rightly) sped up for rioters, there's no reason why the same cannot happen to this murder trial.
I disagree. There is nothing to be gained from rushing such a serious crime.
Locking up rioters asap helps send a message to anyone else thinking of doing it. Thankfully, I don't think too many are thinking of copying the Southport stabber.
Kate Hoey was an MP for 30 years and is currently a member of the House of Lords. How can she pretend not to know this stuff?
Sometimes people can be really thick.
Kate Hoey does have half a point, though, since the trial will not start until next year, and many lesser crimes will see longer delays.
For prosecution and defence to prepare properly for a trial in which a 'whole life' order is a major prospect, and where mental states may be crucial to the nature of the defence is going to take time, as is the mere preparation of forensic evidence and all that. Every eventuality has to be covered even though to the uninformed mind it may seem simple and cut and dried. Add to that thata lot of the potential witnesses are aged about 7.
I am not sure what the prosecution and defence can do in a year that they can't do in the space of weeks. If justice can be (rightly) sped up for rioters, there's no reason why the same cannot happen to this murder trial.
I disagree with the header. I don't think it's a 50/50 race anymore.
At the moment, it's between a narrow win and a big win.
I think I am still scarred by 2016.
I realised over the weekend I am more emotionally invested in the 2024 US Presidential election than I have ever been in any UK general election or Brexit referendum/Scottish independence referendum and I was pretty emotionally invested in the those too.
Whilst I understand the point, and your investment is shared by many on PB, it is another example of people living on the Internet instead of on the ground. Unless you have plans you have not announced, you live in the UK and do not plan to move to the US. The activities of the UK govt will affect you a lot more than any US govt, regardless of its greater magnitude. Yet Trump v Harris matters more to you (and most of PB) emotionally.
I’ve got friends in America.
I think Trump withdrawing from NATO/selling out Ukraine will do more damage to the UK than anything Starmer will manage.
Heck the same applies to Trump’s tariffs.
Quite: the reason to be concerned (or excited, depending on your point of view) about a Trump victory in 2024 is that it has the potential to upend the entire international order.
If Trump were to impose the proposed tariffs (Smoot-Hawley* part two), it would essentially bring an end to the rules based international order that the world has had since the Second World War.
Now, that might be a positive**, but historically, trade wars have resulted in everyone getting poorer. It seems unlikely this time would be any different. Indeed, the most likely outcome of such behaviour from the US would be retaliatory tariffs on US products, and a general diminution of world trade. Which would be bad.
Ironically, the only people who would benefit from this would probably be the Germans, as tariffs would cause a rush to invest in capital equipment for domestic production. And Germany are the the capital equipment kings of the world. Not great for the German car industry, mind.
* Josh Hawley would, I'm sure, be keen to sponsor such a bill, should Trump ask it of him. I don't believe there is a Smoot in either the House of Representatives or the Senate
** Certainly there are lots of people who are desperate for a shake up, almost irrespective of what said shake up is
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
There's one specialist in Edinburgh, but I have rather too many books for that to be convenient, so your post may turn out to be a lifesaver!
I've got rather a lot of inherited books to lose, too, but I'm really not keen on Oxfam.
Anyone want a collection of political biographies? Most of them were probably remaindered immediately.
Or a large collection of 1950/60s? pulp fiction (John Creasey, Ian Fleming et al)?
Probably all destined for recycling, I suppose.
Pulps are a HUGE collecting field now. Check out eBay. Fleming especially should do well.
Many thanks, I will.
Sadly the Flemings aren't in great nick because they've had more than one person read them, but the rest are pretty good. I shall have to check the dates.
I suspect my grandfather must have had a book club subscription to collect quite so many.
If they are worth something, I'll have to put the proceeds towards a first edition New Naturalist 71 (which is the only one I don't have in hardback). They look good on the shelf if nothing else...
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
There's one specialist in Edinburgh, but I have rather too many books for that to be convenient, so your post may turn out to be a lifesaver!
I've got rather a lot of inherited books to lose, too, but I'm really not keen on Oxfam.
Anyone want a collection of political biographies? Most of them were probably remaindered immediately.
Or a large collection of 1950/60s? pulp fiction (John Creasey, Ian Fleming et al)?
Probably all destined for recycling, I suppose.
Didn't one of our PBers open a second hand bookshop ?
Quite a startling statistic deep in the YouGov polling on all the recent troubles. The British people rightly abhor the riots and violence - lock ‘em up - but they are much more sympathetic on the sentiments behind the initial and peaceful Southport protests
“Sympathies with the views of those taking part in the protests are somewhat broader – six in ten Britons (58%) say they have a great deal or fair amount of sympathy for the views of those peacefully taking part in demonstrations that were ostensibly triggered by the Southport murders. This includes majorities of Labour and Lib Dem voters (53-56%), as well as two-thirds of Conservatives (64%), with Reform voters are most sympathetic at 83%.”
Labour councillor demands that we “cut all their throats” (he means the far right protestors I think) - he is applauded, then the crowd breaks into Free Free Palestine
This game is tiresome. Does the source matter if the video is real? It seems real to me
Actually I think it does matter - very much. Vidoes are cropped and manipulated for social media, often as a tactic to generate polarisation / reaction for those who want to trade off it. And the first check is "where is this from? what is this source doing?". Then qs such as "is this representative of what happened?" and the rest.
I'm seeing quite a lot of this in Lee Anderson's FB group. "I agree with this" type of reactions with little reflection as to where it leads. It's like an online marketing funnel in some ways.
Given that Mayhar Tousi is a prominent Right / Far Right Youtuber trying to look mainstream, and that a tactic being used by the Farage -> Robinson tendency is to platform ethnic minority spokespeople, I think it especially applies here.
One example I can point to from the other side is the two black athletes who were stopped in their car in London a couple of years by police, allegations of racial profiling, deliberate targeting, dragging out of vehicle etc following. The videoclips which were all over media were clipped to exclude that the couple in the car spent quite some time before they exited the car - so that was context removed from the police actions.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
Certainly with fertility rates now below replacement level in the UK and USA
Sadly, reproductive services are something that the NHS have all but abandoned.
Technically, they still aim to offer three cycles to under-40s, and one to those aged 40 and 41 - but in most of the country are nowhere close to achieving this. The usual pattern is to mange the problem by delaying long enough that people age out of eligibility, so if you're in your mid 30s they'll drag it out so you get one cycle at 38 or 39, and another a couple of years later. And that's only if you're very persistent.
In reality, most people on average need around four cycles, with some trying up to six before giving up. Each cycle typically costs around £10k.
Fertility rapidly declines once you hit your late 20s, but as a society we've set ourselves up so that people are unable to even consider having children until a decade later. So we're effectively expecting people to pay £20k or so on average to be able to have children, and that's before you even get on to the nightmarish situation that NHS maternity services are in.
Agreed, though there is the freezing eggs option too.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
Egg-freezing is £20k and only works about half the time. It's also less likely to be covered by private health insurance than IVF, though some employers do explicitly fund it separately.
As for it being a lifestyle choice, I think it's a bit stronger than that. It's a choice between building your career, being able to rent a flat by yourself, and generally having a stable life that you control before getting pregnant - or having kids in your 20s, and hoping that the state will provide an adequate safety net if things go wrong.
Not many people trust that safety net these days, and I don't think it's fair to blame them for that.
As with so much else, the best way to fix this would be to ease the pressure on housing. If the best a 20-something at the start of a professional career can expect is to live in a houseshare for the next decade, then is it any wonder why they're not settling down and having kids?
Absolutely!
And this is another reason why too everyone who is working ought to be able to afford a home of their own, from their own efforts, with no inheritance in their twenties as was achievable in the past and could be again if the prices were more appropriate.
An inheritance if you get one (and many won't) is likely to come in your sixties or later nowadays and won't get you on the housing ladder in your twenties.
Most people rented 100 years ago, they still managed to have children in their 20s
'Managed' is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
Society was organised entirely differently, and there were little to no reliable forms of contraception.
I am staggered by those who stagger through life waiting for an inheritance.
Inheritance is irrelevant to this argument as it 100 years ago most couples in their 20s rented and did not have an inheritance but still managed to have children.
Of course we could also go Vatican and restrict contraception too, certainly to 20-35 year olds at peak fertility in settled relationships
I think the point about hypothetical polling is really important.
I don't think I quite understand why Harris is polling so much better in reality than in the hypothetical polls. If I'd been forced to guess I might have thought that the hypothetical polls would be wrong because she would poll worse.
One idea I'm considering is that the disconnect between voters' view of reality and political rhetoric has been growing, and this was a rare instance of the politicians reacting to reality as the voters saw it - that Biden was too old for another four years.
The feeling that the politicians get it and are listening is quite exciting in the context of them not doing so, and speaking in some alien language of avoiding gotchas and recycling cliches for so long.
Not convinced it's necessarily going to carry Harris all the way to election day though.
I think the other thing is that Harris has really struggled to make a success of the VP role. I think there are a number of reasons for this and could write about it at length, but broadly these come down to two things: 1. Harris isn’t very good at the folksy stuff and 2. the administration has not used her effectively at all.
She has had to sit there for 3 years and essentially allow her opponents to portray her as useless, clueless, woke, unintelligent and patronising. No wonder her ratings were poor. Hypotheticals would have factored all this in.
The fact is, and I’ve been saying this for some time, Harris isn’t a bad politician. She just needs to play to her strengths. And perhaps being at the top of the ticket and having the platform and agency to do what she wants actually suits her far more than being an understudy. Hence now a lot of people are seeing her and thinking “actually, she’s not anywhere near as bad as she’s been made out to be, maybe I’ll give her a look.”
A final thought - someone seems to finally have told her that her weird, rambling, pseudo-intellectual pronouncements aren’t a great look. I hope that continues.
She was quiet as VP but isn't that just effective politics? There was basically no upside to attracting attention and she didn't know whether her route to the White House would involve a contested primary or not so she didn't know what kind of attention she should attract. An important skill in politics is the ability to STFU.
Labour councillor demands that we “cut all their throats” (he means the far right protestors I think) - he is applauded, then the crowd breaks into Free Free Palestine
This game is tiresome. Does the source matter if the video is real? It seems real to me
Actually I think it does matter - very much. Vidoes are cropped and manipulated for social media, often as a tactic to generate polarisation / reaction for those who want to trade off it. And the first check is "where is this from? what is the source doing?". Then qs such as "is this representative" and the rest.
Given that Mayhar Tousi is a prominent Right / Far Right Youtuber trying to look mainstream, and that a tactic being used by the Farage -> Robinson tendency is to platform ethnic minority spokespeople, I think it especially applies here.
One example I can point to from the other side is the two black athletes who were stopped in their car in London a couple of years by police, allegations of racial profiling, deliberate targeting, dragging out of vehicle etc following. The videoclips which were all over media were clipped to exclude that the couple in the car spent quite some time before they exited the car - so that was context removed from the police actions.
I can’t imagine a context that makes “slit all their throats” not-inciteful?
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
OT while throwing away my books, I've come across Advocates by PB's favourite lawyer, David Pannick, before he became a lord. £15 hardback in 1992, shortly to start its slow journey to the council tip.
Don't throw away books, there'll always be someone interested in them. Support second-hand bookshops.
Sadly, there aren't. It's not just me, friends report charity bookshops were not even interested in signed copies. The old ecosystem where prolific readers used charity shops as a lending library are gone, as have the dedicated second hand bookshops of Bloomsbury and Charing Cross Road.
Most of my books are out-of-date tech books whose information is readily available online. The rest, well, it's possible I might get the odd nibble from Ebay but the hassle of listing them all, and then having to pack and post them when it's not a full-time hobby, is disproportionate.
But it is sad and frustrating, which is why it is taking so long as I stop to ponder each volume. I'm not a barrister so why buy Advocates more than 30 years ago? I can only assume Pannick had been on television or in the news around that time.
Been finding that too with clearing relatives' houses and doing the usual 60-something clearout post retirement. Certainly for ordinary charity shops, though the specialist charity bookshops in Edinburgh have been better (not much use to you). In the end we simply dumped our unwanted books to add to those in a deceased relative's house which we were getting a charity with a specialist furniture shop to clear - they have a specialist bookshop as well. That way we got the books cleared.
I don't know what it is. Booklovers dying off? Houses too small these days?
But obsolete editions of tech books can go into the recycling bin (not tip) without any compunction.
In England the people best set up to do it are Oxfam; they have various online outlets including rare and collectible books *
They also have a recycling plant in Wakefield or Huddersfield or similar for the processing. Not my favourite charity, but that's where they'd go as I can deliver to a local charity shop without pfaff.
They also have a specific emphasis on text books, which may be sent to developing countries.
National Trust are also surprisingly big in secondhand books at larger properties. Mine (NT top 20 300k visitors) has snack truck, mini-nursery, cafe, restaurant, NT shop, 2nd hand bookshop.
* For posh-nosh gobbling but uncivilised PBers they currently have a First Edition of The Gentleman's Table Guide by E. Ricket and C. Thomas (1871) for £3500.
Interesting! I see they also have free courier (from local dropoff) if one wants to send them books. That I didn't know, which would be useful for the more academic or specialist stuff.
I can't find a Scottish number, but nationally there are 120 specialist Oxfam bookshops.
There's one specialist in Edinburgh, but I have rather too many books for that to be convenient, so your post may turn out to be a lifesaver!
I've got rather a lot of inherited books to lose, too, but I'm really not keen on Oxfam.
Anyone want a collection of political biographies? Most of them were probably remaindered immediately.
Or a large collection of 1950/60s? pulp fiction (John Creasey, Ian Fleming et al)?
Probably all destined for recycling, I suppose.
Pulps are a HUGE collecting field now. Check out eBay. Fleming especially should do well.
Many thanks, I will.
Sadly the Flemings aren't in great nick because they've had more than one person read them, but the rest are pretty good. I shall have to check the dates.
I suspect my grandfather must have had a book club subscription to collect quite so many.
If they are worth something, I'll have to put the proceeds towards a first edition New Naturalist 71 (which is the only one I don't have in hardback). They look good on the shelf if nothing else...
Worth checking up on how to identify 1st Editions from the fly leaf.
I inherited a load of Biggles paperbacks, and several of them are firsts.
I’ve emotionally gone from being mentally and emotionally reconciled to a Trump win to having hope that Harris actually might do it. Sadly it’s the hope that kills you.
*Raises eyebrows*
Has Governor Walz's daughter taken up a new career?
You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
She’s called Hope and may have become an assassin according to your post…
It wasn’t really worth explaining…
But she is called Hope as she was an IVF baby and somehow the Republicans have managed to put themselves in the position of looking anti-IVF.
I thought they *were* anti-IVF?
I am anti taxpayer-funded IVF.
In the scheme of things I can think of a whole set of items that I object to far more.
Giving a family a chance of children seems to be a noble use of a tiny percentage of what I pay in taxes.
Certainly with fertility rates now below replacement level in the UK and USA
Sadly, reproductive services are something that the NHS have all but abandoned.
Technically, they still aim to offer three cycles to under-40s, and one to those aged 40 and 41 - but in most of the country are nowhere close to achieving this. The usual pattern is to mange the problem by delaying long enough that people age out of eligibility, so if you're in your mid 30s they'll drag it out so you get one cycle at 38 or 39, and another a couple of years later. And that's only if you're very persistent.
In reality, most people on average need around four cycles, with some trying up to six before giving up. Each cycle typically costs around £10k.
Fertility rapidly declines once you hit your late 20s, but as a society we've set ourselves up so that people are unable to even consider having children until a decade later. So we're effectively expecting people to pay £20k or so on average to be able to have children, and that's before you even get on to the nightmarish situation that NHS maternity services are in.
Agreed, though there is the freezing eggs option too.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
Egg-freezing is £20k and only works about half the time. It's also less likely to be covered by private health insurance than IVF, though some employers do explicitly fund it separately.
As for it being a lifestyle choice, I think it's a bit stronger than that. It's a choice between building your career, being able to rent a flat by yourself, and generally having a stable life that you control before getting pregnant - or having kids in your 20s, and hoping that the state will provide an adequate safety net if things go wrong.
Not many people trust that safety net these days, and I don't think it's fair to blame them for that.
As with so much else, the best way to fix this would be to ease the pressure on housing. If the best a 20-something at the start of a professional career can expect is to live in a houseshare for the next decade, then is it any wonder why they're not settling down and having kids?
Absolutely!
And this is another reason why too everyone who is working ought to be able to afford a home of their own, from their own efforts, with no inheritance in their twenties as was achievable in the past and could be again if the prices were more appropriate.
An inheritance if you get one (and many won't) is likely to come in your sixties or later nowadays and won't get you on the housing ladder in your twenties.
Most people rented 100 years ago, they still managed to have children in their 20s
'Managed' is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
Society was organised entirely differently, and there were little to no reliable forms of contraception.
I am staggered by those who stagger through life waiting for an inheritance.
On HYUFD's logic, we should increase IHT quite happily - and certainly abolish the house-to-direct-children pampering. Most people didn't pay IHT then.
No we shouldn't, receiving an inheritance is a big financial boost to those in their late 40s to early 60s, including those with older children. That is one of the benefits of property ownership for families
I disagree with the header. I don't think it's a 50/50 race anymore.
At the moment, it's between a narrow win and a big win.
I think I am still scarred by 2016.
I realised over the weekend I am more emotionally invested in the 2024 US Presidential election than I have ever been in any UK general election or Brexit referendum/Scottish independence referendum and I was pretty emotionally invested in the those too.
Whilst I understand the point, and your investment is shared by many on PB, it is another example of people living on the Internet instead of on the ground. Unless you have plans you have not announced, you live in the UK and do not plan to move to the US. The activities of the UK govt will affect you a lot more than any US govt, regardless of its greater magnitude. Yet Trump v Harris matters more to you (and most of PB) emotionally.
I’ve got friends in America.
I think Trump withdrawing from NATO/selling out Ukraine will do more damage to the UK than anything Starmer will manage.
Heck the same applies to Trump’s tariffs.
While not advisable at most Trump would do a peace deal with Putin and tell Zelensky to give Russia the land they now still occupy in Ukraine. Given for most of the last 100 years Ukraine was part of the USSR anyway it wouldn't be a massive issue for the UK though obviously not great for Ukranians self determination and freedom.
Trump's tariffs would be focused at China and the EU rather than the UK, not sure we would want a trade deal with him though now as even if offered it would be US biased
Trump's proposal is for
(a) Tariffs that are at least 10% for all products entering the US, irrespective of where they come from (b) Plus, in the event that any country were to respond with higher tariffs on US goods, then the US would match them and (c) A 60% tariff on all goods from China
That's a lot of tariffs. And a lot less international trade.
I disagree with the header. I don't think it's a 50/50 race anymore.
At the moment, it's between a narrow win and a big win.
I think I am still scarred by 2016.
I realised over the weekend I am more emotionally invested in the 2024 US Presidential election than I have ever been in any UK general election or Brexit referendum/Scottish independence referendum and I was pretty emotionally invested in the those too.
Whilst I understand the point, and your investment is shared by many on PB, it is another example of people living on the Internet instead of on the ground. Unless you have plans you have not announced, you live in the UK and do not plan to move to the US. The activities of the UK govt will affect you a lot more than any US govt, regardless of its greater magnitude. Yet Trump v Harris matters more to you (and most of PB) emotionally.
I’ve got friends in America.
I think Trump withdrawing from NATO/selling out Ukraine will do more damage to the UK than anything Starmer will manage.
Heck the same applies to Trump’s tariffs.
While not advisable at most Trump would do a peace deal with Putin and tell Zelensky to give Russia the land they now still occupy in Ukraine. Given for most of the last 100 years Ukraine was part of the USSR anyway it wouldn't be a massive issue for the UK though obviously not great for Ukranians self determination and freedom.
Trump's tariffs would be focused at China and the EU rather than the UK, not sure we would want a trade deal with him though now as even if offered it would be US biased
Trump's proposal is for
(a) Tariffs that are at least 10% for all products entering the US, irrespective of where they come from (b) Plus, in the event that any country were to respond with higher tariffs on US goods, then the US would match them and (c) A 60% tariff on all goods from China
That's a lot of tariffs. And a lot less international trade.
The 60% tariff would crush international trade. US imports from China are enormous. In 2023 the US imported Chinese goods and services worth $450 BILLION
I disagree with the header. I don't think it's a 50/50 race anymore.
At the moment, it's between a narrow win and a big win.
I think I am still scarred by 2016.
I realised over the weekend I am more emotionally invested in the 2024 US Presidential election than I have ever been in any UK general election or Brexit referendum/Scottish independence referendum and I was pretty emotionally invested in the those too.
Whilst I understand the point, and your investment is shared by many on PB, it is another example of people living on the Internet instead of on the ground. Unless you have plans you have not announced, you live in the UK and do not plan to move to the US. The activities of the UK govt will affect you a lot more than any US govt, regardless of its greater magnitude. Yet Trump v Harris matters more to you (and most of PB) emotionally.
I’ve got friends in America.
I think Trump withdrawing from NATO/selling out Ukraine will do more damage to the UK than anything Starmer will manage.
Heck the same applies to Trump’s tariffs.
While not advisable at most Trump would do a peace deal with Putin and tell Zelensky to give Russia the land they now still occupy in Ukraine. Given for most of the last 100 years Ukraine was part of the USSR anyway it wouldn't be a massive issue for the UK though obviously not great for Ukranians self determination and freedom.
Trump's tariffs would be focused at China and the EU rather than the UK, not sure we would want a trade deal with him though now as even if offered it would be US biased
Trump's proposal is for
(a) Tariffs that are at least 10% for all products entering the US, irrespective of where they come from (b) Plus, in the event that any country were to respond with higher tariffs on US goods, then the US would match them and (c) A 60% tariff on all goods from China
That's a lot of tariffs. And a lot less international trade.
And a lot of price rises for the working middle classes. The tarrif's gotta come from someone.
Comments
He looks pretty inflated to me.
He has the physique and intellect of Barney Gumble.
Of course in the 1930s there was mass unemployment and most people of all ages rented but yet most 20 to 30 year olds had children and the fertility rate was above average so it is also a lifestyle choice, especially with more women wanting careers and leaving children until their 30s and early 40s if they decide to have them at all
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c134p2k24nzo
"17 July 2024
Robert F Kennedy Jr has apologised after a video was leaked of a private phone call in which Donald Trump is heard apparently trying to coax the independent presidential candidate to support him."
Even if he doesn't pull out, he likely won't get 6% even where he is on the ballot, so should probably still add a point to Trump on the 3-way polling.
Though he would need the army on side to enforce that as well as the SC given the inevitable riots in Democratic cities
Meanwhile, next door Bangladesh is the country with the largest population never to have won a medal.
The Harris campaign devotes 5 whole seconds to a one-liner kneecapping Trump, and Trump is forced to call in to Fox and cry for an hour in response.
https://x.com/acnewsitics/status/1821177749345857667
Now. That seems pretty basic, for a nation of scientists and doctors. Suggesting they haven't got a halfway professional support structure.
https://x.com/todayyearsoldig/status/1821355511045828689
As for it being a lifestyle choice, I think it's a bit stronger than that. It's a choice between building your career, being able to rent a flat by yourself, and generally having a stable life that you control before getting pregnant - or having kids in your 20s, and hoping that the state will provide an adequate safety net if things go wrong.
Not many people trust that safety net these days, and I don't think it's fair to blame them for that.
As with so much else, the best way to fix this would be to ease the pressure on housing. If the best a 20-something at the start of a professional career can expect is to live in a houseshare for the next decade, then is it any wonder why they're not settling down and having kids?
I would rather we didn’t test it out, but I think what is far more likely is we get significant politicisation of the civil service, a distain for convention and a weakening of democratic norms. All of which would be bad enough, but would also set the US on a path to autocracy in the coming years. 2028 wouldn’t necessarily not happen, it’s just the system would have been rather heavily influenced by that point and whoever took over from Trump (perhaps with him sat on their shoulder like Putin/Medvedev) could keep chipping away.
A great thing about the kindle is that it will sync with your kindle apps on iPad and iPhone and also with audible - so you can swap seamlessly between all of them
And kindle on iPad is better when you need vivid colour - eg guide books
And this is another reason why too everyone who is working ought to be able to afford a home of their own, from their own efforts, with no inheritance in their twenties as was achievable in the past and could be again if the prices were more appropriate.
An inheritance if you get one (and many won't) is likely to come in your sixties or later nowadays and won't get you on the housing ladder in your twenties.
https://getintoteaching.education.gov.uk/is-teaching-right-for-me/teacher-pay-and-benefits
I've been back out this year for the first time for some time, and I find it's grown a companion or two.
The thing with Yorkshires (and frozen Yorkshires from Aldi work really well air-fried) is to do three extra for dessert. Really a Yorkshire is just an inflated (hopefully) pancake.
Slagging off the adherents is a different matter.
I'd quite happily say I don't like Christianity and Islam, I would not say that I dislike Christians and Muslims.
Sadly many people are too thick to understand the difference.
I might as well engage my neighbour’s pet rabbit in a debate about eurocommunism, then start angrily hitting it with a carrot when it doesn’t grasp my nuanced point about Antonio Gramsci
I don't think I quite understand why Harris is polling so much better in reality than in the hypothetical polls. If I'd been forced to guess I might have thought that the hypothetical polls would be wrong because she would poll worse.
One idea I'm considering is that the disconnect between voters' view of reality and political rhetoric has been growing, and this was a rare instance of the politicians reacting to reality as the voters saw it - that Biden was too old for another four years.
The feeling that the politicians get it and are listening is quite exciting in the context of them not doing so, and speaking in some alien language of avoiding gotchas and recycling cliches for so long.
Not convinced it's necessarily going to carry Harris all the way to election day though.
So they're now both kept at the bottom of the pay scale for longer, and are more likely to find themselves at the end of a contract at an awkward time when no other schools are hiring - cutting their effective annual income still further.
A small cost saving for the academy chain, but it now means that teachers can't expect to be financially stable until they're in their mid 30s or later.
https://x.com/mahyartousi/status/1821477234428850399?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
Such charming sentiments. I don’t understand why Jewish people feel uncomfortable in these happy crowds
I think Trump withdrawing from NATO/selling out Ukraine will do more damage to the UK than anything Starmer will manage.
Heck the same applies to Trump’s tariffs.
She has had to sit there for 3 years and essentially allow her opponents to portray her as useless, clueless, woke, unintelligent and patronising. No wonder her ratings were poor. Hypotheticals would have factored all this in.
The fact is, and I’ve been saying this for some time, Harris isn’t a bad politician. She just needs to play to her strengths. And perhaps being at the top of the ticket and having the platform and agency to do what she wants actually suits her far more than being an understudy. Hence now a lot of people are seeing her and thinking “actually, she’s not anywhere near as bad as she’s been made out to be, maybe I’ll give her a look.”
A final thought - someone seems to finally have told her that her weird, rambling, pseudo-intellectual pronouncements aren’t a great look. I hope that continues.
Mahyar Tousi being one of the platform speakers at Tommy Robinson's Trafalgar Square rally a week ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FGhEA8aNtg
Catalan police have launched an operation to find and arrest Carles Puigdemont after the fugitive former regional president returned to Spain for the first time in seven years to address a crowd of several thousand in Barcelona before disappearing again.
Speaking on a stage at the Arc de Triomf, symbolically close to the law courts and the Catalan parliament, he told the crowd of mainly older supporters: “I’ve come here today to remind you that we’re still here. We don’t have the right to give in, the right to self-determination belongs to the people. Catalonia must be allowed to decide its future.
“I don’t know when I’ll see you again but, whatever happens, when we see each other again we can once again shout out Viva! Free Catalonia!”
Puigdemont was then whisked away, surrounded by members of his Together for Catalonia party, in the direction of the parliament building. However, when the group arrived at parliament, he was not among them.
Catalan police are stopping and searching vehicles heading towards the French border and there are traffic controls around the city centre following reports that Puigdemont was seen leaving in a car.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/08/catalonia-police-hunt-carlos-puigdemont-spain
Now he has Vance, they are a pair of spectacles.
New study from @FraunhoferISE shows that the LCOE for large scale PV + battery is already way below coal, gas or biomass.
https://x.com/nicolasfulghum/status/1821161845400481839
Doesn't solve the intermittency and seasonal variability problem, of course.
But it does provide a strong economic invective to do so.
Both sentences were the maximum possible under sentencing guidelines before a reduction of 33% for the earliest possible guilty plea...
Certainly put Hoey's noises before and after Brexit into a new context. Not to mention those of her Tory allies, some in those same governments.
Also that in many cases "fishery protection" meant bullying other people's fishery protectors. As in cod wars. Some interesting stuff on the damage done to RN ships (ansd their crews) which had better things to do than bash around in those wars. Much done by Neptune and Aeolus, never mind the Icelander coastguard boats with their ice-reinforced structures.
*noit something I agree with, for reasons of food security and environmental maintenance.
Trump's tariffs would be focused at China and the EU rather than the UK, not sure we would want a trade deal with him though now as even if offered it would be US biased
https://people.com/all-about-tim-walz-kids-8690258
Anyone want a collection of political biographies? Most of them were probably remaindered immediately.
Or a large collection of 1950/60s? pulp fiction (John Creasey, Ian Fleming et al)?
Probably all destined for recycling, I suppose.
“Sympathies with the views of those taking part in the protests are somewhat broader – six in ten Britons (58%) say they have a great deal or fair amount of sympathy for the views of those peacefully taking part in demonstrations that were ostensibly triggered by the Southport murders. This includes majorities of Labour and Lib Dem voters (53-56%), as well as two-thirds of Conservatives (64%), with Reform voters are most sympathetic at 83%.”
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/50257-the-public-reaction-to-the-2024-riots
Society was organised entirely differently, and there were little to no reliable forms of contraception.
I am staggered by those who stagger through life waiting for an inheritance.
On this basis Labour will almost certainly fluff any response to underlying issues relating to immigration and cultural change.
One such outfit in Ireland will buy books via ziffit.com - might be worth a try.
Posted without prejudice or comment.
Locking up rioters asap helps send a message to anyone else thinking of doing it. Thankfully, I don't think too many are thinking of copying the Southport stabber.
If Trump were to impose the proposed tariffs (Smoot-Hawley* part two), it would essentially bring an end to the rules based international order that the world has had since the Second World War.
Now, that might be a positive**, but historically, trade wars have resulted in everyone getting poorer. It seems unlikely this time would be any different. Indeed, the most likely outcome of such behaviour from the US would be retaliatory tariffs on US products, and a general diminution of world trade. Which would be bad.
Ironically, the only people who would benefit from this would probably be the Germans, as tariffs would cause a rush to invest in capital equipment for domestic production. And Germany are the the capital equipment kings of the world. Not great for the German car industry, mind.
* Josh Hawley would, I'm sure, be keen to sponsor such a bill, should Trump ask it of him. I don't believe there is a Smoot in either the House of Representatives or the Senate
** Certainly there are lots of people who are desperate for a shake up, almost irrespective of what said shake up is
Sadly the Flemings aren't in great nick because they've had more than one person read them, but the rest are pretty good. I shall have to check the dates.
I suspect my grandfather must have had a book club subscription to collect quite so many.
If they are worth something, I'll have to put the proceeds towards a first edition New Naturalist 71 (which is the only one I don't have in hardback). They look good on the shelf if nothing else...
ETA was it him or someone else looking for a name?
I'm seeing quite a lot of this in Lee Anderson's FB group. "I agree with this" type of reactions with little reflection as to where it leads. It's like an online marketing funnel in some ways.
Given that Mayhar Tousi is a prominent Right / Far Right Youtuber trying to look mainstream, and that a tactic being used by the Farage -> Robinson tendency is to platform ethnic minority spokespeople, I think it especially applies here.
One example I can point to from the other side is the two black athletes who were stopped in their car in London a couple of years by police, allegations of racial profiling, deliberate targeting, dragging out of vehicle etc following. The videoclips which were all over media were clipped to exclude that the couple in the car spent quite some time before they exited the car - so that was context removed from the police actions.
Of course we could also go Vatican and restrict contraception too, certainly to 20-35 year olds at peak fertility in settled relationships
I inherited a load of Biggles paperbacks, and several of them are firsts.
(a) Tariffs that are at least 10% for all products entering the US, irrespective of where they come from
(b) Plus, in the event that any country were to respond with higher tariffs on US goods, then the US would match them
and
(c) A 60% tariff on all goods from China
That's a lot of tariffs. And a lot less international trade.
Has he thought this through?