Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

So when thumbnails and previews go wrong – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,212
edited September 29 in General
imageSo when thumbnails and previews go wrong – politicalbetting.com

It has been a pleasure to meet so many members on the campaign trail and I'm grateful for all their support. pic.twitter.com/aaBDlYaOmH

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    First like I don't know who in the Trory race
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,399
    Too difficult for me. Jenrick is arguably a centrist, as is Cleverly.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    I'm free to be whatever I
    Whatever I choose, and I'll sing the blues if I want
    I'm free to say whatever I
    Whatever I like, if it's wrong or right, it's alright
  • Tim_in_RuislipTim_in_Ruislip Posts: 435
    edited August 30
    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704

    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
    Nah. Wise Tory heads will not fall for the bait.

    The Tories need to rediscover what they are for rather than raging against everything for oppositions sake and cheap headlines.
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815

    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
    As usual sks has his opponents opposite him in HoC and his enemies behind him. This is about the labour left and the optics of the Kid Starver sitting under a portrait of the Milk Snatcher.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,896
    On the NHS fat inspectors.

    A staple complaint on pb.com has been that Johnson missed an opportunity during the pandemic to encourage the country to get into shape, and that a bit of money spent on prevention would be a lot cheaper than a fortune spent later on treatment.

    I've no idea if what is proposed is the right way to go about things (sounds like it is a screening questionnaire, rather than physical appointments) but it's evidence that someone is asking the right questions and trying something new.

    It's one of the better signs in the early days of Keir.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,946
    Good morning, everyone.

    Looking forward to my tax rebate for having low body fat. Huzzah for Sir Keir's Lipid Inquisition!
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437
    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,277
    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,946
    Mr. Eagles, it'd be interesting considering portrait sizes based on time in office.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,422

    Mr. Eagles, it'd be interesting considering portrait sizes based on time in office.

    “And this miniature is of Liz Truss…”
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942
    mercator said:

    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
    As usual sks has his opponents opposite him in HoC and his enemies behind him. This is about the labour left and the optics of the Kid Starver sitting under a portrait of the Milk Snatcher.
    If you take a step back, Labour are behaving like a competent Conservative government. Fiscally responsible, no increases in taxes (so far...), cuts to universal benefits, neutral position on Gaza, big on law and order.

    They have to give the left something.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437

    Mr. Eagles, it'd be interesting considering portrait sizes based on time in office.

    “And this miniature is of Liz Truss…”
    In which case, you'd need a scanning electron microscope to study Truss's portrait.

    Or alternatively, hang it at the bottom of the Kola Borehole, to represent the hole she left the country in...
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,610

    On the NHS fat inspectors.

    A staple complaint on pb.com has been that Johnson missed an opportunity during the pandemic to encourage the country to get into shape, and that a bit of money spent on prevention would be a lot cheaper than a fortune spent later on treatment.

    I've no idea if what is proposed is the right way to go about things (sounds like it is a screening questionnaire, rather than physical appointments) but it's evidence that someone is asking the right questions and trying something new.

    It's one of the better signs in the early days of Keir.

    Good morning

    As most of you know I have had nearly a year of a health crisis including a large dvt, an aneurism, and in February a pacemaker implanted

    It follows that I have had a long and extensive engagement with the NHS, a haematologist, a cardiologist, a vascular surgeon , as well as numerous visits to my GP practice which will continue indefinitely and on most occasions I have my blood, pulse, and oxygen readings taken as routine

    I expect there will be an outcry over testing in work environments but I do think these simple, possibly life saving, tests should be taken at every available opportunity even in the workplace
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437
    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
    As usual sks has his opponents opposite him in HoC and his enemies behind him. This is about the labour left and the optics of the Kid Starver sitting under a portrait of the Milk Snatcher.
    If you take a step back, Labour are behaving like a competent Conservative government. Fiscally responsible, no increases in taxes (so far...), cuts to universal benefits, neutral position on Gaza, big on law and order.

    They have to give the left something.
    They've given massive pay increases to union members, whilst taking money from poor pensioners.

    What's not for the leftists to like?
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815
    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,173
    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Another one obsessed with Thatcher.
    Is it some kind of national religion ?
    Was Gordon Brown when he commissioned the portrait?
    Pretty well, yes.

    As I noted upthread, Blair and Brown failed to address, let alone reverse, the hollowing out of government; the rejection of industrial strategy; the long term structural problems of the housing market; the economic neglect of the regions.
    Good job we've got the strategic visionary genius Starmer then, eh?
    If he gets house building restarted, benefitting local government in the process, he'll be the first PM in three decades actually to do something about one of Thatcher's great failures.

    Meanwhile you're moaning about a picture.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,173
    Everything about the Trump Arlington story is bananas, but maybe the *most* bananas part was the actual plan itself: to secretly film a fake established memorial event & then claim Harris refused to attend.
    https://x.com/RTodKelly/status/1829158005700735314
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942

    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
    As usual sks has his opponents opposite him in HoC and his enemies behind him. This is about the labour left and the optics of the Kid Starver sitting under a portrait of the Milk Snatcher.
    If you take a step back, Labour are behaving like a competent Conservative government. Fiscally responsible, no increases in taxes (so far...), cuts to universal benefits, neutral position on Gaza, big on law and order.

    They have to give the left something.
    They've given massive pay increases to union members, whilst taking money from poor pensioners.

    What's not for the leftists to like?
    Those pay increases don't even bring the public sector in line with the private sector since the Great Recession, and the whole point of WFP is that it's now means-tested.

    That means-testing is a little too tight, in my view, but you can hardly argue that universal benefits is a what is important to Conservatives. Politically, you're right about public sector pay, but we know from the polling that public services are important to people and a series of strikes into the winter would have sunk any government.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437
    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
  • guybrushguybrush Posts: 257
    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Seems like a really good idea to me; identifying at risk people before they present with a serious issue. Lets save the outraged tabloid headlines for another time.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,268
    Nigelb said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Another one obsessed with Thatcher.
    Is it some kind of national religion ?
    Was Gordon Brown when he commissioned the portrait?
    Pretty well, yes.

    As I noted upthread, Blair and Brown failed to address, let alone reverse, the hollowing out of government; the rejection of industrial strategy; the long term structural problems of the housing market; the economic neglect of the regions.
    Good job we've got the strategic visionary genius Starmer then, eh?
    If he gets house building restarted, benefitting local government in the process, he'll be the first PM in three decades actually to do something about one of Thatcher's great failures.

    Meanwhile you're moaning about a picture.
    It's not Thatcher's failure that we had a huge immigration-driven expansion in the population since she was PM.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942
    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    It's probably in JLR's interest that their workforce is fit and healthy. Think about the enormous expense and loss of human capital for each person who goes off sick, and the loss of productivity when someone has a minor chronic condition.

    We know that sickness is one of the things causing our economy to slow and our public spending to build, so this is exactly the kind of intervention the government needs to make.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    Cameron held an EU referendum to satisfy his right-wing; Starmer has removed a portrait of a PM from 30 years ago to satisfy his equivalent.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
    As usual sks has his opponents opposite him in HoC and his enemies behind him. This is about the labour left and the optics of the Kid Starver sitting under a portrait of the Milk Snatcher.
    If you take a step back, Labour are behaving like a competent Conservative government. Fiscally responsible, no increases in taxes (so far...), cuts to universal benefits, neutral position on Gaza, big on law and order.

    They have to give the left something.
    They've given massive pay increases to union members, whilst taking money from poor pensioners.

    What's not for the leftists to like?
    Those pay increases don't even bring the public sector in line with the private sector since the Great Recession, and the whole point of WFP is that it's now means-tested.

    That means-testing is a little too tight, in my view, but you can hardly argue that universal benefits is a what is important to Conservatives. Politically, you're right about public sector pay, but we know from the polling that public services are important to people and a series of strikes into the winter would have sunk any government.
    I'm not talking for the Conservatives, or about the Conservatives; I'm giving my own view.

    The pensioners' fuel cut will hurt many pensioners, regardless of means-testing. Starmer's Labour have made their priorities very clear: public sector workers can look forward to good times; whilst others can go hang. It was predictable, but Starmer probably thinks his supermajority protects him from the public for a while. He might be right.

    It's still early days, and I'm open to the possibility that Starmer's government(s) will be good for the country. It'll almost certainly be better than the two previous Conservative ones; but that is a low base, and much lower than we need. But these early signs are not good IMV.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709
    Nigelb said:

    Everything about Trump is bananas
    https://x.com/RTodKelly/status/1829158005700735314

    Fixed that for you, Mr Kelly.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,443
    Jonathan said:

    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
    Nah. Wise Tory heads will not fall for the bait.

    The Tories need to rediscover what they are for rather than raging against everything
    for oppositions sake and cheap headlines.
    Outrage about this is quite clever

    It juices up parts of the Tory party, but it’s something they can all unite behind

    It paints Starmer as petty and vindictive (it is the “Thatcher Room” so of course there should be a picture of Thatcher in it!)

    It sets the frame that he is focused on small things that aren’t important rather than tackling big issues

    (Edit: autocorrect wants to change “Tory party” to “Tory pity” 😂)
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,422

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    Indeed.

    And the focus will be on blood pressure, not weight.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,141
    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Checks for the private sector, cheques for the public.
    Etc.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    edited August 30

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    The Tories on PB are increasingly unhinged. If Starmer walked on water they would complain that he was putting deserving boatman out of work.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942
    a
    Foxy said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    The Tories on PB are increasingly unhinged. If Starmer walked on water they would complain that he was putting deserving boatman out of work.
    What was the reaction like to Blair in '97? Similar?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,972
    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    It's probably in JLR's interest that their workforce is fit and healthy. Think about the enormous expense and loss of human capital for each person who goes off sick, and the loss of productivity when someone has a minor chronic condition.

    We know that sickness is one of the things causing our economy to slow and our public spending to build, so this is exactly the kind of intervention the government needs to make.
    If it’s in JLR’s interest, then JLR should be doing it!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    edited August 30

    Eabhal said:

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    Cameron held an EU referendum to satisfy his right-wing; Starmer has removed a portrait of a PM from 30 years ago to satisfy his equivalent.
    Cameron held an EU referendum because the public wanted one; and it could easily be argued that politics needed one. The fact that leave won shows that there was a massive demand; and as Corbyn showed, the demand was not just on the Conservative Party's right wing.

    IMV if we had not had an EU referendum in 2016 we would have either had one by now, or have a very right-wing government that would make Sunak's look like Corbyn's.

    The issue of EU membership was a can that could only be kicked down the road so far.
    So by that logic we should soon have either a Rejoin referendum or a massively pro-remain government.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    If I had to make life and death decisions I'd probably want to do it in an environment that I found conducive.

    It's definitely you that needs to get a grip, he's only taken a picture off a wall in a room that none of us will ever see, he's not thrown the statue of Churchill into the Thames.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942
    edited August 30

    Eabhal said:

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    Cameron held an EU referendum to satisfy his right-wing; Starmer has removed a portrait of a PM from 30 years ago to satisfy his equivalent.
    Cameron held an EU referendum because the public wanted one; and it could easily be argued that politics needed one. The fact that leave won shows that there was a massive demand; and as Corbyn showed, the demand was not just on the Conservative Party's right wing.

    IMV if we had not had an EU referendum in 2016 we would have either had one by now, or have a very right-wing government that would make Sunak's look like Corbyn's.

    The issue of EU membership was a can that could only be kicked down the road so far.
    Oh don't get me wrong, I think holding the referendum was the right thing to do precisely for the reasons you give.

    But Cameron did it to head off the right-wing given his small majority. And I don't think there is any evidence that the country would suddenly swing to the right on the back of not having one, simply because we've had absolutely massive non-EU migration since then and just elected Labour.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437
    Nigelb said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Another one obsessed with Thatcher.
    Is it some kind of national religion ?
    Was Gordon Brown when he commissioned the portrait?
    Pretty well, yes.

    As I noted upthread, Blair and Brown failed to address, let alone reverse, the hollowing out of government; the rejection of industrial strategy; the long term structural problems of the housing market; the economic neglect of the regions.
    Good job we've got the strategic visionary genius Starmer then, eh?
    If he gets house building restarted, benefitting local government in the process, he'll be the first PM in three decades actually to do something about one of Thatcher's great failures.

    Meanwhile you're moaning about a picture.
    That 'if' is doing a heck of a lot of heavy lifting.

    And I have to repeat myself: it's not just about building houses; it's about building communities. And also note that build quality also needs to be addressed: something I've been harping on about on here for years.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942
    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    It's probably in JLR's interest that their workforce is fit and healthy. Think about the enormous expense and loss of human capital for each person who goes off sick, and the loss of productivity when someone has a minor chronic condition.

    We know that sickness is one of the things causing our economy to slow and our public spending to build, so this is exactly the kind of intervention the government needs to make.
    If it’s in JLR’s interest, then JLR should be doing it!
    They probably already are. My employer is pretty keen on occupational health, pushing the C2W scheme, cheap gym membership, healthy food in the office and so on.

    That's why the outrage over this is a bit silly.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,974

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    Eabhal said:

    a

    Foxy said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    The Tories on PB are increasingly unhinged. If Starmer walked on water they would complain that he was putting deserving boatman out of work.
    What was the reaction like to Blair in '97? Similar?
    No, there was more relief and joy at the ending of the floundering Major government. There was a lot more to be positive about.

    Starmer needs to be a bit more positive. People will put up with hard times if they see some purpose and better times ahead. It's too negative to keep blaming the previous government, even when completely correct as to the run down finances, failing public services and lacklustre economy that they have inherited.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    Cameron held an EU referendum to satisfy his right-wing; Starmer has removed a portrait of a PM from 30 years ago to satisfy his equivalent.
    Cameron held an EU referendum because the public wanted one; and it could easily be argued that politics needed one. The fact that leave won shows that there was a massive demand; and as Corbyn showed, the demand was not just on the Conservative Party's right wing.

    IMV if we had not had an EU referendum in 2016 we would have either had one by now, or have a very right-wing government that would make Sunak's look like Corbyn's.

    The issue of EU membership was a can that could only be kicked down the road so far.
    Oh don't get me wrong, I think holding the referendum was the right thing to do precisely for the reasons you give.

    But Cameron did it to head off the right-wing given his small majority. And I don't think there is any evidence that the country would suddenly swing to the right on the back of not having one, simply because we've had absolutely massive non-EU migration since then and just elected Labour.
    So putting on your alternative-history hat, how do you think politics would have unrolled had Cameron not held an EU referendum in 2016? Do you think Farage and UKIP would have said: "Oh, that's okay!" and disappeared?
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,974
    Foxy said:

    Eabhal said:

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    Cameron held an EU referendum to satisfy his right-wing; Starmer has removed a portrait of a PM from 30 years ago to satisfy his equivalent.
    Cameron held an EU referendum because the public wanted one; and it could easily be argued that politics needed one. The fact that leave won shows that there was a massive demand; and as Corbyn showed, the demand was not just on the Conservative Party's right wing.

    IMV if we had not had an EU referendum in 2016 we would have either had one by now, or have a very right-wing government that would make Sunak's look like Corbyn's.

    The issue of EU membership was a can that could only be kicked down the road so far.
    So by that logic we should soon have either a Rejoin referendum of a massively pro-remain government.
    You really think the public wants to re-open that debate?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,972
    Eabhal said:

    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    It's probably in JLR's interest that their workforce is fit and healthy. Think about the enormous expense and loss of human capital for each person who goes off sick, and the loss of productivity when someone has a minor chronic condition.

    We know that sickness is one of the things causing our economy to slow and our public spending to build, so this is exactly the kind of intervention the government needs to make.
    If it’s in JLR’s interest, then JLR should be doing it!
    They probably already are. My employer is pretty keen on occupational health, pushing the C2W scheme, cheap gym membership, healthy food in the office and so on.

    That's why the outrage over this is a bit silly.
    There’s no point in the government doing this with a select handful of large employers who are likely doing something awfully similar anyway.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,946
    Mr. Jessop, the can-kicking (particular Labour reneging on the Lisbon referendum) is something that tipped the scales, I think.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    Cameron held an EU referendum to satisfy his right-wing; Starmer has removed a portrait of a PM from 30 years ago to satisfy his equivalent.
    Cameron held an EU referendum because the public wanted one; and it could easily be argued that politics needed one. The fact that leave won shows that there was a massive demand; and as Corbyn showed, the demand was not just on the Conservative Party's right wing.

    IMV if we had not had an EU referendum in 2016 we would have either had one by now, or have a very right-wing government that would make Sunak's look like Corbyn's.

    The issue of EU membership was a can that could only be kicked down the road so far.
    Oh don't get me wrong, I think holding the referendum was the right thing to do precisely for the reasons you give.

    But Cameron did it to head off the right-wing given his small majority. And I don't think there is any evidence that the country would suddenly swing to the right on the back of not having one, simply because we've had absolutely massive non-EU migration since then and just elected Labour.
    So putting on your alternative-history hat, how do you think politics would have unrolled had Cameron not held an EU referendum in 2016? Do you think Farage and UKIP would have said: "Oh, that's okay!" and disappeared?
    No, in the same way that I don't think the left will disappear if Starmer continues to lead a fairly centrist government. I'm just pointing out that the Thatcher portrait thing is a similar act of party management.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942
    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    It's probably in JLR's interest that their workforce is fit and healthy. Think about the enormous expense and loss of human capital for each person who goes off sick, and the loss of productivity when someone has a minor chronic condition.

    We know that sickness is one of the things causing our economy to slow and our public spending to build, so this is exactly the kind of intervention the government needs to make.
    If it’s in JLR’s interest, then JLR should be doing it!
    They probably already are. My employer is pretty keen on occupational health, pushing the C2W scheme, cheap gym membership, healthy food in the office and so on.

    That's why the outrage over this is a bit silly.
    There’s no point in the government doing this with a select handful of large employers who are likely doing something awfully similar anyway.
    Possibly. A universal annual health check up would probably be more effective, but that would take serious reform of primary care and, all else held equal, a cut in the funds available to hospitals.

    In the long-run probably the right kind of thing to do.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    Which is precisely why this outreach programme is being trialled. People ignore the health MOT with only a 40% take up. Even if someone knows they are obese and unable to lose weight they may well benefit from having the consequential diabetes, blood pressure and cholesterol treated.

    Every week I see new patient with established complications of diabetes due to late diagnosis, often because of no symptoms. Some of them will be permanently disabled as a result.
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815
    Foxy said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    The Tories on PB are increasingly unhinged. If Starmer walked on water they would complain that he was putting deserving boatman out of work.
    After Truss and Sunak evidence that he can walk on dry land would be a welcome change. Sadly the jury is out and the defence have shifted their ground to "give him time."
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,896
    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    We don't have any detail about what intervention or follow-up there will be with people identified as having risk factors for later illness. I'd hope they're was more to it than telling people something they already know.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    edited August 30
    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    I thought he was in hock to the unionised workers and hated business, you are suggesting the opposite.

    Tory cheerleaders on here like to focus on productivity as a means to generate growth. Surely having a full attendance, healthy workforce could achieve just that.

    I don't hold that much enthusiasm for Starmer-Labour and I believe they have a thankless task ahead. But those in the media and on here shouting foul, loudest and in unison ("the herd"as Casino might call them) are those who were opposed to Starmer-Labour before the election. Where were the cries over Hunt's absurd NI cuts with nothing to replace it at the bottom on the economic cycle, or Sunak's rolling ban on the sale of cigarettes? Of course those bellyaching now were telling us in earnest that Johnson got all the big calls right and Truss's budget was the best, most conservative budget ever
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    It's probably in JLR's interest that their workforce is fit and healthy. Think about the enormous expense and loss of human capital for each person who goes off sick, and the loss of productivity when someone has a minor chronic condition.

    We know that sickness is one of the things causing our economy to slow and our public spending to build, so this is exactly the kind of intervention the government needs to make.
    If it’s in JLR’s interest, then JLR should be doing it!
    They probably already are. My employer is pretty keen on occupational health, pushing the C2W scheme, cheap gym membership, healthy food in the office and so on.

    That's why the outrage over this is a bit silly.
    There’s no point in the government doing this with a select handful of large employers who are likely doing something awfully similar anyway.
    Which is exactly why they are not doing that!
    Eabhal said:

    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    It's probably in JLR's interest that their workforce is fit and healthy. Think about the enormous expense and loss of human capital for each person who goes off sick, and the loss of productivity when someone has a minor chronic condition.

    We know that sickness is one of the things causing our economy to slow and our public spending to build, so this is exactly the kind of intervention the government needs to make.
    If it’s in JLR’s interest, then JLR should be doing it!
    They probably already are. My employer is pretty keen on occupational health, pushing the C2W scheme, cheap gym membership, healthy food in the office and so on.

    That's why the outrage over this is a bit silly.
    There’s no point in the government doing this with a select handful of large employers who are likely doing something awfully similar anyway.
    Possibly. A universal annual health check up would probably be more effective, but that would take serious reform of primary care and, all else held equal, a cut in the funds available to hospitals.

    In the long-run probably the right kind of thing to do.
    There is a clear prioritisation of Primary Care in Streetings plan for the NHS.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,972
    Eabhal said:

    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    It's probably in JLR's interest that their workforce is fit and healthy. Think about the enormous expense and loss of human capital for each person who goes off sick, and the loss of productivity when someone has a minor chronic condition.

    We know that sickness is one of the things causing our economy to slow and our public spending to build, so this is exactly the kind of intervention the government needs to make.
    If it’s in JLR’s interest, then JLR should be doing it!
    They probably already are. My employer is pretty keen on occupational health, pushing the C2W scheme, cheap gym membership, healthy food in the office and so on.

    That's why the outrage over this is a bit silly.
    There’s no point in the government doing this with a select handful of large employers who are likely doing something awfully similar anyway.
    Possibly. A universal annual health check up would probably be more effective, but that would take serious reform of primary care and, all else held equal, a cut in the funds available to hospitals.

    In the long-run probably the right kind of thing to do.
    Oh indeed, and if that’s what they were doing I would applaud it - although good luck getting the average middle-aged man anywhere near a medical professional voluntarily.

    What was actually announced just comes across as a soundbite, that sounds good in a speech but changes nothing in reality.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236

    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
    As usual sks has his opponents opposite him in HoC and his enemies behind him. This is about the labour left and the optics of the Kid Starver sitting under a portrait of the Milk Snatcher.
    If you take a step back, Labour are behaving like a competent Conservative government. Fiscally responsible, no increases in taxes (so far...), cuts to universal benefits, neutral position on Gaza, big on law and order.

    They have to give the left something.
    They've given massive pay increases to union members, whilst taking money from poor pensioners.

    What's not for the leftists to like?
    Actually the pay increases are national average apart from junior doctors where they paid the review body recommendation.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,974
    Foxy said:

    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    Which is precisely why this outreach programme is being trialled. People ignore the health MOT with only a 40% take up. Even if someone knows they are obese and unable to lose weight they may well benefit from having the consequential diabetes, blood pressure and cholesterol treated.

    Every week I see new patient with established complications of diabetes due to late diagnosis, often because of no symptoms. Some of them will be permanently disabled as a result.
    Then make it so that when someone does need to see a doctor they don't have to wait months because they're all working part time.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,974

    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    We don't have any detail about what intervention or follow-up there will be with people identified as having risk factors for later illness. I'd hope they're was more to it than telling people something they already know.
    Well, never let it be said you're not an optimist.
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,920
    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    Sandpit said:

    Eabhal said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    It's probably in JLR's interest that their workforce is fit and healthy. Think about the enormous expense and loss of human capital for each person who goes off sick, and the loss of productivity when someone has a minor chronic condition.

    We know that sickness is one of the things causing our economy to slow and our public spending to build, so this is exactly the kind of intervention the government needs to make.
    If it’s in JLR’s interest, then JLR should be doing it!
    They probably already are. My employer is pretty keen on occupational health, pushing the C2W scheme, cheap gym membership, healthy food in the office and so on.

    That's why the outrage over this is a bit silly.
    There’s no point in the government doing this with a select handful of large employers who are likely doing something awfully similar anyway.
    Window dressing, then, at little cost to themse;ves.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    edited August 30
    Driver said:

    Foxy said:

    Eabhal said:

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    Cameron held an EU referendum to satisfy his right-wing; Starmer has removed a portrait of a PM from 30 years ago to satisfy his equivalent.
    Cameron held an EU referendum because the public wanted one; and it could easily be argued that politics needed one. The fact that leave won shows that there was a massive demand; and as Corbyn showed, the demand was not just on the Conservative Party's right wing.

    IMV if we had not had an EU referendum in 2016 we would have either had one by now, or have a very right-wing government that would make Sunak's look like Corbyn's.

    The issue of EU membership was a can that could only be kicked down the road so far.
    So by that logic we should soon have either a Rejoin referendum of a massively pro-remain government.
    You really think the public wants to re-open that debate?
    I think it will be a growing issue.

    Brexit will be blamed for our turgid economy, and the red tape with Europe will be increasingly frustrating.

    Cutting those barriers by rejoining the SM would be the quickest spur to growth. The surviving Brexiteers could even get their WFA back as a result.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,173

    Nigelb said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Another one obsessed with Thatcher.
    Is it some kind of national religion ?
    Was Gordon Brown when he commissioned the portrait?
    Pretty well, yes.

    As I noted upthread, Blair and Brown failed to address, let alone reverse, the hollowing out of government; the rejection of industrial strategy; the long term structural problems of the housing market; the economic neglect of the regions.
    Good job we've got the strategic visionary genius Starmer then, eh?
    If he gets house building restarted, benefitting local government in the process, he'll be the first PM in three decades actually to do something about one of Thatcher's great failures.

    Meanwhile you're moaning about a picture.
    That 'if' is doing a heck of a lot of heavy lifting.

    And I have to repeat myself: it's not just about building houses; it's about building communities. And also note that build quality also needs to be addressed: something I've been harping on about on here for years.
    It's not doing any heavy lifting; it's a straightforward conditional.

    Also, can we place 'is doing a lot of heavy lifting' on the banned PB cliche list, please.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208

    Jonathan said:

    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
    Nah. Wise Tory heads will not fall for the bait.

    The Tories need to rediscover what they are for rather than raging against everything
    for oppositions sake and cheap headlines.
    Outrage about this is quite clever

    It juices up parts of the Tory party, but it’s something they can all unite behind

    It paints Starmer as petty and vindictive (it is the “Thatcher Room” so of course there should be a picture of Thatcher in it!)

    It sets the frame that he is focused on small things that aren’t important rather than tackling big issues

    (Edit: autocorrect wants to change “Tory party” to “Tory pity” 😂)
    Officially callled "The Study"

    I'd get rid of the awful curtains and carpet too - but that would cost money. The armchairs by the fireplace are pretty hideous too.

    https://artsandculture.google.com/story/take-a-tour-through-the-historic-rooms-of-10-downing-street/twXxuEIPr4FZJA
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    Driver said:

    Foxy said:

    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    Which is precisely why this outreach programme is being trialled. People ignore the health MOT with only a 40% take up. Even if someone knows they are obese and unable to lose weight they may well benefit from having the consequential diabetes, blood pressure and cholesterol treated.

    Every week I see new patient with established complications of diabetes due to late diagnosis, often because of no symptoms. Some of them will be permanently disabled as a result.
    Then make it so that when someone does need to see a doctor they don't have to wait months because they're all working part time.
    Yes, improving retention of NHS staff would help. How could we possibly encourage that?
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,916
    It feels like we don’t have a lot of visibility where Tory MPs sit on the candidates. Maybe it’s just because the Tories are much less relevant than they used to be, but I feel we’d usually be able to plot the top 2 among MPs by low. I’m not sure I feel clued up? I suspect one will be Badenoch by virtue of her being the favourite. The other could be any of Jenrick, Cleverley and Tugendhat I think?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    ...

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    If you became CEO of an organisation that had previously had Blair as Chairman of the Board, would you want his ugly mug looking over your shoulder or would you replace his picture with a nice movie still of James Bond and Vesper Lind to relax you and focus your mind on the job in hand?

    See, it's not petty and it's not vindictive.
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815
    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    I thought he was in hock to the unionised workers and hated business, you are suggesting the opposite.

    Tory cheerleaders on here like to focus on productivity as a means to generate growth. Surely having a full attendance, healthy workforce could achieve just that.

    I don't hold that much enthusiasm for Starmer-Labour and I believe they have a thankless task ahead. But those in the media and on here shouting foul, loudest and in unison ("the herd"as Casino might call them) are those who were opposed to Starmer-Labour before the election. Where were the cries over Hunt's absurd NI cuts with nothing to replace it at the bottom on the economic cycle, or Sunak's rolling ban on the sale of cigarettes? Of course those bellyaching now were telling us in earnest that Johnson got all the big calls right and Truss's budget was the best, most conservative budget ever
    I was hoping for a reset to competence and good government after everything since 2015. I don't think this is the worst idea in itself, I do expect Starmer's left to express outrage along the lines suggested.

    Let's see what happens.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,610
    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    I would just say that it could be the most important thing you do

    I had my dvt in October last year and was admitted to hospital as a medical emergency and underwent an immediate ultra sound

    That ultrasound found a massive dvt in my left thigh but also an undetected aneurysm that can often be fatal

    As a result my aneurysm is monitored yearly and if necessary the surgeon will operate

    Blood pressure, pulse and oxygen tests can be lifesavers and to be honest there is no need to fat shame anyone
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 726

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    I feel Starmer's dilemma. I used to have a large antique portrait of Gladstone above my bed until a guy I brought back pointed out that it didn't exactly create an amorous mood. I reluctantly relegated him to the stairs after that.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,399
    Tory leadership contest cranks up - 4 of the 6 candidates worked in Home Office - a dept the [IFS] says failed to properly budget for asylum costs
    https://x.com/vicderbyshire/status/1829256503393460313
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,972

    It feels like we don’t have a lot of visibility where Tory MPs sit on the candidates. Maybe it’s just because the Tories are much less relevant than they used to be, but I feel we’d usually be able to plot the top 2 among MPs by low. I’m not sure I feel clued up? I suspect one will be Badenoch by virtue of her being the favourite. The other could be any of Jenrick, Cleverley and Tugendhat I think?

    Hopefully the interest of the MPs is best served by picking a wide initial choice of candidates, and then actually reading and listening to what they have to say before voting, rather than groups of MPs aligning with a certain candidate early in the process as they do when in office.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,173
    Now that Trump has said he supports it (he's almost certainly lying, but whatever), is it too late to reintroduce the bill ?

    Every Senate Republican — except Collins and Murkowksi — voted against a bill to mandate insurance coverage for IVF in June.
    https://x.com/stephen_neukam/status/1829327475706384402
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,946
    Mr. Stereodog, "I reluctantly relegated him to the stairs after that. "

    Does 'him' refer to Gladstone or the guy you brought back?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    Stereodog said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    I feel Starmer's dilemma. I used to have a large antique portrait of Gladstone above my bed until a guy I brought back pointed out that it didn't exactly create an amorous mood. I reluctantly relegated him to the stairs after that.
    Your pick up or Gladstone?
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,974
    edited August 30

    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    I would just say that it could be the most important thing you do

    I had my dvt in October last year and was admitted to hospital as a medical emergency and underwent an immediate ultra sound

    That ultrasound found a massive dvt in my left thigh but also an undetected aneurysm that can often be fatal

    As a result my aneurysm is monitored yearly and if necessary the surgeon will operate

    Blood pressure, pulse and oxygen tests can be lifesavers and to be honest there is no need to fat shame anyone
    But that last is all that will happen - people will be told to lose weight/drink less/give up smoking, as appropriate, and not a jot more.
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 726

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    I presume you left everything in your house exactly the same as the previous owner?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114

    It feels like we don’t have a lot of visibility where Tory MPs sit on the candidates. Maybe it’s just because the Tories are much less relevant than they used to be, but I feel we’d usually be able to plot the top 2 among MPs by low. I’m not sure I feel clued up? I suspect one will be Badenoch by virtue of her being the favourite. The other could be any of Jenrick, Cleverley and Tugendhat I think?

    At this stage it's cutting it down to four, with Stride and Patel falling at the first hurdle IMO.

    Jenrick and Tugenhat for the members ballot, with Jenrick winning the poisoned chalice.
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 726
    Foxy said:

    Stereodog said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    I feel Starmer's dilemma. I used to have a large antique portrait of Gladstone above my bed until a guy I brought back pointed out that it didn't exactly create an amorous mood. I reluctantly relegated him to the stairs after that.
    Your pick up or Gladstone?
    Haha Gladstone. He went next to Queen Victoria and Joseph Chamberlain (I was an odd teenager) which I thought a bit unfair but needs must.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Another one obsessed with Thatcher.
    Is it some kind of national religion ?
    Was Gordon Brown when he commissioned the portrait?
    Pretty well, yes.

    As I noted upthread, Blair and Brown failed to address, let alone reverse, the hollowing out of government; the rejection of industrial strategy; the long term structural problems of the housing market; the economic neglect of the regions.
    Good job we've got the strategic visionary genius Starmer then, eh?
    If he gets house building restarted, benefitting local government in the process, he'll be the first PM in three decades actually to do something about one of Thatcher's great failures.

    Meanwhile you're moaning about a picture.
    That 'if' is doing a heck of a lot of heavy lifting.

    And I have to repeat myself: it's not just about building houses; it's about building communities. And also note that build quality also needs to be addressed: something I've been harping on about on here for years.
    It's not doing any heavy lifting; it's a straightforward conditional.

    Also, can we place 'is doing a lot of heavy lifting' on the banned PB cliche list, please.
    Can we put 'banned PB cliche list' on the banned list, please? The concept of banning cliches is fairly pathetic. ;)

    I'll explain why the 'if' is doing heavy lifting. Firstly, that entire sentence was wrong. Its not a case of getting house building restarted, as f-loads of houses are being built, as I can see after a few minutes of walking. It is a case of building *more* houses. Secondly, I have my doubts that he will be able to increase the rate of build so that it is *enough*, given the massive demand. Are houses like roads; the more we build, the more we need? Thirdly, we want good houses, not shite poorly-built ones that barely qualify as 'houses'.

    Perhaps the reason why the PM's over the last three decades have not been able to tackle the problem is that the problem is fairly intractable, especially given the demand?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236
    mercator said:

    Foxy said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    The Tories on PB are increasingly unhinged. If Starmer walked on water they would complain that he was putting deserving boatman out of work.
    After Truss and Sunak evidence that he can walk on dry land would be a welcome change. Sadly the jury is out and the defence have shifted their ground to "give him time."
    I think Starmer is doing OK and genuinely it is a pleasant change having a prime minister making decisions, most of which can be justified. As such better than all four previous Tory prime ministers, so far

    He needs to lay off the politics a bit when it comes to day to day government, but contrarily he needs to get better at narrative so he brings people with him as he makes his not always popular choices.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,610
    Driver said:

    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    I would just say that it could be the most important thing you do

    I had my dvt in October last year and was admitted to hospital as a medical emergency and underwent an immediate ultra sound

    That ultrasound found a massive dvt in my left thigh but also an undetected aneurysm that can often be fatal

    As a result my aneurysm is monitored yearly and if necessary the surgeon will operate

    Blood pressure, pulse and oxygen tests can be lifesavers and to be honest there is no need to fat shame anyone
    But that last is all that will happen - people will be told to lose weight/drink less/give up smoking, as appropriate, and not a jot more.
    That is not how it works

    If high blood pressure is detected or further tests diagnosed diabetes, then treatment will commence and monitored including year on year reviews

    Prevention is better than a funeral
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815
    Driver said:

    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    I would just say that it could be the most important thing you do

    I had my dvt in October last year and was admitted to hospital as a medical emergency and underwent an immediate ultra sound

    That ultrasound found a massive dvt in my left thigh but also an undetected aneurysm that can often be fatal

    As a result my aneurysm is monitored yearly and if necessary the surgeon will operate

    Blood pressure, pulse and oxygen tests can be lifesavers and to be honest there is no need to fat shame anyone
    But that last is all that will happen - people will be told to lose weight/drink less/give up smoking, as appropriate, and not a jot more.
    Nah they will be given statins and BP meds
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437
    kamski said:

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    If I had to make life and death decisions I'd probably want to do it in an environment that I found conducive.

    It's definitely you that needs to get a grip, he's only taken a picture off a wall in a room that none of us will ever see, he's not thrown the statue of Churchill into the Thames.
    "If I had to make life and death decisions I'd probably want to do it in an environment that I found conducive."

    He doesn't get that choice. He might have to make the decision whilst on holiday; or on a foreign visit, or at three o'clock in the morning. Or whilst on the toilet, if it is urgent enough. ;)

    It's fairly pathetic of him. Although I do wonder if it is an utterly deliberate move on his part, as an easy piece of red meat thrown to the left.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    Driver said:

    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    I would just say that it could be the most important thing you do

    I had my dvt in October last year and was admitted to hospital as a medical emergency and underwent an immediate ultra sound

    That ultrasound found a massive dvt in my left thigh but also an undetected aneurysm that can often be fatal

    As a result my aneurysm is monitored yearly and if necessary the surgeon will operate

    Blood pressure, pulse and oxygen tests can be lifesavers and to be honest there is no need to fat shame anyone
    But that last is all that will happen - people will be told to lose weight/drink less/give up smoking, as appropriate, and not a jot more.
    Sure, it's a free country. We cannot force people to be healthy, but in a few patients it will be a light bulb moment that spurs them to a healthier lifestyle and better life. The occasional successes make up for being ignored by the remainder.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,213
    edited August 30
    Driver said:

    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    I would just say that it could be the most important thing you do

    I had my dvt in October last year and was admitted to hospital as a medical emergency and underwent an immediate ultra sound

    That ultrasound found a massive dvt in my left thigh but also an undetected aneurysm that can often be fatal

    As a result my aneurysm is monitored yearly and if necessary the surgeon will operate

    Blood pressure, pulse and oxygen tests can be lifesavers and to be honest there is no need to fat shame anyone
    But that last is all that will happen - people will be told to lose weight/drink less/give up smoking, as appropriate, and not a jot more.
    Fatness has become such a ridiculous taboo in this country. Mentioning it is almost up there with racial slurs.

    The fact is the country is way too obese and it’s making the population unhealthy and unproductive. British diets are shit and we don’t do enough exercise. If people are fat they should be told so.

    Yet there seems to be more fear of eating disorders than of the epochal health challenge that is obesity.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    Cameron held an EU referendum to satisfy his right-wing; Starmer has removed a portrait of a PM from 30 years ago to satisfy his equivalent.
    Cameron held an EU referendum because the public wanted one; and it could easily be argued that politics needed one. The fact that leave won shows that there was a massive demand; and as Corbyn showed, the demand was not just on the Conservative Party's right wing.

    IMV if we had not had an EU referendum in 2016 we would have either had one by now, or have a very right-wing government that would make Sunak's look like Corbyn's.

    The issue of EU membership was a can that could only be kicked down the road so far.
    Oh don't get me wrong, I think holding the referendum was the right thing to do precisely for the reasons you give.

    But Cameron did it to head off the right-wing given his small majority. And I don't think there is any evidence that the country would suddenly swing to the right on the back of not having one, simply because we've had absolutely massive non-EU migration since then and just elected Labour.
    So putting on your alternative-history hat, how do you think politics would have unrolled had Cameron not held an EU referendum in 2016? Do you think Farage and UKIP would have said: "Oh, that's okay!" and disappeared?
    But we've Brexited on a manifesto of sending foreigners home at the expense of free movement of goods and people, yet immigration is through the roof and Farage is more emboldened than ever. The only bit of good news is with the smoking ban he has vowed we will never see him down the pub.
  • Greetings from Greece to all.

    The removal of Thatcher's portrait from No.10 certainly seems a goid start, I must sy.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    edited August 30
    kamski said:

    Jonathan said:

    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
    Nah. Wise Tory heads will not fall for the bait.

    The Tories need to rediscover what they are for rather than raging against everything
    for oppositions sake and cheap headlines.
    Outrage about this is quite clever

    It juices up parts of the Tory party, but it’s something they can all unite behind

    It paints Starmer as petty and vindictive (it is the “Thatcher Room” so of course there should be a picture of Thatcher in it!)

    It sets the frame that he is focused on small things that aren’t important rather than tackling big issues

    (Edit: autocorrect wants to change “Tory party” to “Tory pity” 😂)
    Officially callled "The Study"

    I'd get rid of the awful curtains and carpet too - but that would cost money. The armchairs by the fireplace are pretty hideous too.

    https://artsandculture.google.com/story/take-a-tour-through-the-historic-rooms-of-10-downing-street/twXxuEIPr4FZJA
    Yes, the decor is hideously dated. Is there still the awful Johnson era decor upstairs?

    Most of Downing St belongs in a skip.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Another one obsessed with Thatcher.
    Is it some kind of national religion ?
    Was Gordon Brown when he commissioned the portrait?
    Pretty well, yes.

    As I noted upthread, Blair and Brown failed to address, let alone reverse, the hollowing out of government; the rejection of industrial strategy; the long term structural problems of the housing market; the economic neglect of the regions.
    Good job we've got the strategic visionary genius Starmer then, eh?
    If he gets house building restarted, benefitting local government in the process, he'll be the first PM in three decades actually to do something about one of Thatcher's great failures.

    Meanwhile you're moaning about a picture.
    That 'if' is doing a heck of a lot of heavy lifting.

    And I have to repeat myself: it's not just about building houses; it's about building communities. And also note that build quality also needs to be addressed: something I've been harping on about on here for years.
    It's not doing any heavy lifting; it's a straightforward conditional.

    Also, can we place 'is doing a lot of heavy lifting' on the banned PB cliche list, please.
    Can we put 'banned PB cliche list' on the banned list, please? The concept of banning cliches is fairly pathetic. ;)

    I'll explain why the 'if' is doing heavy lifting. Firstly, that entire sentence was wrong. Its not a case of getting house building restarted, as f-loads of houses are being built, as I can see after a few minutes of walking. It is a case of building *more* houses. Secondly, I have my doubts that he will be able to increase the rate of build so that it is *enough*, given the massive demand. Are houses like roads; the more we build, the more we need? Thirdly, we want good houses, not shite poorly-built ones that barely qualify as 'houses'.

    Perhaps the reason why the PM's over the last three decades have not been able to tackle the problem is that the problem is fairly intractable, especially given the demand?
    'is doing a lot of heavy lifting' is an annoying cliche that ironically doesn't do any heavy lifting, or even light lifting - as your explanation of why 'if' is supposedly doing 'heavy lifting' demonstrates (can't for the life of me see how a reader can get any of it from the 'heavy lifting' expression).
  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,213

    Greetings from Greece to all.

    The removal of Thatcher's portrait from No.10 certainly seems a goid start, I must sy.

    These stories are funny. Reminds me of when Obama removed the Churchill bust from the Oval Office. The power of signs and signifiers.
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 726

    kamski said:

    kamski said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    He might turn out to be a poor PM but fuck me you need something more than him slightly adjusting his work environment to suit himself. Get a fucking grip.
    I'm laughing at him. It's hilarious.

    He is PM. He will, sadly, have to make really important decisions; sometimes life-and-death decisions. He needs to be tough, as do all PMs. Yet he finds a portrait of a massively successful (although controversial) predecessor 'unsettling'.

    He needs to get a grip. :)
    If I had to make life and death decisions I'd probably want to do it in an environment that I found conducive.

    It's definitely you that needs to get a grip, he's only taken a picture off a wall in a room that none of us will ever see, he's not thrown the statue of Churchill into the Thames.
    "If I had to make life and death decisions I'd probably want to do it in an environment that I found conducive."

    He doesn't get that choice. He might have to make the decision whilst on holiday; or on a foreign visit, or at three o'clock in the morning. Or whilst on the toilet, if it is urgent enough. ;)

    It's fairly pathetic of him. Although I do wonder if it is an utterly deliberate move on his part, as an easy piece of red meat thrown to the left.
    Every minister and Perm Sec gets to choose the art they want for their office from the government art collection (on a sliding scale of quality based on rank). Why wouldn't Starmer choose a picture he likes if he's given the option? Wouldn't you? If your objection based on the fact that the media were briefed about it then that's fair enough.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,437
    FF43 said:

    mercator said:

    Foxy said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    The Tories on PB are increasingly unhinged. If Starmer walked on water they would complain that he was putting deserving boatman out of work.
    After Truss and Sunak evidence that he can walk on dry land would be a welcome change. Sadly the jury is out and the defence have shifted their ground to "give him time."
    I think Starmer is doing OK and genuinely it is a pleasant change having a prime minister making decisions, most of which can be justified. As such better than all four previous Tory prime ministers, so far

    (Snip)
    That's a bit unfair on Johnson and May. May did make decisions, despite large parts of her party doing Labour's job. Salisbury being an example. And Johnson made a whole host of massive decisions, for better or worse. In fact, he probably had the most important decisions to make of any PM since WW2. On Covid, he had to make incredibly difficult decisions on lockdowns and vaccines, which I think generally he got right (leaving aside his own personal behaviour...). And on Ukraine, he was totally right.
  • And "I must say", that would ofcourse say, too, if I could edit from a mobile.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,974
    mercator said:

    Driver said:

    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    I would just say that it could be the most important thing you do

    I had my dvt in October last year and was admitted to hospital as a medical emergency and underwent an immediate ultra sound

    That ultrasound found a massive dvt in my left thigh but also an undetected aneurysm that can often be fatal

    As a result my aneurysm is monitored yearly and if necessary the surgeon will operate

    Blood pressure, pulse and oxygen tests can be lifesavers and to be honest there is no need to fat shame anyone
    But that last is all that will happen - people will be told to lose weight/drink less/give up smoking, as appropriate, and not a jot more.
    Nah they will be given statins and BP meds
    For being overweight?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    TimS said:

    Driver said:

    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    I would just say that it could be the most important thing you do

    I had my dvt in October last year and was admitted to hospital as a medical emergency and underwent an immediate ultra sound

    That ultrasound found a massive dvt in my left thigh but also an undetected aneurysm that can often be fatal

    As a result my aneurysm is monitored yearly and if necessary the surgeon will operate

    Blood pressure, pulse and oxygen tests can be lifesavers and to be honest there is no need to fat shame anyone
    But that last is all that will happen - people will be told to lose weight/drink less/give up smoking, as appropriate, and not a jot more.
    Fatness has become such a ridiculous taboo in this country. Mentioning it is almost up there with racial slurs.

    The fact is the country is way too obese and it’s making the population unhealthy and unproductive. British diets are shit and we don’t do enough exercise. If people are fat they should be told so.

    Yet there seems to be more fear of eating disorders than of the epochal health challenge that is obesity.
    I think my own hospital could do with a visit by the fat inspectors. Indeed my own diabetes team is alarmingly plump.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Stereodog said:

    Has Starmer really removed Thatcher's portrait from the Thatcher room at No. 10 because he found it 'unsettling' ?

    Aw, bless. We cant have his little feelings hurtied, can we? I wonder what else he'll find 'unsettling'? ;)

    He really is going to be a poor PM.

    I feel Starmer's dilemma. I used to have a large antique portrait of Gladstone above my bed until a guy I brought back pointed out that it didn't exactly create an amorous mood. I reluctantly relegated him to the stairs after that.
    I think this post needs some unpacking.
  • TimS said:

    Greetings from Greece to all.

    The removal of Thatcher's portrait from No.10 certainly seems a goid start, I must sy.

    These stories are funny. Reminds me of when Obama removed the Churchill bust from the Oval Office. The power of signs and signifiers.
    Yes, I remember the huge amount of huffing and puffing about that.
    It's essentially a late silly season story, with added anti-Starmer press edge.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    Foxy said:

    kamski said:

    Jonathan said:

    fpt;

    FF43 said:

    Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.


    Starmer is a pretty vindictive person.

    This is already becoming quite clear.
    Re-arranging the office decor when you move in is hardly a sign of great vindictiveness. Maybe spare your outrage for stuff that matters?
    The outrage does matter.

    The tories are still in a very dangerous position. Not quite as existential as it was several months ago, but they're nowhere near out of the woods. The last thing the party needs are members like casino & hyufd shrugging their shoulders and quietly walking away. They've got to rebuild from something. Anything.

    He's doing the tory party a great service, here.
    Nah. Wise Tory heads will not fall for the bait.

    The Tories need to rediscover what they are for rather than raging against everything
    for oppositions sake and cheap headlines.
    Outrage about this is quite clever

    It juices up parts of the Tory party, but it’s something they can all unite behind

    It paints Starmer as petty and vindictive (it is the “Thatcher Room” so of course there should be a picture of Thatcher in it!)

    It sets the frame that he is focused on small things that aren’t important rather than tackling big issues

    (Edit: autocorrect wants to change “Tory party” to “Tory pity” 😂)
    Officially callled "The Study"

    I'd get rid of the awful curtains and carpet too - but that would cost money. The armchairs by the fireplace are pretty hideous too.

    https://artsandculture.google.com/story/take-a-tour-through-the-historic-rooms-of-10-downing-street/twXxuEIPr4FZJA
    Yes, the decor is hideously dated. Is there still the awful Johnson era decor upstairs?

    Most of Downing St belongs in a skip.
    You mean no one has yet emulsioned over the Lulu Lytle shite?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,114
    edited August 30
    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    Driver said:

    Driver said:

    mercator said:

    nico679 said:

    The Times headline seems to imply its forced on workers and that they’ll be fat shamed in front of their colleagues.

    It’s voluntary . The Times I’ve found over the last year seems to do a lot headlines which seek to mislead .

    "Employers to have signed up include Jaguar Land Rover, where 4,500 staff from the boardroom to the factory floor will get the checks within months at its Solihull base."

    I read that as voluntary at the employer level. Kid Starver teams up with the head capitalists to fat shame The Workers. He really is hilariously useless.
    Reading the Guardian write-up it points out that:

    "More than 16 million people are eligible for an NHS health check, but data shows that only about 40% of those invited complete one."

    Reaching people via their workplace - inviting them to complete a voluntary health questionnaire on company time - might be a way of improving that sort of response rate, and help to head off health problems at an earlier stage.

    It's not going to be forcing people up on stage to face the calipers in front of all their colleagues. Some of the reactions to this very modest trial scheme are completely unhinged.
    In my experience, people who are fat know they are fat, and being told yet again that they need to lose weight won't help.

    If I were to get a letter inviting me for "an NHS health check", I'd probably just bin it because it strikes me as a waste of time when I know it takes literally months to get an appointment when I want one.
    I would just say that it could be the most important thing you do

    I had my dvt in October last year and was admitted to hospital as a medical emergency and underwent an immediate ultra sound

    That ultrasound found a massive dvt in my left thigh but also an undetected aneurysm that can often be fatal

    As a result my aneurysm is monitored yearly and if necessary the surgeon will operate

    Blood pressure, pulse and oxygen tests can be lifesavers and to be honest there is no need to fat shame anyone
    But that last is all that will happen - people will be told to lose weight/drink less/give up smoking, as appropriate, and not a jot more.
    Nah they will be given statins and BP meds
    For being overweight?
    For blood pressure and lipid disorders caused by obesity.

    If people cant/won't lose weight you can still mitigate the damage with cheap pharmaceuticals.
This discussion has been closed.