If DJT does lose, I think the point he chucked it away was when he was unable to resist parading the supplication of JDV and gave him the Veep slot.
That stupid Childless Cat Lady shit and similar lack-witted drivel has dragged on the campaign. He'd have been better off bringing Haley in from the cold.
In the unlikely event of it being offered, would she have accepted ?
She's a politician, why the fuck would she refuse? If DJT wins, she's in pole position for the 2028 GOP nomination and there is a sporting chance that the fat piece of shit will have a massive myocardial infarction on the 18th green at some point in the next four years and then she's sat behind the Resolute Desk.
If DJT does lose, I think the point he chucked it away was when he was unable to resist parading the supplication of JDV and gave him the Veep slot.
That stupid Childless Cat Lady shit and similar lack-witted drivel has dragged on the campaign. He'd have been better off bringing Haley in from the cold.
Like last time. As incumbent all he had to do was not be a dick over Covid and he'd have been re-elected. But he couldn't do it. He has to be himself - which is purest unrefined dick - and this hurts him outside the base.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
Playing Devil's Advocate - no one is really going to pay attention to a small midwestern city in 99%+ of circumstances even when it's a take of declining jobs, broken communities etc and nor are broadcasters going to send their TV reporters to the place.
But they will do if a former President starts claiming immigrants are eating cats and dogs. It is the sort of story that TV (and online) commentators love because it draws in audiences.
I suspect Trump's ploy here is not to get people outraged about cats and dogs but to focus the spotlight on a small American town that he can portray as a microcosm of what is happening across much of America and where many of the themes he has highlighted - a large percentage of the population being immigrant (many illegal), local employers saying they prefer to hire Haitians rather than local Americans because they work more etc - are writ large. If the campaign is dominated by talk about Springfield and the like, Trump probably wins.
That's not a bad point. Trump says Haitians eat cats, local employers say Haitians are non cat eating diligent employees, trump voters are more threatened by the employability than the cat eating.
It’s a sector that should be ripe for disruption with technology.
Not really. A university is really all about thinking - doing it, showing how to do it, writing about it and criticising it.
Transmission of supposed certainties and appropriate professional tecniques is more proper to a technical education.
There is room for both and a need for both. But it is time to make a distinction.
Pre-internet, universities also provided a pretty unique function of providing a place for smart people interested in particular academic disciplines to get together to communicate and collaborate. That just isn't so true any more.
And the distinction between academic and technical skills isn't entirely clear cut.
They still provide something that nowhere else really does, but it's not ridiculous that we rethink the way in which they fulfil that role.
There is probably more to be gained from rethinking the school curriculum to reflect the modern world, from using spreadsheets to using paintbrushes; from cycling to driving. Do our children really need to know about Oxbow lakes and the unification of Italy?
Surely schools can teach geography and real life skills like how to managed finances and a budget and cooking?
They can but introducing new material means dropping existing material, and every subject will be staunchly defended. That said, we have in recent decades done away with woodwork and metalwork, and technical drawing and geology.
Mostly the advocates of relevance are silent on what has become irrelevant, even if they have thought about it at all.
“Woodwork, metalwork, and technical drawing” are now called Design Technology and are one of the more popular choices at GCSE at my school.
Just so everyone who comments on this is not assuming that schools are the same as they were when they were at them: In England (other countries will be different here) the expectation is that pupils will do the following for GCSE: English, Maths, Science (so Physics, Chemistry, and Biology, either double award or three separate sciences), a language (other than English), a humanity (eg history, geography, or RE) and then their choice to make it up to eight, nine, or sometimes ten depending on school and ability. Not all pupils do this, but it is the baseline.
What is a fact is that a woman was arrested for eating a cat on the street, in Ohio. She is an American citizen. What is also a fact, is that a man was photographed carrying what looks like a wild bird on the street, in Ohio.
There was a man who mentioned street people eating cats at a public meeting in Springfield, OH.
There are some ambiguities regarding exact times and locations (not necessarily Springfield), but the story is not the wild conspiracy theory it’s been made out to be.
There are also a number of community Facebook posts relating to eating cats, but no photos and no arrest records, so difficult to stand up individual cases.
This reminds me of the Currant Bun story around 20 years ago about East European asylum seekers poaching swans to eat. Exposed as an urban myth at the time.
Commentators seemed to have missed Trumps accusation that Harris slept around with his she “put it out “. That was in the middle of his response to the question of her race .
A bit sexist of him, after all he has famously slept around himself. Why shouldn't a single woman too?
I know we are not supposed to mention this these days, but Kamala is a very attractive woman. I cannot believe she is almost 60 years of age!
I think it's OK to mention it because it will almost certainly be a relevant factor for voting behaviour. Good looking people do better in elections as they do in most aspects of life. The fact is that Harris is a good looking person and this will win her votes.
Donald Trump is currently being interviewed on Fox and Friends. We will have more detail on that interview soon. But he has told the show that it was his “best ever” debate, and that he won it by “a lot”.
The Korean Oddjob is of course a cat eater in Goldfinger. That's the book, one of the problems with the films is the omission of this sort of detail.
... what about not eating avocado for desert in the film of Casino Royale?!!!!?
Certainly an oddity but Fleming was proper posh, so presumably a thing posh folks did.
More likely is that Fleming had seen avocado pear on a posh menu but not actually ordered one.
" 'Now,' he turned back to the menu, 'I myself will accompany Mademoiselle with the caviar, but then I would like a very small tournedos, underdone, with sauce Béarnaise and a coeur d'artichaut. While Mademoiselle is enjoying the strawberries, I will have half an avocado pear with a little French dressing. Do you approve?' The maître d'hôtel bowed. 'My compliments, mademoiselle and monsieur."
This is off the scale creepy and snobby but it's clearly meant to be a posh thing to do. And the french dressing argues against the notion that he thinks it's a proper pear.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges· 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
Harris showed pretty well during the debate that she's in control of the narrative.
She came over as strong. That for me was the big win because it nullifies what imo could be a reason why undecideds might go for Trump.
"Don't like the guy, I really don't, but he can get things done."
That sort of thing. Nonsense as we know (his administration was a chaotic clown show) but I do think this 'tough money guy running the country like a business' malarky is potent for him.
What is a fact is that a woman was arrested for eating a cat on the street, in Ohio. She is an American citizen. What is also a fact, is that a man was photographed carrying what looks like a wild bird on the street, in Ohio.
There was a man who mentioned street people eating cats at a public meeting in Springfield, OH.
There are some ambiguities regarding exact times and locations (not necessarily Springfield), but the story is not the wild conspiracy theory it’s been made out to be.
There are also a number of community Facebook posts relating to eating cats, but no photos and no arrest records, so difficult to stand up individual cases.
That’s a very odd reading of the evidence. The claim is Haitian immigrants are eating pets in Springfield, Ohio. The sole evidence for this claim is a mad woman who isn’t Haitian in a different part of Ohio killed a cat, and there’s a photo of a black guy, also in a different part of Ohio, immigration status unknown, carrying a dead goose, in circumstances unknown. In other words, there is zero evidence that Haitian immigrants are eating pets. It is a wild conspiracy theory.
And then there are second hand my-friend-said posts on Facebook. The sort of “evidence” that led to rioting recently in the UK.
It’s not just a wild conspiracy theory, it’s a deeply racist conspiracy theory.
What is a fact is that a woman was arrested for eating a cat on the street, in Ohio. She is an American citizen. What is also a fact, is that a man was photographed carrying what looks like a wild bird on the street, in Ohio.
There was a man who mentioned street people eating cats at a public meeting in Springfield, OH.
There are some ambiguities regarding exact times and locations (not necessarily Springfield), but the story is not the wild conspiracy theory it’s been made out to be.
There are also a number of community Facebook posts relating to eating cats, but no photos and no arrest records, so difficult to stand up individual cases.
This reminds me of the Currant Bun story around 20 years ago about East European asylum seekers poaching swans to eat. Exposed as an urban myth at the time.
A point of context on how bad the debate was for Trump is that the CNN snap poll had 63% saying Harris won to 37% for Trump... that doesn't seem too awful until you note that the equivalent poll following his debate with Biden showed 67% saying Trump had won, versus 33% for Biden.
In other words, in a fairly polarised political environment, the absolute rock bottom floor for either candidate is perhaps 30%. Whilst Trump performed fairly poorly in June, very few fair minded observers would say Biden "won" the debate - yet 33% of poll respondents did so.
If you assume, not unreasonably, that 60% will say their candidate "won" come what may (30% each), and only about 40% of viewers are up for grabs, then more than eight out of ten thought Harris won it. And, crucially, those are the voters that matter.
That's not to say Trump was down at Biden's performance levels in June, or that the impact will match that. But it was a bit of a thrashing really and he needs to move the conversation on pretty fast.
When I saw it this morning, I thought Harris looked weak because she appeared to feel the need to be the one to go to his territory. But maybe she was being assertive and showing that she's in charge?
I'm not really sure what Team Kamala hoped to achieve. She travelled to him, and it emphasised their size difference. On the other hand, if the idea was to rattle The Donald, maybe it worked.
Yes, it emphasised that a lady of south Asian descent was more petite than an overweight, male Scottish American. Wonders never cease!!
I think it was definitely the right decision. It made her look statesmanlike and him tetchy.
Remember him invading Hillary's space during the debate ? Avoided that, and turned a potential weakness into a strength, by leaning in to it.
If DJT does lose, I think the point he chucked it away was when he was unable to resist parading the supplication of JDV and gave him the Veep slot.
That stupid Childless Cat Lady shit and similar lack-witted drivel has dragged on the campaign. He'd have been better off bringing Haley in from the cold.
In the unlikely event of it being offered, would she have accepted ?
She's a politician, why the fuck would she refuse? If DJT wins, she's in pole position for the 2028 GOP nomination and there is a sporting chance that the fat piece of shit will have a massive myocardial infarction on the 18th green at some point in the next four years and then she's sat behind the Resolute Desk.
How did that work out for Pence ? How's it going to do for JD ?
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
Playing Devil's Advocate - no one is really going to pay attention to a small midwestern city in 99%+ of circumstances even when it's a take of declining jobs, broken communities etc and nor are broadcasters going to send their TV reporters to the place.
But they will do if a former President starts claiming immigrants are eating cats and dogs. It is the sort of story that TV (and online) commentators love because it draws in audiences.
I suspect Trump's ploy here is not to get people outraged about cats and dogs but to focus the spotlight on a small American town that he can portray as a microcosm of what is happening across much of America and where many of the themes he has highlighted - a large percentage of the population being immigrant (many illegal), local employers saying they prefer to hire Haitians rather than local Americans because they work more etc - are writ large. If the campaign is dominated by talk about Springfield and the like, Trump probably wins.
That's not a bad point. Trump says Haitians eat cats, local employers say Haitians are non cat eating diligent employees, trump voters are more threatened by the employability than the cat eating.
Well yes, there's that. But immigrants have votes too - the ones in Springfield aren't illegals - and 2% of Florida's electorate is Haitian. It cuts both ways.
Going straight to the gutter has a cost which might well outweigh any benefit for him.
There’s a little bit of Telegraph exaggeration there. The head of the union is mooting a ballot on strike action. There’s nothing imminent.
The union remains militant, but I’m not certain the membership is that eager for more strike action. But the union is right that the sector is in trouble. Undergrad fees remain frozen despite the inflation of recent years. It’s not rocket science: costs have gone up, but a major source of income hasn’t, so universities are in deficit.
Good morning everyone.
I think this is an interesting one.
Despite its squeezes, the university sector has had a long period relatively in the sun - meaning perhaps 25 years, compared to for example local authorities, public transport, the legal system, or defence.
How will this play in a competition for scarce (or "find your own" resources)?
Universities across the country have been milking the Student Accommodation cash-cow since 2000 or before, and heavily since ~2005-2010, and have also targeted intertnational student fees. What other income sources are available?
I would want to see evidence to back up that claim
The biggest providers in the market nowadays are private firms such as Unite, IQ or Student Roost all backed by pension funds.
Which claim?
I made several observations. I was also timed out with the following bonus bit:
Domestic student fees are down afaics by about 35% in real terms since 2010 (£9000 then to £9250 now).
The claim that Universities are milking the accommodation cash-cow. It's not universities who are the real offenders there...
OK. Looked up the actual numbers for tuition fee caps in England.
(External factors are other funding sources and how they change)
So 2011 £3000 / year 2012 £9000 / year 2024 £9250 / year 2011 to 2024 increased by 3.08 2012 to 2024 CPI increase 1.39
what's your point?
The repayment system has changed, so some debate over that but the main issue is that £9k is something that you could realistically see yourself clearing in a few years once in a job, but £27,750 isn't, people struggle to reduce the outstanding balance.
The political reactions in 2046, when the first tranche of £9000 fee loans get written off, will be fascinating. I just hope I am still around to see it.
There’s a little bit of Telegraph exaggeration there. The head of the union is mooting a ballot on strike action. There’s nothing imminent.
The union remains militant, but I’m not certain the membership is that eager for more strike action. But the union is right that the sector is in trouble. Undergrad fees remain frozen despite the inflation of recent years. It’s not rocket science: costs have gone up, but a major source of income hasn’t, so universities are in deficit.
If they increase tuition fees further then there'll be a further decline in student numbers, they're also being rinsed for accommodation. From ES "Figures from Ucas (Universities and Colleges Admissions Service) show by the end of June 41.9% of all 18-year-olds in the UK had applied through their system – compared to 42.1% last year and 44.1% in 2022."
I am very pro universities, but the idea that 40%+ of our 18 year olds should be even thinking of going to one is ludicrous. The way in which the entire media prioritise them as the route for young people is absurd and damaging, and must be contributing to the jobs crisis in unfashionable fields, the marginalisation of FE, and apprentices.
I can't think of a country other than Britain where the idea that its young people are receiving too much education has so much traction. If you suggested this in Ireland people would think you were madder than Donald Trump.
What is wrong with Britain?
Take this argument to it's logical conclusion - if full time education is so good for us, we should all remain in full time education until we are 50, or even 70. Just think what an amazing workforce the country would have, all these brilliant educated minds...
The reality is that time spent in education is not free - it's years of life not spent doing something else. If you enter the labour force at 22, and retire at 65, that's 43 years. The four years from 18-22 are almost ten percent of your working life. Imagine what the country could do with 10% more workers and no extra costs (it might solve the "need" for the mass immigration Ponzi scheme)
I didn't go to university, and spent the equivalent part of my life doing relatively menial jobs in a factory (although as I grew up I took on supervisory roles). I'm now at the age of 37 running a successful small business, currently employing 5 people. Having just looked it up, I'm earning just under the 90th percentile of the income distribution (and not in the outrageously overpriced South East either, unlike most such high earners).
A lot of my success comes from what I learnt (particularly about human nature) during the 5 years I worked in that factory. I had the grades to go to uni. I had a fees paid scholarship to do physics at Aberystwyth. Had I done that, I think it's very likely I would have either dropped out or got a poor grade, followed by a menial job - Although I was very bright, and academically able, I didn't like being academic and I didn't at that age have the drive and work ethic required.
IMHO 90% of young people would actually learn more useful stuff going into the workforce at 18, rather than spending 3-4 years and £50-100k for a system that basically amounts to credentialism, so they can get a "graduate level" job. And as a bonus, they would be economically productive for those 3-4 years, rather than just a net drain.
Every other country in the world believes that the way to get ahead is to improve the skills of its people to compete as a modern global economy.
In Britain people are still grumbling about not being able to send kids down the mine because they're in school until age 14 (to slightly unfairly paraphrase your argument).
It's baffling.
The problem with your argument, is that someone needs to go down the mine. What we're doing is sending them on a very expensive course in something often unrelated to mining, so that they can go down the mine afterwards. This may not be value.
I'm pretty unconvinced that Uni actually does much for the useful skills people need - my wife works at the back end of a Financial services outfit; they recruit graduates to do lots of relatively straightforward processes. She has endless problems which boil down to the fact most of them don't understand things like percentages properly; which you might hope to have learnt in GCSE maths.
The latest figures I could find said there are 36000 people working in mining in the UK, and lots of them won’t actually be going down mines. There are 47000 people in the UK in the computer games industry. There are 199000 lawyers. There are 357000 accountants. So, yes, someone needs to go down the mine, but not very many.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
It’s a sector that should be ripe for disruption with technology.
Not really. A university is really all about thinking - doing it, showing how to do it, writing about it and criticising it.
Transmission of supposed certainties and appropriate professional tecniques is more proper to a technical education.
There is room for both and a need for both. But it is time to make a distinction.
Pre-internet, universities also provided a pretty unique function of providing a place for smart people interested in particular academic disciplines to get together to communicate and collaborate. That just isn't so true any more.
And the distinction between academic and technical skills isn't entirely clear cut.
They still provide something that nowhere else really does, but it's not ridiculous that we rethink the way in which they fulfil that role.
There is probably more to be gained from rethinking the school curriculum to reflect the modern world, from using spreadsheets to using paintbrushes; from cycling to driving. Do our children really need to know about Oxbow lakes and the unification of Italy?
I'd agree that we should be rethinking education for everyone from infants to oldies. Doing so effectively would require a degree of experimentation though. Top down Gove-style stuff is unlikely to bring about significant improvements.
The danger here is that every rethink of education tends towards valuing it for its extrinsic worth (how does this help me make money, get a nice job) instead of intrinsic worth (knowing stuff, understanding valuing and participating in science, history, culture etc for their own sake, and because of the sort of person you become through it) without which life is not really very meaningful.
Hence my avoid Gove II comment. Local experimentation (though there'd probably be howls about that) might be the way to go about it.
Ironically, Gove was the main proponent of a liberal arts education.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
Well worn racist trope. Compare the "bat soup" stuff about COVID.
How can it be a racist trope if it is true?
Some people come from a culture where you eat apparently wild animals. So they bring that to Britain, they don’t understand that the locals revere certain creatures (like swans and cats) but not others (squirrels and deer)
The Dems should be careful on the Haitian story because if it turns out to be true then that hands a late post debate victory to Trump. And he definitely lost the debate as is
Ugh, as an accidental landlord, this new government hates landlords.
Landlords will only be allowed to raise rents once a year, and to the market rate, under Labour’s rent reforms outlined on Wednesday.
The Government has said it will “ban” in-tenancy rent increases from being written into contracts in legislation set to come in by next summer.
Currently, if a landlord wants to raise the rent they can either write it into the contract as a yearly set increase, or issue a Section 13 notice when they want to raise it. A tenant can dispute a rent increase – but only after it has been enforced.
Other commitments announced on Wednesday include a ban on rental bidding wars, and a further “ban” on landlords refusing housing benefit claimants or parents as tenants – although this is already illegal.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
Ugh, as an accidental landlord, this new government hates landlords.
Landlords will only be allowed to raise rents once a year, and to the market rate, under Labour’s rent reforms outlined on Wednesday.
The Government has said it will “ban” in-tenancy rent increases from being written into contracts in legislation set to come in by next summer.
Currently, if a landlord wants to raise the rent they can either write it into the contract as a yearly set increase, or issue a Section 13 notice when they want to raise it. A tenant can dispute a rent increase – but only after it has been enforced.
Other commitments announced on Wednesday include a ban on rental bidding wars, and a further “ban” on landlords refusing housing benefit claimants or parents as tenants – although this is already illegal.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
If DJT does lose, I think the point he chucked it away was when he was unable to resist parading the supplication of JDV and gave him the Veep slot.
That stupid Childless Cat Lady shit and similar lack-witted drivel has dragged on the campaign. He'd have been better off bringing Haley in from the cold.
Yes, Vance brought nothing. Ohio is not a swing State anymore, and he is not a popular Senator.
The idea with Vance is he has a reasonably authentic white working class story and is quite young (whereas Trump is apparently a billionaire, comes from money, and is elderly). When he was chosen, that also made sense to combat "Scranton Joe" who does have a white working class appeal but is very elderly, as well as Harris, who has a solidly professional background and doesn't really have the middle America connection. It's not just about Ohio, and I think there is too much emphasis on individual state - that tends not to be a key factor in running mate selection.
His trouble is, firstly, that he's not half as good a communicator as he seems to believe. He has a style that mimics Trump (which is maybe what appealed) but lacks the magic ingredient Trump undeniably has of being able to style out horrendous brain farts that would sink most politicians - he has tried to laugh off "childless cat ladies" but just can't do it as effectively as his boss so it's still a real problem. Secondly, Vance made more sense before Biden stood down - Walz was a pretty good reactive pick with a modest background and, frankly, a much warmer style than Vance.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
It looks like Harris did win this debate then based on the post debate snap polls.
However I doubt it makes much difference to the polling. Hillary Clinton won every debate with Trump in 2016 and his voteshare was little changed and it was much the same in 2020 when a pre dementia Biden won his debates with Trump too.
However if Harris can squeeze more Independents into her camp after her debate win it could help her a little in swing states
I think this was a somewhat bigger deal because Hillary Clinton was very well-known at that point, whereas there seem to be quite a few undecided voters who don't feel like they know much about Kamala Harris.
Yes. After the slightest of display of nerves at the start, Harris grew into her performance, fleshed out her personality for those that haven’t been paying attention, and demonstrated that she is capable of both dealing with Trump and performing at top level politics.
Her reference to people leaving Trump’s rallies in boredom was a masterstroke, targeted directly at his fragile ego. After that, he lost any focus, turned into a rambling idiot, and kept coming back to his increasingly incredible claims about illegal immigration regardless of the question. In an instant, Mussolini was transformed into Leon.
Quite probably, last night was when Harris became the winner.
Ugh, as an accidental landlord, this new government hates landlords.
Landlords will only be allowed to raise rents once a year, and to the market rate, under Labour’s rent reforms outlined on Wednesday.
The Government has said it will “ban” in-tenancy rent increases from being written into contracts in legislation set to come in by next summer.
Currently, if a landlord wants to raise the rent they can either write it into the contract as a yearly set increase, or issue a Section 13 notice when they want to raise it. A tenant can dispute a rent increase – but only after it has been enforced.
Other commitments announced on Wednesday include a ban on rental bidding wars, and a further “ban” on landlords refusing housing benefit claimants or parents as tenants – although this is already illegal.
"The Government will also legally require landlords and letting agents to publish an “asking rent” for their property, and prevent them from asking for, encouraging, or accepting any bids above this price."
As someone who offered £50 a month over the asking price to get his current place (essentially to ameliorate likely landlord concerns about self-employment) this one stinks. If everyone offers the same price, the landlord will only ever pick the candidate with the safest job or highest salary. The alternative is forcing the landlord to consider applications in strict order, I suppose.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
Ugh, as an accidental landlord, this new government hates landlords.
Landlords will only be allowed to raise rents once a year, and to the market rate, under Labour’s rent reforms outlined on Wednesday.
The Government has said it will “ban” in-tenancy rent increases from being written into contracts in legislation set to come in by next summer.
Currently, if a landlord wants to raise the rent they can either write it into the contract as a yearly set increase, or issue a Section 13 notice when they want to raise it. A tenant can dispute a rent increase – but only after it has been enforced.
Other commitments announced on Wednesday include a ban on rental bidding wars, and a further “ban” on landlords refusing housing benefit claimants or parents as tenants – although this is already illegal.
Ugh, as an accidental landlord, this new government hates landlords.
Landlords will only be allowed to raise rents once a year, and to the market rate, under Labour’s rent reforms outlined on Wednesday.
The Government has said it will “ban” in-tenancy rent increases from being written into contracts in legislation set to come in by next summer.
Currently, if a landlord wants to raise the rent they can either write it into the contract as a yearly set increase, or issue a Section 13 notice when they want to raise it. A tenant can dispute a rent increase – but only after it has been enforced.
Other commitments announced on Wednesday include a ban on rental bidding wars, and a further “ban” on landlords refusing housing benefit claimants or parents as tenants – although this is already illegal.
Ugh, as an accidental landlord, this new government hates landlords.
Landlords will only be allowed to raise rents once a year, and to the market rate, under Labour’s rent reforms outlined on Wednesday.
The Government has said it will “ban” in-tenancy rent increases from being written into contracts in legislation set to come in by next summer.
Currently, if a landlord wants to raise the rent they can either write it into the contract as a yearly set increase, or issue a Section 13 notice when they want to raise it. A tenant can dispute a rent increase – but only after it has been enforced.
Other commitments announced on Wednesday include a ban on rental bidding wars, and a further “ban” on landlords refusing housing benefit claimants or parents as tenants – although this is already illegal.
There’s a little bit of Telegraph exaggeration there. The head of the union is mooting a ballot on strike action. There’s nothing imminent.
The union remains militant, but I’m not certain the membership is that eager for more strike action. But the union is right that the sector is in trouble. Undergrad fees remain frozen despite the inflation of recent years. It’s not rocket science: costs have gone up, but a major source of income hasn’t, so universities are in deficit.
Good morning everyone.
I think this is an interesting one.
Despite its squeezes, the university sector has had a long period relatively in the sun - meaning perhaps 25 years, compared to for example local authorities, public transport, the legal system, or defence.
How will this play in a competition for scarce (or "find your own" resources)?
Universities across the country have been milking the Student Accommodation cash-cow since 2000 or before, and heavily since ~2005-2010, and have also targeted intertnational student fees. What other income sources are available?
I would want to see evidence to back up that claim
The biggest providers in the market nowadays are private firms such as Unite, IQ or Student Roost all backed by pension funds.
Which claim?
I made several observations. I was also timed out with the following bonus bit:
Domestic student fees are down afaics by about 35% in real terms since 2010 (£9000 then to £9250 now).
The claim that Universities are milking the accommodation cash-cow. It's not universities who are the real offenders there...
OK. Looked up the actual numbers for tuition fee caps in England.
(External factors are other funding sources and how they change)
So 2011 £3000 / year 2012 £9000 / year 2024 £9250 / year 2011 to 2024 increased by 3.08 2012 to 2024 CPI increase 1.39
what's your point?
The repayment system has changed, so some debate over that but the main issue is that £9k is something that you could realistically see yourself clearing in a few years once in a job, but £27,750 isn't, people struggle to reduce the outstanding balance.
The political reactions in 2046, when the first tranche of £9000 fee loans get written off, will be fascinating. I just hope I am still around to see it.
the recipients of the loans will still have paid a substantial amount in repayments in most cases though, they just won't have cleared them in full.
Ugh, as an accidental landlord, this new government hates landlords.
Landlords will only be allowed to raise rents once a year, and to the market rate, under Labour’s rent reforms outlined on Wednesday.
The Government has said it will “ban” in-tenancy rent increases from being written into contracts in legislation set to come in by next summer.
Currently, if a landlord wants to raise the rent they can either write it into the contract as a yearly set increase, or issue a Section 13 notice when they want to raise it. A tenant can dispute a rent increase – but only after it has been enforced.
Other commitments announced on Wednesday include a ban on rental bidding wars, and a further “ban” on landlords refusing housing benefit claimants or parents as tenants – although this is already illegal.
When I saw it this morning, I thought Harris looked weak because she appeared to feel the need to be the one to go to his territory. But maybe she was being assertive and showing that she's in charge?
I'm not really sure what Team Kamala hoped to achieve. She travelled to him, and it emphasised their size difference. On the other hand, if the idea was to rattle The Donald, maybe it worked.
It also just appears to have worked with viewers. There are various reasons she's widely judged to have won the debate, but first impressions do matter and I suspect the benefit of taking charge and rather obviously forcing a handshake he clearly didn't want to give outweighed the height difference (which was scarcely a revelation).
Ugh, as an accidental landlord, this new government hates landlords.
Landlords will only be allowed to raise rents once a year, and to the market rate, under Labour’s rent reforms outlined on Wednesday.
The Government has said it will “ban” in-tenancy rent increases from being written into contracts in legislation set to come in by next summer.
Currently, if a landlord wants to raise the rent they can either write it into the contract as a yearly set increase, or issue a Section 13 notice when they want to raise it. A tenant can dispute a rent increase – but only after it has been enforced.
Other commitments announced on Wednesday include a ban on rental bidding wars, and a further “ban” on landlords refusing housing benefit claimants or parents as tenants – although this is already illegal.
Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Harris is just pitch perfect. And signing off as Childless Cat Lady the chef’s kiss.
Lady is all class.
And Musk’s subsequent offer to impregnate her just put all that into relief.
Nothing has changed my view that the 5th of November will be a blowout for Harris.
How many voters are there that care about Taylor Swift’s voting preference that would not already be voting democrat? It’s more a fleeting morale boost to the campaigners than a game changer surely. The Liz Cheney endorsement feels far more impactful to me.
Heard it stated research showed that Oprah Winfrey's endorsement of Obama was worth 3 million votes to him.
Trump is all about celebrity. The fuel for his ego. It is why he is so thin-skinned about who has the bigger rallies. If an even bigger celebrity wades in to endorse his opponent, it will be the only thing he takes from the debate night. It will enrage him.
Hopefully, America is about to change channels and stop watching him. (I think where he really lost it and never recovered his composure was when Harris goaded him about being fired by the voters. "I'm the only one who gets to say who gets fired!! That's me! Me!!!")
Donald - you're fired from Celebrity World. Go directly to jail. Do not grab any pussy....
Not only is Swift a bigger celebrity than Trump, she’s also considerably richer than he is, and she made her money rather than inheriting it.
Which also reminds us of another Harris barb that scored a direct hit on Trump, when she referred to herself not inheriting lots of money, which spun Trump off into another entirely self-defeating self-justification
When I saw it this morning, I thought Harris looked weak because she appeared to feel the need to be the one to go to his territory. But maybe she was being assertive and showing that she's in charge?
I'm not really sure what Team Kamala hoped to achieve. She travelled to him, and it emphasised their size difference. On the other hand, if the idea was to rattle The Donald, maybe it worked.
It also just appears to have worked with viewers. There are various reasons she's widely judged to have won the debate, but first impressions do matter and I suspect the benefit of taking charge and rather obviously forcing a handshake he clearly didn't want to give outweighed the height difference (which was scarcely a revelation).
There were several PBers last night and even this morning who seemed to think that the height difference would be bad for Kamala. Presumably, they were expecting a lady of south Asian descent to stand 6ft4in and be as porky as the Big Mac muncher beside her?
When I saw it this morning, I thought Harris looked weak because she appeared to feel the need to be the one to go to his territory. But maybe she was being assertive and showing that she's in charge?
I'm not really sure what Team Kamala hoped to achieve. She travelled to him, and it emphasised their size difference. On the other hand, if the idea was to rattle The Donald, maybe it worked.
It also just appears to have worked with viewers. There are various reasons she's widely judged to have won the debate, but first impressions do matter and I suspect the benefit of taking charge and rather obviously forcing a handshake he clearly didn't want to give outweighed the height difference (which was scarcely a revelation).
There were several PBers last night and even this morning who seemed to think that the height difference would be bad for Kamala. Presumably, they were expecting a lady of south Asian descent to stand 6ft4in and be as porky as the Big Mac muncher beside her?
Not a chance, she's giving away 2 inches in heel height for a start
There’s a little bit of Telegraph exaggeration there. The head of the union is mooting a ballot on strike action. There’s nothing imminent.
The union remains militant, but I’m not certain the membership is that eager for more strike action. But the union is right that the sector is in trouble. Undergrad fees remain frozen despite the inflation of recent years. It’s not rocket science: costs have gone up, but a major source of income hasn’t, so universities are in deficit.
Good morning everyone.
I think this is an interesting one.
Despite its squeezes, the university sector has had a long period relatively in the sun - meaning perhaps 25 years, compared to for example local authorities, public transport, the legal system, or defence.
How will this play in a competition for scarce (or "find your own" resources)?
Universities across the country have been milking the Student Accommodation cash-cow since 2000 or before, and heavily since ~2005-2010, and have also targeted intertnational student fees. What other income sources are available?
I would want to see evidence to back up that claim
The biggest providers in the market nowadays are private firms such as Unite, IQ or Student Roost all backed by pension funds.
Which claim?
I made several observations. I was also timed out with the following bonus bit:
Domestic student fees are down afaics by about 35% in real terms since 2010 (£9000 then to £9250 now).
The claim that Universities are milking the accommodation cash-cow. It's not universities who are the real offenders there...
OK. Looked up the actual numbers for tuition fee caps in England.
(External factors are other funding sources and how they change)
So 2011 £3000 / year 2012 £9000 / year 2024 £9250 / year 2011 to 2024 increased by 3.08 2012 to 2024 CPI increase 1.39
what's your point?
The repayment system has changed, so some debate over that but the main issue is that £9k is something that you could realistically see yourself clearing in a few years once in a job, but £27,750 isn't, people struggle to reduce the outstanding balance.
The political reactions in 2046, when the first tranche of £9000 fee loans get written off, will be fascinating. I just hope I am still around to see it.
the recipients of the loans will still have paid a substantial amount in repayments in most cases though, they just won't have cleared them in full.
As I see it, there will be 4 distinct groups, who will have differing reactions to this.
1) high-earning graduates, who will already have paid their loans off; 2) middle-earning graduates, who were still repaying, but now find themselves with 9% extra disposable income; 3) low-earning graduates, who will never have paid a penny back on their loans; and 4) people who never took out a student loan.
If DJT does lose, I think the point he chucked it away was when he was unable to resist parading the supplication of JDV and gave him the Veep slot.
That stupid Childless Cat Lady shit and similar lack-witted drivel has dragged on the campaign. He'd have been better off bringing Haley in from the cold.
In the unlikely event of it being offered, would she have accepted ?
She's a politician, why the fuck would she refuse? If DJT wins, she's in pole position for the 2028 GOP nomination and there is a sporting chance that the fat piece of shit will have a massive myocardial infarction on the 18th green at some point in the next four years and then she's sat behind the Resolute Desk.
How did that work out for Pence ? How's it going to do for JD ?
She's not an idiot.
What is the route for either of those men to the Presidency without being VP?
I mean, Pence quite obviously didn't become President and won't do so in future. But it's not like he'd be Republican candidate today if he'd politely declined Trump's approach - he'd be a rather uncharismatic retired former Governor of a not particularly big state.
The fact a gamble doesn't pay off doesn't mean it's a stupid gamble. By going on Trump's ticket, Pence massively increased his chance of becoming President one day - he was VP to a rather old and unfit (both physically and in terms of impeachment risk) President for four years and, had Trump won in 2020, he'd have had a reasonable chance of the nomination. It didn't work out, but it wasn't at all stupid judged on what we all knew in 2016.
For Vance, he may well still become President. It's a close election and, if Trump wins, he'll be VP to an elderly man. Just on an actuarial basis, he'd have a fair chance of getting it. What's his route otherwise? He's a Senator so there is one - but he's one of many with an outside chance when Trump leaves the scene - couldn't be above 10% though.
Ugh, as an accidental landlord, this new government hates landlords.
Landlords will only be allowed to raise rents once a year, and to the market rate, under Labour’s rent reforms outlined on Wednesday.
The Government has said it will “ban” in-tenancy rent increases from being written into contracts in legislation set to come in by next summer.
Currently, if a landlord wants to raise the rent they can either write it into the contract as a yearly set increase, or issue a Section 13 notice when they want to raise it. A tenant can dispute a rent increase – but only after it has been enforced.
Other commitments announced on Wednesday include a ban on rental bidding wars, and a further “ban” on landlords refusing housing benefit claimants or parents as tenants – although this is already illegal.
This also strikes me as rather suboptimal for tenants. The lesson that you can't legislate away the market seems to be one that has to be relearnt again each generation.
When I saw it this morning, I thought Harris looked weak because she appeared to feel the need to be the one to go to his territory. But maybe she was being assertive and showing that she's in charge?
I'm not really sure what Team Kamala hoped to achieve. She travelled to him, and it emphasised their size difference. On the other hand, if the idea was to rattle The Donald, maybe it worked.
It also just appears to have worked with viewers. There are various reasons she's widely judged to have won the debate, but first impressions do matter and I suspect the benefit of taking charge and rather obviously forcing a handshake he clearly didn't want to give outweighed the height difference (which was scarcely a revelation).
There were several PBers last night and even this morning who seemed to think that the height difference would be bad for Kamala. Presumably, they were expecting a lady of south Asian descent to stand 6ft4in and be as porky as the Big Mac muncher beside her?
Not a chance, she's giving away 2 inches in heel height for a start
Ha! She traded her usual stilettos for kitten heels last night so conceded a further two inches voluntarily. My assumption was she doesn't much care about the height difference – unlike certain PBers...
A little travel anecdote to pass the time as I wait to go back to sleep at 5am
I am in “Manning Park”, en route to the Okanagan Valley, in the Cascade Mountains, BC. Yesterday the hotel receptionist mentioned some “nice lakes” nearby, something I could do to while away an afternoon. I shrugged, thinking: “how good can they be, never heard of Manning Park?”
In the end, I sighed, but hiked over, and had a look
Honestly three of the most beautiful hours I’ve ever spent: utterly sublime. And I was basically alone
A little travel anecdote to pass the time as I wait to go back to sleep at 5am
I am in “Manning Park”, en route to the Okanagan Valley, in the Cascade Mountains, BC. Yesterday the hotel receptionist mentioned some “nice lakes” nearby, something I could do to while away an afternoon. I shrugged, thinking: “how good can they be, never heard of Manning Park?”
In the end, I sighed, but hiked over, and had a look
Honestly three of the most beautiful hours I’ve ever spent: utterly sublime. And I was basically alone
Lovely.
Basically alone? The other day I saw a car advert that said it was 'fully' hybrid. I thought well it is either a hybrid or it isn't. It can be ICE with a little electric or a lot of electric input but it is a hybrid whatever. My car is 'fully' hybrid, but it isn't a plug in so what does 'fully' mean. If it means plug in then say so.
Ditto 'Basically alone'. What does that mean?
End of pedantry. You can tell I have a job to do that I am avoiding.
If DJT does lose, I think the point he chucked it away was when he was unable to resist parading the supplication of JDV and gave him the Veep slot.
That stupid Childless Cat Lady shit and similar lack-witted drivel has dragged on the campaign. He'd have been better off bringing Haley in from the cold.
In the unlikely event of it being offered, would she have accepted ?
She's a politician, why the fuck would she refuse? If DJT wins, she's in pole position for the 2028 GOP nomination and there is a sporting chance that the fat piece of shit will have a massive myocardial infarction on the 18th green at some point in the next four years and then she's sat behind the Resolute Desk.
How did that work out for Pence ? How's it going to do for JD ?
She's not an idiot.
What is the route for either of those men to the Presidency without being VP?
I mean, Pence quite obviously didn't become President and won't do so in future. But it's not like he'd be Republican candidate today if he'd politely declined Trump's approach - he'd be a rather uncharismatic retired former Governor of a not particularly big state.
The fact a gamble doesn't pay off doesn't mean it's a stupid gamble. By going on Trump's ticket, Pence massively increased his chance of becoming President one day - he was VP to a rather old and unfit (both physically and in terms of impeachment risk) President for four years and, had Trump won in 2020, he'd have had a reasonable chance of the nomination. It didn't work out, but it wasn't at all stupid judged on what we all knew in 2016.
For Vance, he may well still become President. It's a close election and, if Trump wins, he'll be VP to an elderly man. Just on an actuarial basis, he'd have a fair chance of getting it. What's his route otherwise? He's a Senator so there is one - but he's one of many with an outside chance when Trump leaves the scene - couldn't be above 10% though.
Sure. But Haley has her own route without Trump.
She was the voice of reason who ran against him. The voice of reason who kowtowed to the nutter doesn't have the same ring.
A little travel anecdote to pass the time as I wait to go back to sleep at 5am
I am in “Manning Park”, en route to the Okanagan Valley, in the Cascade Mountains, BC. Yesterday the hotel receptionist mentioned some “nice lakes” nearby, something I could do to while away an afternoon. I shrugged, thinking: “how good can they be, never heard of Manning Park?”
In the end, I sighed, but hiked over, and had a look
Honestly three of the most beautiful hours I’ve ever spent: utterly sublime. And I was basically alone
Lovely.
Basically alone? The other day I saw a car advert that said it was 'fully' hybrid. I thought well it is either a hybrid or it isn't. It can be ICE with a little electric or a lot of electric input but it is a hybrid whatever. My car is 'fully' hybrid, but it isn't a plug in so what does 'fully' mean. If it means plug in then say so.
Ditto 'Basically alone'. What does that mean?
End of pedantry. You can tell I have a job to do that I am avoiding.
I was completely alone for 85% of the time. ie if I stopped walking, looked around, I would see and hear no one else. Zero humans (and no human noise)
Occasionally I saw a fisherman or another hiker, or a lone kayaker in the distance. At one memorable moment I saw a young woman in the world’s tiniest bikini - she was camping and swimming with her boyfriend. She gave me a wide smile as I purposefully looked ahead, determined not to perv her
On topic - that Haley quote looks almost as prescient as my recent reminder to you all that the first debate in 2020 probably cost Trump the election.
A way to go yet but that performance leaves Trump in deep trouble outside of his base.
I don't think the woman who recently (and unnecessarily) endorsed Trump is "the other winner from the debate".
If anything, that reduced her chances of leading a post-MAGA GOP. And if it stays MAGA, the MAGAts aren't going to forgive her the things she said when campaigning against their leader.
If anyone, the ‘other winners’ are surely the Cheneys?
As with the Tories, when Trump falls, they will need someone untarnished by what has gone before.
No loss of life, thankfully. "The last tram had traversed the bridge just 18 minutes before the 3:08 am collapse".
And here we were thinking our infrastructure was dodgy, although something about this seems a bit odd.
Corrosion to the point of collapse without someone noticing? I suppose it happened in Italy...
They were exceptionally lucky that there was nobody on it.
Another entry for the ever popular lecture series of Engineering screw ups, so that you can make different mistakes next time...
It is particularly odd, since it was recently renovated:
"Reconstruction took place between 1967 and 1971. It underwent renovations from 2019 to 2021."
AIUI the tramway section that collapsed had not been renovated yet. It's in 3 sections - footway/road, bit in the middle (which may be a future cycleway), tramway (or the cycleway may be alongside the tramway). The tramway section had a span go collapso.
I'd say the greatest disruption would be to river traffic on the Elbe. Is anyone planning a River Cruise up there?
There’s a little bit of Telegraph exaggeration there. The head of the union is mooting a ballot on strike action. There’s nothing imminent.
The union remains militant, but I’m not certain the membership is that eager for more strike action. But the union is right that the sector is in trouble. Undergrad fees remain frozen despite the inflation of recent years. It’s not rocket science: costs have gone up, but a major source of income hasn’t, so universities are in deficit.
Good morning everyone.
I think this is an interesting one.
Despite its squeezes, the university sector has had a long period relatively in the sun - meaning perhaps 25 years, compared to for example local authorities, public transport, the legal system, or defence.
How will this play in a competition for scarce (or "find your own" resources)?
Universities across the country have been milking the Student Accommodation cash-cow since 2000 or before, and heavily since ~2005-2010, and have also targeted intertnational student fees. What other income sources are available?
I would want to see evidence to back up that claim
The biggest providers in the market nowadays are private firms such as Unite, IQ or Student Roost all backed by pension funds.
Which claim?
I made several observations. I was also timed out with the following bonus bit:
Domestic student fees are down afaics by about 35% in real terms since 2010 (£9000 then to £9250 now).
The claim that Universities are milking the accommodation cash-cow. It's not universities who are the real offenders there...
OK. Looked up the actual numbers for tuition fee caps in England.
(External factors are other funding sources and how they change)
So 2011 £3000 / year 2012 £9000 / year 2024 £9250 / year 2011 to 2024 increased by 3.08 2012 to 2024 CPI increase 1.39
what's your point?
The repayment system has changed, so some debate over that but the main issue is that £9k is something that you could realistically see yourself clearing in a few years once in a job, but £27,750 isn't, people struggle to reduce the outstanding balance.
The political reactions in 2046, when the first tranche of £9000 fee loans get written off, will be fascinating. I just hope I am still around to see it.
the recipients of the loans will still have paid a substantial amount in repayments in most cases though, they just won't have cleared them in full.
As I see it, there will be 4 distinct groups, who will have differing reactions to this.
1) high-earning graduates, who will already have paid their loans off; 2) middle-earning graduates, who were still repaying, but now find themselves with 9% extra disposable income; 3) low-earning graduates, who will never have paid a penny back on their loans; and 4) people who never took out a student loan.
Student loans are bit complicated, but have I got this right? You borrow maybe £50,000 and pay it back at 9% of earnings over about £25 k. Interest rate is about 6 or 7%.
6% of 50,000 is £3k, so the bill rises by £3K annually unless paid off.
So just to keep paying off the interest, not reducing the principal, you have to earn £25+£33k per annum - £58K. 9% of £33K is just under £3K. Round here £58K is a lot.
This calculation must be wrong or else this system is deranged. Can someone put it right/explain?
A little travel anecdote to pass the time as I wait to go back to sleep at 5am
I am in “Manning Park”, en route to the Okanagan Valley, in the Cascade Mountains, BC. Yesterday the hotel receptionist mentioned some “nice lakes” nearby, something I could do to while away an afternoon. I shrugged, thinking: “how good can they be, never heard of Manning Park?”
In the end, I sighed, but hiked over, and had a look
Honestly three of the most beautiful hours I’ve ever spent: utterly sublime. And I was basically alone
Lovely.
Basically alone? The other day I saw a car advert that said it was 'fully' hybrid. I thought well it is either a hybrid or it isn't. It can be ICE with a little electric or a lot of electric input but it is a hybrid whatever. My car is 'fully' hybrid, but it isn't a plug in so what does 'fully' mean. If it means plug in then say so.
Ditto 'Basically alone'. What does that mean?
End of pedantry. You can tell I have a job to do that I am avoiding.
I was completely alone for 85% of the time. ie if I stopped walking, looked around, I would see and hear no one else. Zero humans (and no human noise)
Occasionally I saw a fisherman or another hiker, or a lone kayaker in the distance. At one memorable moment I saw a young woman in the world’s tiniest bikini - she was camping and swimming with her boyfriend. She gave me a wide smile as I purposefully looked ahead, determined not to perv her
I think “basically alone” is a fair description
It is. I was fed up with what I have to do and I wanted to tell the 'fully hybrid' story which I do think is a nonsense description and you gave me an in.
When I saw it this morning, I thought Harris looked weak because she appeared to feel the need to be the one to go to his territory. But maybe she was being assertive and showing that she's in charge?
I'm not really sure what Team Kamala hoped to achieve. She travelled to him, and it emphasised their size difference. On the other hand, if the idea was to rattle The Donald, maybe it worked.
It also just appears to have worked with viewers. There are various reasons she's widely judged to have won the debate, but first impressions do matter and I suspect the benefit of taking charge and rather obviously forcing a handshake he clearly didn't want to give outweighed the height difference (which was scarcely a revelation).
There were several PBers last night and even this morning who seemed to think that the height difference would be bad for Kamala. Presumably, they were expecting a lady of south Asian descent to stand 6ft4in and be as porky as the Big Mac muncher beside her?
I was half expecting a certain poster to show up and claim
- there is no average height difference between women and men. - women are shorter because they are held back from growing taller by the patriarchy
When I saw it this morning, I thought Harris looked weak because she appeared to feel the need to be the one to go to his territory. But maybe she was being assertive and showing that she's in charge?
I'm not really sure what Team Kamala hoped to achieve. She travelled to him, and it emphasised their size difference. On the other hand, if the idea was to rattle The Donald, maybe it worked.
It also just appears to have worked with viewers. There are various reasons she's widely judged to have won the debate, but first impressions do matter and I suspect the benefit of taking charge and rather obviously forcing a handshake he clearly didn't want to give outweighed the height difference (which was scarcely a revelation).
There were several PBers last night and even this morning who seemed to think that the height difference would be bad for Kamala. Presumably, they were expecting a lady of south Asian descent to stand 6ft4in and be as porky as the Big Mac muncher beside her?
Her team had clearly gamed it out. The podiums were scaled, so that she didn't look diminutive in any of the wide shots.
And Trump let her boss the stage - couldn't even meet her gaze. So the height thing did nothing for him.
A little travel anecdote to pass the time as I wait to go back to sleep at 5am
I am in “Manning Park”, en route to the Okanagan Valley, in the Cascade Mountains, BC. Yesterday the hotel receptionist mentioned some “nice lakes” nearby, something I could do to while away an afternoon. I shrugged, thinking: “how good can they be, never heard of Manning Park?”
In the end, I sighed, but hiked over, and had a look
Honestly three of the most beautiful hours I’ve ever spent: utterly sublime. And I was basically alone
Lovely.
Basically alone? The other day I saw a car advert that said it was 'fully' hybrid. I thought well it is either a hybrid or it isn't. It can be ICE with a little electric or a lot of electric input but it is a hybrid whatever. My car is 'fully' hybrid, but it isn't a plug in so what does 'fully' mean. If it means plug in then say so.
Ditto 'Basically alone'. What does that mean?
End of pedantry. You can tell I have a job to do that I am avoiding.
I was completely alone for 85% of the time. ie if I stopped walking, looked around, I would see and hear no one else. Zero humans (and no human noise)
Occasionally I saw a fisherman or another hiker, or a lone kayaker in the distance. At one memorable moment I saw a young woman in the world’s tiniest bikini - she was camping and swimming with her boyfriend. She gave me a wide smile as I purposefully looked ahead, determined not to perv her
I think “basically alone” is a fair description
It's peak bear season (I was there this time last year and a couple and their dog were killed by a grizzly 40 miles from where I was) so remember to pack bear spray.
There’s a little bit of Telegraph exaggeration there. The head of the union is mooting a ballot on strike action. There’s nothing imminent.
The union remains militant, but I’m not certain the membership is that eager for more strike action. But the union is right that the sector is in trouble. Undergrad fees remain frozen despite the inflation of recent years. It’s not rocket science: costs have gone up, but a major source of income hasn’t, so universities are in deficit.
Good morning everyone.
I think this is an interesting one.
Despite its squeezes, the university sector has had a long period relatively in the sun - meaning perhaps 25 years, compared to for example local authorities, public transport, the legal system, or defence.
How will this play in a competition for scarce (or "find your own" resources)?
Universities across the country have been milking the Student Accommodation cash-cow since 2000 or before, and heavily since ~2005-2010, and have also targeted intertnational student fees. What other income sources are available?
I would want to see evidence to back up that claim
The biggest providers in the market nowadays are private firms such as Unite, IQ or Student Roost all backed by pension funds.
Which claim?
I made several observations. I was also timed out with the following bonus bit:
Domestic student fees are down afaics by about 35% in real terms since 2010 (£9000 then to £9250 now).
The claim that Universities are milking the accommodation cash-cow. It's not universities who are the real offenders there...
OK. Looked up the actual numbers for tuition fee caps in England.
(External factors are other funding sources and how they change)
So 2011 £3000 / year 2012 £9000 / year 2024 £9250 / year 2011 to 2024 increased by 3.08 2012 to 2024 CPI increase 1.39
what's your point?
The repayment system has changed, so some debate over that but the main issue is that £9k is something that you could realistically see yourself clearing in a few years once in a job, but £27,750 isn't, people struggle to reduce the outstanding balance.
The political reactions in 2046, when the first tranche of £9000 fee loans get written off, will be fascinating. I just hope I am still around to see it.
the recipients of the loans will still have paid a substantial amount in repayments in most cases though, they just won't have cleared them in full.
As I see it, there will be 4 distinct groups, who will have differing reactions to this.
1) high-earning graduates, who will already have paid their loans off; 2) middle-earning graduates, who were still repaying, but now find themselves with 9% extra disposable income; 3) low-earning graduates, who will never have paid a penny back on their loans; and 4) people who never took out a student loan.
Student loans are bit complicated, but have I got this right? You borrow maybe £50,000 and pay it back at 9% of earnings over about £25 k. Interest rate is about 6 or 7%.
6% of 50,000 is £3k, so the bill rises by £3K annually unless paid off.
So just to keep paying off the interest, not reducing the principal, you have to earn £25+£33k per annum - £58K. 9% of £33K is just under £3K. Round here £58K is a lot.
This calculation must be wrong or else this system is deranged. Can someone put it right/explain?
Your calculation is correct - unless the student starts earning seriously money very quickly the debt will expand at a rate far quicker than the ability to pay it off....
The WH2016 betting moves markedly back to Clinton after convincing first debate performance
Yebbut, she won the popular vote. Her mistake was taking the 'blue wall' for granted and not bothering to campaign there. Trump visited late in the campaign and won by tiny majorities, but that gave him the Electoral College.
Clinton was surrounded by idiots - for letting her lose the blue wall.
But she was a uniqely unpleasant offering for high office. Nobody since Nixon had come close. Thankfully for her long-term record, J D Vance has clearly stolen her title.
But at the time that is not how Clinton was perceived. No one viewed her as 'uniquely unpleasant' just as 6 months no one on here thought Joe Biden was mentally incapable.
She was though an idiot for taking the Blue Wall for granted.
Oh no, she was. Her high negatives in the polling were there to see. I was in the US in summer 2016 and spoke with several people very critical of Clinton.
She was the wrong pick to win an election, even though it's possible she's might have made a decent President.
On EI, Harris clearly scores well ahead of Clinton, which is the nub of the matter. Clinton’s best career move was her choice of partner.
When I saw it this morning, I thought Harris looked weak because she appeared to feel the need to be the one to go to his territory. But maybe she was being assertive and showing that she's in charge?
I'm not really sure what Team Kamala hoped to achieve. She travelled to him, and it emphasised their size difference. On the other hand, if the idea was to rattle The Donald, maybe it worked.
It also just appears to have worked with viewers. There are various reasons she's widely judged to have won the debate, but first impressions do matter and I suspect the benefit of taking charge and rather obviously forcing a handshake he clearly didn't want to give outweighed the height difference (which was scarcely a revelation).
There were several PBers last night and even this morning who seemed to think that the height difference would be bad for Kamala. Presumably, they were expecting a lady of south Asian descent to stand 6ft4in and be as porky as the Big Mac muncher beside her?
The height thing isn't such a player when it's man v woman. What can be a player is 'the fairer sex' - the perception of a woman as being not tough enough for the serious business of leading a superpower - which is why her coming across as a strong person was particularly important. Which I think she did.
There’s a little bit of Telegraph exaggeration there. The head of the union is mooting a ballot on strike action. There’s nothing imminent.
The union remains militant, but I’m not certain the membership is that eager for more strike action. But the union is right that the sector is in trouble. Undergrad fees remain frozen despite the inflation of recent years. It’s not rocket science: costs have gone up, but a major source of income hasn’t, so universities are in deficit.
If they increase tuition fees further then there'll be a further decline in student numbers, they're also being rinsed for accommodation. From ES "Figures from Ucas (Universities and Colleges Admissions Service) show by the end of June 41.9% of all 18-year-olds in the UK had applied through their system – compared to 42.1% last year and 44.1% in 2022."
I am very pro universities, but the idea that 40%+ of our 18 year olds should be even thinking of going to one is ludicrous. The way in which the entire media prioritise them as the route for young people is absurd and damaging, and must be contributing to the jobs crisis in unfashionable fields, the marginalisation of FE, and apprentices.
I can't think of a country other than Britain where the idea that its young people are receiving too much education has so much traction. If you suggested this in Ireland people would think you were madder than Donald Trump.
What is wrong with Britain?
Take this argument to it's logical conclusion - if full time education is so good for us, we should all remain in full time education until we are 50, or even 70. Just think what an amazing workforce the country would have, all these brilliant educated minds...
The reality is that time spent in education is not free - it's years of life not spent doing something else. If you enter the labour force at 22, and retire at 65, that's 43 years. The four years from 18-22 are almost ten percent of your working life. Imagine what the country could do with 10% more workers and no extra costs (it might solve the "need" for the mass immigration Ponzi scheme)
I didn't go to university, and spent the equivalent part of my life doing relatively menial jobs in a factory (although as I grew up I took on supervisory roles). I'm now at the age of 37 running a successful small business, currently employing 5 people. Having just looked it up, I'm earning just under the 90th percentile of the income distribution (and not in the outrageously overpriced South East either, unlike most such high earners).
A lot of my success comes from what I learnt (particularly about human nature) during the 5 years I worked in that factory. I had the grades to go to uni. I had a fees paid scholarship to do physics at Aberystwyth. Had I done that, I think it's very likely I would have either dropped out or got a poor grade, followed by a menial job - Although I was very bright, and academically able, I didn't like being academic and I didn't at that age have the drive and work ethic required.
IMHO 90% of young people would actually learn more useful stuff going into the workforce at 18, rather than spending 3-4 years and £50-100k for a system that basically amounts to credentialism, so they can get a "graduate level" job. And as a bonus, they would be economically productive for those 3-4 years, rather than just a net drain.
Every other country in the world believes that the way to get ahead is to improve the skills of its people to compete as a modern global economy.
In Britain people are still grumbling about not being able to send kids down the mine because they're in school until age 14 (to slightly unfairly paraphrase your argument).
It's baffling.
The problem with your argument, is that someone needs to go down the mine. What we're doing is sending them on a very expensive course in something often unrelated to mining, so that they can go down the mine afterwards. This may not be value.
I'm pretty unconvinced that Uni actually does much for the useful skills people need - my wife works at the back end of a Financial services outfit; they recruit graduates to do lots of relatively straightforward processes. She has endless problems which boil down to the fact most of them don't understand things like percentages properly; which you might hope to have learnt in GCSE maths.
The latest figures I could find said there are 36000 people working in mining in the UK, and lots of them won’t actually be going down mines. There are 47000 people in the UK in the computer games industry. There are 199000 lawyers. There are 357000 accountants. So, yes, someone needs to go down the mine, but not very many.
We should send the accountants and lawyers down the mine and not let them back up
It’s a sector that should be ripe for disruption with technology.
Not really. A university is really all about thinking - doing it, showing how to do it, writing about it and criticising it.
Transmission of supposed certainties and appropriate professional tecniques is more proper to a technical education.
There is room for both and a need for both. But it is time to make a distinction.
Pre-internet, universities also provided a pretty unique function of providing a place for smart people interested in particular academic disciplines to get together to communicate and collaborate. That just isn't so true any more.
And the distinction between academic and technical skills isn't entirely clear cut.
They still provide something that nowhere else really does, but it's not ridiculous that we rethink the way in which they fulfil that role.
There is probably more to be gained from rethinking the school curriculum to reflect the modern world, from using spreadsheets to using paintbrushes; from cycling to driving. Do our children really need to know about Oxbow lakes and the unification of Italy?
The main problem with only teaching what people need to know is who decides?
An education that restricted itself to only the things people need to know would run up against a big problem: how can you possibly know now what will be useful in ten, twenty, or thirty years? I ended up using the O-level French I learned at school far more than I did my A-level Chemistry, but at the time I regarded it as a waste of time. Ox-bow lakes are often give as a classic example of useless knowledge, but understanding physical geography helps to explain why some things are where they are and why building on that nice flat bit of land near the river might not be such a good idea.
We cannot teach everything so the question is, if we are to add new subjects in order to make the curriculum more relevant to today, which sacred cows are to be dropped?
A bigger problem is that if you don't teach 13-year-olds that table salt is sodium chloride arranged in face centred cubic crystals, which almost no-one needs to know, we shan't have any scientists in the decades to come.
It’s mostly exercise for the brain, anyhow; it doesn’t really matter whether what you forget you learned at university is of any use.
Folks go to the gym and use that machine where you push the pads apart with your knees. No-one keeps going on about the essential uselessness of being able to push your knees apart.
No loss of life, thankfully. "The last tram had traversed the bridge just 18 minutes before the 3:08 am collapse".
And here we were thinking our infrastructure was dodgy, although something about this seems a bit odd.
Corrosion to the point of collapse without someone noticing? I suppose it happened in Italy...
They were exceptionally lucky that there was nobody on it.
Another entry for the ever popular lecture series of Engineering screw ups, so that you can make different mistakes next time...
It is particularly odd, since it was recently renovated:
"Reconstruction took place between 1967 and 1971. It underwent renovations from 2019 to 2021."
AIUI the tramway section that collapsed had not been renovated yet. It's in 3 sections - footway/road, bit in the middle (which may be a future cycleway), tramway (or the cycleway may be alongside the tramway). The tramway section had a span go collapso.
I'd say the greatest disruption would be to river traffic on the Elbe. Is anyone planning a River Cruise up there?
There’s a little bit of Telegraph exaggeration there. The head of the union is mooting a ballot on strike action. There’s nothing imminent.
The union remains militant, but I’m not certain the membership is that eager for more strike action. But the union is right that the sector is in trouble. Undergrad fees remain frozen despite the inflation of recent years. It’s not rocket science: costs have gone up, but a major source of income hasn’t, so universities are in deficit.
Good morning everyone.
I think this is an interesting one.
Despite its squeezes, the university sector has had a long period relatively in the sun - meaning perhaps 25 years, compared to for example local authorities, public transport, the legal system, or defence.
How will this play in a competition for scarce (or "find your own" resources)?
Universities across the country have been milking the Student Accommodation cash-cow since 2000 or before, and heavily since ~2005-2010, and have also targeted intertnational student fees. What other income sources are available?
I would want to see evidence to back up that claim
The biggest providers in the market nowadays are private firms such as Unite, IQ or Student Roost all backed by pension funds.
Which claim?
I made several observations. I was also timed out with the following bonus bit:
Domestic student fees are down afaics by about 35% in real terms since 2010 (£9000 then to £9250 now).
The claim that Universities are milking the accommodation cash-cow. It's not universities who are the real offenders there...
OK. Looked up the actual numbers for tuition fee caps in England.
(External factors are other funding sources and how they change)
So 2011 £3000 / year 2012 £9000 / year 2024 £9250 / year 2011 to 2024 increased by 3.08 2012 to 2024 CPI increase 1.39
what's your point?
The repayment system has changed, so some debate over that but the main issue is that £9k is something that you could realistically see yourself clearing in a few years once in a job, but £27,750 isn't, people struggle to reduce the outstanding balance.
The political reactions in 2046, when the first tranche of £9000 fee loans get written off, will be fascinating. I just hope I am still around to see it.
the recipients of the loans will still have paid a substantial amount in repayments in most cases though, they just won't have cleared them in full.
As I see it, there will be 4 distinct groups, who will have differing reactions to this.
1) high-earning graduates, who will already have paid their loans off; 2) middle-earning graduates, who were still repaying, but now find themselves with 9% extra disposable income; 3) low-earning graduates, who will never have paid a penny back on their loans; and 4) people who never took out a student loan.
Student loans are bit complicated, but have I got this right? You borrow maybe £50,000 and pay it back at 9% of earnings over about £25 k. Interest rate is about 6 or 7%.
6% of 50,000 is £3k, so the bill rises by £3K annually unless paid off.
So just to keep paying off the interest, not reducing the principal, you have to earn £25+£33k per annum - £58K. 9% of £33K is just under £3K. Round here £58K is a lot.
This calculation must be wrong or else this system is deranged. Can someone put it right/explain?
The interest rate is variable, depending on inflation and income. So, yes, complicated.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Joking aside, I think we should be careful about the Dead Dog mockery. It's completely bonkers. But it pulls the debate into an area Trump wants. "Are migrants eating dead dogs or not". Harris needs to be careful she doesn't let him throw a half-eaten dog on the table.
A little travel anecdote to pass the time as I wait to go back to sleep at 5am
I am in “Manning Park”, en route to the Okanagan Valley, in the Cascade Mountains, BC. Yesterday the hotel receptionist mentioned some “nice lakes” nearby, something I could do to while away an afternoon. I shrugged, thinking: “how good can they be, never heard of Manning Park?”
In the end, I sighed, but hiked over, and had a look
Honestly three of the most beautiful hours I’ve ever spent: utterly sublime. And I was basically alone
Lovely.
Basically alone? The other day I saw a car advert that said it was 'fully' hybrid. I thought well it is either a hybrid or it isn't. It can be ICE with a little electric or a lot of electric input but it is a hybrid whatever. My car is 'fully' hybrid, but it isn't a plug in so what does 'fully' mean. If it means plug in then say so.
Ditto 'Basically alone'. What does that mean?
End of pedantry. You can tell I have a job to do that I am avoiding.
I was completely alone for 85% of the time. ie if I stopped walking, looked around, I would see and hear no one else. Zero humans (and no human noise)
Occasionally I saw a fisherman or another hiker, or a lone kayaker in the distance. At one memorable moment I saw a young woman in the world’s tiniest bikini - she was camping and swimming with her boyfriend. She gave me a wide smile as I purposefully looked ahead, determined not to perv her
I think “basically alone” is a fair description
It's peak bear season (I was there this time last year and a couple and their dog were killed by a grizzly 40 miles from where I was) so remember to pack bear spray.
👍
No bears in this neck of the woods but later on there will be. Useful advice, ta
Trump says he is 'less inclined' to participate in another debate Donald Trump, speaking to Fox and Friends, said he didn’t know if he wanted to debate Kamala Harris again, claiming he “won the debate” last night.
Well, I’d be less inclined to because we had a great night. We won the debate.
Trump had previously agreed to participate in a debate hosted by Fox News, moderated by Martha MacCallum and Bret Baier. But this morning, he said:
I wouldn’t want to have Martha and Bret. I’d love to have somebody else other than Martha and Bret.
He could do with a re run where he gets an electric shock every time he goes off topic
Harris was better than I expected
Weird thing to say but I found the whole thing incredibly harrowing because Trump was so shit, weird and palpably insane. I don't know what I was expecting but he was deranged, on global telly. I assumed he'd at least try to look presidential. Yet this loony could soon be Potus. It was a scary couple of hours.
It’s a sector that should be ripe for disruption with technology.
Not really. A university is really all about thinking - doing it, showing how to do it, writing about it and criticising it.
Transmission of supposed certainties and appropriate professional tecniques is more proper to a technical education.
There is room for both and a need for both. But it is time to make a distinction.
Pre-internet, universities also provided a pretty unique function of providing a place for smart people interested in particular academic disciplines to get together to communicate and collaborate. That just isn't so true any more.
And the distinction between academic and technical skills isn't entirely clear cut.
They still provide something that nowhere else really does, but it's not ridiculous that we rethink the way in which they fulfil that role.
There is probably more to be gained from rethinking the school curriculum to reflect the modern world, from using spreadsheets to using paintbrushes; from cycling to driving. Do our children really need to know about Oxbow lakes and the unification of Italy?
The main problem with only teaching what people need to know is who decides?
An education that restricted itself to only the things people need to know would run up against a big problem: how can you possibly know now what will be useful in ten, twenty, or thirty years? I ended up using the O-level French I learned at school far more than I did my A-level Chemistry, but at the time I regarded it as a waste of time. Ox-bow lakes are often give as a classic example of useless knowledge, but understanding physical geography helps to explain why some things are where they are and why building on that nice flat bit of land near the river might not be such a good idea.
We cannot teach everything so the question is, if we are to add new subjects in order to make the curriculum more relevant to today, which sacred cows are to be dropped?
A bigger problem is that if you don't teach 13-year-olds that table salt is sodium chloride arranged in face centred cubic crystals, which almost no-one needs to know, we shan't have any scientists in the decades to come.
It’s mostly exercise for the brain, anyhow; it doesn’t really matter whether what you forget you learned at university is of any use.
Folks go to the gym and use that machine where you push the pads apart with your knees. No-one keeps going on about the essential uselessness of being able to push your knees apart.
Had I known it was a thing, I would. Why on earth would anyone want to do that ?
There’s a little bit of Telegraph exaggeration there. The head of the union is mooting a ballot on strike action. There’s nothing imminent.
The union remains militant, but I’m not certain the membership is that eager for more strike action. But the union is right that the sector is in trouble. Undergrad fees remain frozen despite the inflation of recent years. It’s not rocket science: costs have gone up, but a major source of income hasn’t, so universities are in deficit.
Good morning everyone.
I think this is an interesting one.
Despite its squeezes, the university sector has had a long period relatively in the sun - meaning perhaps 25 years, compared to for example local authorities, public transport, the legal system, or defence.
How will this play in a competition for scarce (or "find your own" resources)?
Universities across the country have been milking the Student Accommodation cash-cow since 2000 or before, and heavily since ~2005-2010, and have also targeted intertnational student fees. What other income sources are available?
I would want to see evidence to back up that claim
The biggest providers in the market nowadays are private firms such as Unite, IQ or Student Roost all backed by pension funds.
Which claim?
I made several observations. I was also timed out with the following bonus bit:
Domestic student fees are down afaics by about 35% in real terms since 2010 (£9000 then to £9250 now).
The claim that Universities are milking the accommodation cash-cow. It's not universities who are the real offenders there...
OK. Looked up the actual numbers for tuition fee caps in England.
(External factors are other funding sources and how they change)
So 2011 £3000 / year 2012 £9000 / year 2024 £9250 / year 2011 to 2024 increased by 3.08 2012 to 2024 CPI increase 1.39
what's your point?
The repayment system has changed, so some debate over that but the main issue is that £9k is something that you could realistically see yourself clearing in a few years once in a job, but £27,750 isn't, people struggle to reduce the outstanding balance.
The political reactions in 2046, when the first tranche of £9000 fee loans get written off, will be fascinating. I just hope I am still around to see it.
the recipients of the loans will still have paid a substantial amount in repayments in most cases though, they just won't have cleared them in full.
As I see it, there will be 4 distinct groups, who will have differing reactions to this.
1) high-earning graduates, who will already have paid their loans off; 2) middle-earning graduates, who were still repaying, but now find themselves with 9% extra disposable income; 3) low-earning graduates, who will never have paid a penny back on their loans; and 4) people who never took out a student loan.
Student loans are bit complicated, but have I got this right? You borrow maybe £50,000 and pay it back at 9% of earnings over about £25 k. Interest rate is about 6 or 7%.
6% of 50,000 is £3k, so the bill rises by £3K annually unless paid off.
So just to keep paying off the interest, not reducing the principal, you have to earn £25+£33k per annum - £58K. 9% of £33K is just under £3K. Round here £58K is a lot.
This calculation must be wrong or else this system is deranged. Can someone put it right/explain?
Your calculation is correct - unless the student starts earning seriously money very quickly the debt will expand at a rate far quicker than the ability to pay it off....
The interest rate used to be lower, so this was much less of an issue.
It will not change one mind. There will not be a single Trump voter who will now say after watching that will now vote Harris.
But, what it will do is harden the Democrat vote and soften the Republican vote at the margins. The reverse of 2016 when Americans found Trump entertaining and Clinton grating. Those debates just gave the Trump campaign oxygen despite Clinton seemingly winning them.
Swift's endorsement in a celebrity obsessed world is just as important than Kamala's steady hand which allowed the Democrats more than anything to expel a huge sigh of relief.
Someone upthread posted a poll suggesting 6% of republicans and 2% of Dems would change their mind as a result of the debate
More Republicans than democrats would reconsider as well
No change was 78% Rep and 88% for Dem
My worry about that is why would any Democrats change their mind from that debate, which then puts in doubt the Republican figure who would consider changing their vote.
Not sure there’s too many minds to be changed. At this point it’s all about the two parties getting their supporters to turn out in the key States.
Which may be the main benefit of Taylor Swift - she may get her fans to go out and vote and by the looks of it vote early...
That’s obviously something on which they’ve been working for a while now. She’s the biggest pop star in the States at the moment, and the endorsement announcement just as the debate finished was well choreographed. She was already known to be a Dem supporter, perhaps unusually for a country singer from Nashville, and endorsed Biden last time out. It would also have been a good distraction if the debate had gone badly for Harris, give her media something positive to talk about. Not sure celeb endorsements mean too much these days, but anything that gets a few more voters registering and turning out is good for your ‘side’.
No loss of life, thankfully. "The last tram had traversed the bridge just 18 minutes before the 3:08 am collapse".
And here we were thinking our infrastructure was dodgy, although something about this seems a bit odd.
Corrosion to the point of collapse without someone noticing? I suppose it happened in Italy...
They were exceptionally lucky that there was nobody on it.
Another entry for the ever popular lecture series of Engineering screw ups, so that you can make different mistakes next time...
It is particularly odd, since it was recently renovated:
"Reconstruction took place between 1967 and 1971. It underwent renovations from 2019 to 2021."
AIUI the tramway section that collapsed had not been renovated yet. It's in 3 sections - footway/road, bit in the middle (which may be a future cycleway), tramway (or the cycleway may be alongside the tramway). The tramway section had a span go collapso.
I'd say the greatest disruption would be to river traffic on the Elbe. Is anyone planning a River Cruise up there?
It will not change one mind. There will not be a single Trump voter who will now say after watching that will now vote Harris.
But, what it will do is harden the Democrat vote and soften the Republican vote at the margins. The reverse of 2016 when Americans found Trump entertaining and Clinton grating. Those debates just gave the Trump campaign oxygen despite Clinton seemingly winning them.
Swift's endorsement in a celebrity obsessed world is just as important than Kamala's steady hand which allowed the Democrats more than anything to expel a huge sigh of relief.
Someone upthread posted a poll suggesting 6% of republicans and 2% of Dems would change their mind as a result of the debate
More Republicans than democrats would reconsider as well
No change was 78% Rep and 88% for Dem
My worry about that is why would any Democrats change their mind from that debate, which then puts in doubt the Republican figure who would consider changing their vote.
Not sure there’s too many minds to be changed. At this point it’s all about the two parties getting their supporters to turn out in the key States.
Which may be the main benefit of Taylor Swift - she may get her fans to go out and vote and by the looks of it vote early...
That’s obviously something on which they’ve been working for a while now. She’s the biggest pop star in the States at the moment, and the endorsement announcement just as the debate finished was well choreographed. She was already known to be a Dem supporter, perhaps unusually for a country singer from Nashville, and endorsed Biden last time out. It would also have been a good distraction if the debate had gone badly for Harris, give her media something positive to talk about. Not sure celeb endorsements mean too much these days, but anything that gets a few more voters registering and turning out is good for your ‘side’.
We've seen the video of Walz live on air being told about the Swift endorsement. He doesn't look as though he knew it was coming then! Claims of choreography are just speculation.
No loss of life, thankfully. "The last tram had traversed the bridge just 18 minutes before the 3:08 am collapse".
And here we were thinking our infrastructure was dodgy, although something about this seems a bit odd.
Corrosion to the point of collapse without someone noticing? I suppose it happened in Italy...
They were exceptionally lucky that there was nobody on it.
Another entry for the ever popular lecture series of Engineering screw ups, so that you can make different mistakes next time...
It is particularly odd, since it was recently renovated:
"Reconstruction took place between 1967 and 1971. It underwent renovations from 2019 to 2021."
AIUI the tramway section that collapsed had not been renovated yet. It's in 3 sections - footway/road, bit in the middle (which may be a future cycleway), tramway (or the cycleway may be alongside the tramway). The tramway section had a span go collapso.
I'd say the greatest disruption would be to river traffic on the Elbe. Is anyone planning a River Cruise up there?
Comments
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/czxlv9ndvkdo
Just so everyone who comments on this is not assuming that schools are the same as they were when they were at them:
In England (other countries will be different here) the expectation is that pupils will do the following for GCSE: English, Maths, Science (so Physics, Chemistry, and Biology, either double award or three separate sciences), a language (other than English), a humanity (eg history, geography, or RE) and then their choice to make it up to eight, nine, or sometimes ten depending on school and ability. Not all pupils do this, but it is the baseline.
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-bridge-in-dresden-collapses-into-elbe-river/a-70185172
No loss of life, thankfully. "The last tram had traversed the bridge just 18 minutes before the 3:08 am collapse".
Who would have thought Leon and Trump were on different pages over the consumption of pets?
Guardian live blog
This is off the scale creepy and snobby but it's clearly meant to be a posh thing to do. And the french dressing argues against the notion that he thinks it's a proper pear.
"Don't like the guy, I really don't, but he can get things done."
That sort of thing. Nonsense as we know (his administration was a chaotic clown show) but I do think this 'tough money guy running the country like a business' malarky is potent for him.
And then there are second hand my-friend-said posts on Facebook. The sort of “evidence” that led to rioting recently in the UK.
It’s not just a wild conspiracy theory, it’s a deeply racist conspiracy theory.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-20410463
Plenty of the official fishing signage on UK rivers has translations into eastern european languages now:
https://www.alamy.com/no-fishing-warning-sign-on-a-railing-in-multi-lingual-eastern-european-languages-english-lithuanian-slovakian-romanian-and-polish-river-witham-w-image601105275.html
In other words, in a fairly polarised political environment, the absolute rock bottom floor for either candidate is perhaps 30%. Whilst Trump performed fairly poorly in June, very few fair minded observers would say Biden "won" the debate - yet 33% of poll respondents did so.
If you assume, not unreasonably, that 60% will say their candidate "won" come what may (30% each), and only about 40% of viewers are up for grabs, then more than eight out of ten thought Harris won it. And, crucially, those are the voters that matter.
That's not to say Trump was down at Biden's performance levels in June, or that the impact will match that. But it was a bit of a thrashing really and he needs to move the conversation on pretty fast.
Avoided that, and turned a potential weakness into a strength, by leaning in to it.
How's it going to do for JD ?
She's not an idiot.
Remember when The Sun ran a headline about asylum seekers eating swans in the UK? It was immediately and loudly rubbished as nonsense
https://pressgazette.co.uk/archive-content/sun-accused-of-swan-bake-myth-making/
Years later, and much more quietly, it turned out to be true. Multiple sources confirmed it
https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/immigrant-was-cooking-swan-amid-bird-bodies-6627412.html
But immigrants have votes too - the ones in Springfield aren't illegals - and 2% of Florida's electorate is Haitian. It cuts both ways.
Going straight to the gutter has a cost which might well outweigh any benefit for him.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-35028556
Well worn racist trope. Compare the "bat soup" stuff about COVID.
Corrosion to the point of collapse without someone noticing? I suppose it happened in Italy...
They were exceptionally lucky that there was nobody on it.
Another entry for the ever popular lecture series of Engineering screw ups, so that you can make different mistakes next time...
Some people come from a culture where you eat apparently wild animals. So they bring that to Britain, they don’t understand that the locals revere certain creatures (like swans and cats) but not others (squirrels and deer)
The Dems should be careful on the Haitian story because if it turns out to be true then that hands a late post debate victory to Trump. And he definitely lost the debate as is
Landlords will only be allowed to raise rents once a year, and to the market rate, under Labour’s rent reforms outlined on Wednesday.
The Government has said it will “ban” in-tenancy rent increases from being written into contracts in legislation set to come in by next summer.
Currently, if a landlord wants to raise the rent they can either write it into the contract as a yearly set increase, or issue a Section 13 notice when they want to raise it. A tenant can dispute a rent increase – but only after it has been enforced.
Other commitments announced on Wednesday include a ban on rental bidding wars, and a further “ban” on landlords refusing housing benefit claimants or parents as tenants – although this is already illegal.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/property/buy-to-let/labour-ban-landlords-raising-rents-more-once-year/
"Reconstruction took place between 1967 and 1971. It underwent renovations from 2019 to 2021."
Surely this legislation, however well intended, will only cause there to be fewer rental properties out there.
It is legislation on the back of demands from tenant activists. Be careful what they wish for.
I might point them in the direction of Hampstead where just one cat, a well known tubster, could feed Port-au-Prince for a week
His trouble is, firstly, that he's not half as good a communicator as he seems to believe. He has a style that mimics Trump (which is maybe what appealed) but lacks the magic ingredient Trump undeniably has of being able to style out horrendous brain farts that would sink most politicians - he has tried to laugh off "childless cat ladies" but just can't do it as effectively as his boss so it's still a real problem. Secondly, Vance made more sense before Biden stood down - Walz was a pretty good reactive pick with a modest background and, frankly, a much warmer style than Vance.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-22104151#:~:text=The owner of a fishing lake who put,up after £10,000 worth of carp was stolen.
Her reference to people leaving Trump’s rallies in boredom was a masterstroke, targeted directly at his fragile ego. After that, he lost any focus, turned into a rambling idiot, and kept coming back to his increasingly incredible claims about illegal immigration regardless of the question. In an instant, Mussolini was transformed into Leon.
Quite probably, last night was when Harris became the winner.
As someone who offered £50 a month over the asking price to get his current place (essentially to ameliorate likely landlord concerns about self-employment) this one stinks. If everyone offers the same price, the landlord will only ever pick the candidate with the safest job or highest salary. The alternative is forcing the landlord to consider applications in strict order, I suppose.
Wide awake at 4am, again
Ugh!
Just build more fucking houses like you're promising, and the market will sort itself out.
(Though a rule limiting rent rises to once a year is not at all unreasonable.)
I feel old.
Either way once the house is sold supply and demand will match one way or the other...
1) high-earning graduates, who will already have paid their loans off;
2) middle-earning graduates, who were still repaying, but now find themselves with 9% extra disposable income;
3) low-earning graduates, who will never have paid a penny back on their loans; and
4) people who never took out a student loan.
I mean, Pence quite obviously didn't become President and won't do so in future. But it's not like he'd be Republican candidate today if he'd politely declined Trump's approach - he'd be a rather uncharismatic retired former Governor of a not particularly big state.
The fact a gamble doesn't pay off doesn't mean it's a stupid gamble. By going on Trump's ticket, Pence massively increased his chance of becoming President one day - he was VP to a rather old and unfit (both physically and in terms of impeachment risk) President for four years and, had Trump won in 2020, he'd have had a reasonable chance of the nomination. It didn't work out, but it wasn't at all stupid judged on what we all knew in 2016.
For Vance, he may well still become President. It's a close election and, if Trump wins, he'll be VP to an elderly man. Just on an actuarial basis, he'd have a fair chance of getting it. What's his route otherwise? He's a Senator so there is one - but he's one of many with an outside chance when Trump leaves the scene - couldn't be above 10% though.
I am in “Manning Park”, en route to the Okanagan Valley, in the Cascade Mountains, BC. Yesterday the hotel receptionist mentioned some “nice lakes” nearby, something I could do to while away an afternoon. I shrugged, thinking: “how good can they be, never heard of Manning Park?”
In the end, I sighed, but hiked over, and had a look
Honestly three of the most beautiful hours I’ve ever spent: utterly sublime. And I was basically alone
Hardly anyone said it would change their vote.
Bit disappointed I still think it will be a close election
If so Trump supporters will claim the election was stolen again
I am hoping for a thumping Harris win with Democrats winning Senate and maybe even the House
SCOTUS needs Political appointees to make it balanced too.
Hadn't even had a drink as it is a schoolnight.
Why did they have to renovate it? What did they forget to do when carrying out the renovations?
I’m usually better at defeating The Lag than this. Luckily I don’t have anything to do but drive and yawn for a couple of days
And the Cascade Mountains are magnificent. I can look at them as I drive and yawn
Basically alone? The other day I saw a car advert that said it was 'fully' hybrid. I thought well it is either a hybrid or it isn't. It can be ICE with a little electric or a lot of electric input but it is a hybrid whatever. My car is 'fully' hybrid, but it isn't a plug in so what does 'fully' mean. If it means plug in then say so.
Ditto 'Basically alone'. What does that mean?
End of pedantry. You can tell I have a job to do that I am avoiding.
But Haley has her own route without Trump.
She was the voice of reason who ran against him. The voice of reason who kowtowed to the nutter doesn't have the same ring.
Occasionally I saw a fisherman or another hiker, or a lone kayaker in the distance. At one memorable moment I saw a young woman in the world’s tiniest bikini - she was camping and swimming with her boyfriend. She gave me a wide smile as I purposefully looked ahead, determined not to perv her
I think “basically alone” is a fair description
As with the Tories, when Trump falls, they will need someone untarnished by what has gone before.
(I am not a doctor, and this is not a recommendation.)
I'd say the greatest disruption would be to river traffic on the Elbe. Is anyone planning a River Cruise up there?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBVnrRNJizg
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0555044,13.7467877,3a,72.1y,198.79h,78.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sarwn8wqv1IIN9r6yXBda2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MDkwOC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw==
6% of 50,000 is £3k, so the bill rises by £3K annually unless paid off.
So just to keep paying off the interest, not reducing the principal, you have to earn £25+£33k per annum - £58K. 9% of £33K is just under £3K. Round here £58K is a lot.
This calculation must be wrong or else this system is deranged. Can someone put it right/explain?
I would have said the same as you.
- there is no average height difference between women and men.
- women are shorter because they are held back from growing taller by the patriarchy
The podiums were scaled, so that she didn't look diminutive in any of the wide shots.
And Trump let her boss the stage - couldn't even meet her gaze. So the height thing did nothing for him.
Trump easily distracted from his message
He could do with a re run where he gets an electric shock every time he goes off topic
Harris was better than I expected
Folks go to the gym and use that machine where you push the pads apart with your knees. No-one keeps going on about the essential uselessness of being able to push your knees apart.
Some good pictures from various angles.
Hmmmm.....
IMMIGRANTS
You'll be shocked when you come up to Scotland/N.Yorkshire and see what the big estates do to Hen Harriers.
Apparently this Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyl0xnrynzo
No bears in this neck of the woods but later on there will be. Useful advice, ta
Donald Trump, speaking to Fox and Friends, said he didn’t know if he wanted to debate Kamala Harris again, claiming he “won the debate” last night.
Well, I’d be less inclined to because we had a great night. We won the debate.
Trump had previously agreed to participate in a debate hosted by Fox News, moderated by Martha MacCallum and Bret Baier. But this morning, he said:
I wouldn’t want to have Martha and Bret. I’d love to have somebody else other than Martha and Bret.
Why on earth would anyone want to do that ?