Current bug bear - not only have we imported Black Friday from the USA to the UK, when we don't have Thanksgiving we have the stupidity to have adverts proclaiming the start of 'Black Friday week', No, you feckers, its a day, not a week.
What's wrong with just calling it the pre-Christmas sales?
Checks ACM guidelines....ref whistle blows....yellow card....use of term black....
More seriously, however much they try pushing it here, Black Friday never seems to have really caught on. There aren't 1000s queuing overnight to get a cheap telly and then fighting on another in the aisles of Asda when the doors open. I don't even know if its that big a thing in the US anymore.
Serious traffic queues at Brent Cross shopping centre today though. So maybe there is some traction with it.
Lol, yes. Very few ads I don't like. Trying to think of one. Oh god yes - the one with that woman behaving like a total madam and ending with "what would you do for love?" That makes me go and put the kettle on.
Natalie Portman.
The Daisy, Daisy, Daisy advert makes me want to throw something at the TV plus the Pure Cremation and Funeral Plan ads.
Oh yes they are awful.
Quite a few ads I don't like, now we're looking seriously at it. So I was wrong there.
I can't remember the last time I saw a TV ad.
If you do all stream or bbc or record you can cut them out of your life entirely. Their viewing figs must be a fraction of what they were in the glory days.
What about the 'iconic' Christmas ads from the likes of John Lewis etc though - don't you watch them even just the once to see what the fuss is all about?
No I honestly couldn't give two shits.
That's a brave stance - you'll be frozen out of the conversation at many a kitchen table.
This year's "Lewis" features two sisters, the one buying a present for the other, in the process thinking back to various moments in their lives (as sisters).
It's ok.
I'll report back in the New Year but these things are not really conversation pieces among my friends and family.
Gatwick Airport has evacuated a large part of its South Terminal following a "security incident". Sussex Police say this follows the discovery of a "suspected prohibited item in luggage"
Which dickhead has tried to smuggle some Turkish goat herders moonshine back through customs then....
Reported rumour that in the past when the UK PM visited the Dalai Lama, the word wet out across China that investment should not be made in the UK. And it basically wasn't. That sounds credible.
Also talk of whether "always mentioning human rights" as part of the talking points China checklist has made the faintest bit of difference in 30 years.
And potential aspect of the Le Pen trial, which I had not spotted, on the next French election.
They've even got bookmarks:
01:11 The farmers protest 10:50 Is the international order collapsing around us? 13:11 Violence in Amsterdam 16:25 Is Keir Starmer spending too much time abroad? 17:54 UK-China relations 18:45 What is the point of COP? 20:35 EU trade dwarfs every other trading relationship 22:30 Does the West really care about human rights? 26:18 Will Marine Le Pen be barred from standing? 29:49 What have Alastair and Rory been watching recently? 33:59 How did Jeffrey Epstein manage to protect himself?
I've never really been tempted by TRIP - I'm fairly sure I already know what Alastair Campbell thinks about everything (which is that Alastair Campbell is right about everything and Labour is right about everything and anyone to the right, or indeed to the left of him is not only wrong but probably evil) - he doesn't strike me as a man with a lot of nuance. Am I missing out? Rory, on the other hand, strikes me as perhaps a man with too much nuance: on the one hand, on the other hand, you're probably right Alastair.
Am I missing out?
Good question.
I'm not listening to all of it, but I'm getting perspectives that I have not had before and I find interesting. Especially for me, perhaps, the Rory views based on his reflections on experience in several mid-level Ministerial positions.
I've always been somewhere between wary and contemptuous where Bad 'Al is concerned. I haven't come to any reassessment yet; however no on can be evaluated from a single viewpoint so I'm listening and critiquing at once.
I like it. Campbell brings a certain Labour tribalism, and that's a weakness, but otoh he knows more than most how politics works and he explains things well.
Lol, yes. Very few ads I don't like. Trying to think of one. Oh god yes - the one with that woman behaving like a total madam and ending with "what would you do for love?" That makes me go and put the kettle on.
Natalie Portman.
The Daisy, Daisy, Daisy advert makes me want to throw something at the TV plus the Pure Cremation and Funeral Plan ads.
Oh yes they are awful.
Quite a few ads I don't like, now we're looking seriously at it. So I was wrong there.
I can't remember the last time I saw a TV ad.
If you do all stream or bbc or record you can cut them out of your life entirely. Their viewing figs must be a fraction of what they were in the glory days.
What about the 'iconic' Christmas ads from the likes of John Lewis etc though - don't you watch them even just the once to see what the fuss is all about?
No I honestly couldn't give two shits.
That's a brave stance - you'll be frozen out of the conversation at many a kitchen table.
This year's "Lewis" features two sisters, the one buying a present for the other, in the process thinking back to various moments in their lives (as sisters).
It's ok.
I'll report back in the New Year but these things are not really conversation pieces among my friends and family.
Well if it does unexpectedly crop up I've given you enough to get by. Two sisters. Present. Life memories.
SKS Tories have 4.5 years to make people feel better off.
Otherwise there will be dozens of REF gains from SKS Tories in GE 2029
First Farage came for the Tories, Starmer stayed silent, then when Reform came for Labour there was nobody left to stop their bandwagon with the white working class
A new deal on climate change has just been proposed at COP29 as almost 200 countries meet in Baku, the Azerbaijani capital. The deal proposes wealthier countries give $250bn (£199bn) per year by 2035 to developing nations to help tackle climate change. The figure is up from the $100bn a year currently in place.
I'm not. Even ‘peaceful’ death is rarely pretty and often follows drastic physical or mental decline. It is not surprising that many who have witnessed it think there must be a better way.
I'm not. The religious taboo against suicide is meaningless to most people in this day and age, which means the main motivation is the thought of either spending weeks before you kick the bucket in agonising pain and shitting yourself, or having the suffering ended quickly and easily before it gets that far. Most people who have witnessed end of life care first-hand are likely to harbour such ideas. I know I do.
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
If you break down further into the poll there are concerns about what the implications could be and for the mentally ill and disabled and for palliative care they are there
SKS Tories have 4.5 years to make people feel better off.
Otherwise there will be dozens of REF gains from SKS Tories in GE 2029
First Farage came for the Tories, Starmer stayed silent, then when Reform came for Labour there was nobody left to stop their bandwagon with the white working class
The long term result of Starmer playing political games over Brexit could be Farage as Prime Minister.
SKS Tories have 4.5 years to make people feel better off.
Otherwise there will be dozens of REF gains from SKS Tories in GE 2029
First Farage came for the Tories, Starmer stayed silent, then when Reform came for Labour there was nobody left to stop their bandwagon with the white working class
The long term result of Starmer playing political games over Brexit could be Farage as Prime Minister.
On current polls it would at most still be the Badenoch Tories most seats with the LDs having balance of power though
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Her role was variously described as an 'analyst' and an 'economist' in earlier profiles:
"I've got two economics degrees," she says, through gritted teeth. She has also had stints at the Bank of England, the British Embassy in Washington and as an analyst at HBOS...
Unlike Ed Balls, Reeves is untainted by New Labour's love affair with light-touch City regulation (her career at HBOS was based in its retail division up in Yorkshire, not among the high-rollers in the capital).
A junior chess champion from a relatively humble background, she spent 10 years as an economist for the Bank of England, HBOS and at the British embassy in Washington before entering Parliament.
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Why did the lackey guess 'economist'? Presumably because that's what the lackey had been told.
To be fair, my Linkedin profile is about seven years out of date. But that undersells me, rather than oversells.
Here's a BoE paper from 2005 co-authored by Rachel Reeves about whether markets react to Bank of England communications. Reeves is listed as being part of the 'Structural Economic Analysis Division'.
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Because almost everyone famous has a social media agent or manager to post stuff for them. On the plus side #RachelFromAccounts is trending on TwiX.
I'm not. The religious taboo against suicide is meaningless to most people in this day and age, which means the main motivation is the thought of either spending weeks before you kick the bucket in agonising pain and shitting yourself, or having the suffering ended quickly and easily before it gets that far. Most people who have witnessed end of life care first-hand are likely to harbour such ideas. I know I do.
We had a really good discussion on PB a few days ago, and I don't want to rehash it. Clearly some people worry about coercion etc, and thats a fair enough point, but I always draw the comparison with how we treat our sick and dying pets and how we treat our sick and dying relatives.
A new deal on climate change has just been proposed at COP29 as almost 200 countries meet in Baku, the Azerbaijani capital. The deal proposes wealthier countries give $250bn (£199bn) per year by 2035 to developing nations to help tackle climate change. The figure is up from the $100bn a year currently in place.
It's a shakedown and Starmer is stupid enough to fall for it.
Current bug bear - not only have we imported Black Friday from the USA to the UK, when we don't have Thanksgiving we have the stupidity to have adverts proclaiming the start of 'Black Friday week', No, you feckers, its a day, not a week.
What's wrong with just calling it the pre-Christmas sales?
Checks ACM guidelines....ref whistle blows....yellow card....use of term black....
More seriously, however much they try pushing it here, Black Friday never seems to have really caught on. There aren't 1000s queuing overnight to get a cheap telly and then fighting on another in the aisles of Asda when the doors open. I don't even know if its that big a thing in the US anymore.
It's still a big thing with 'minorities' - hence the name (I assume...).
It never seems to work for me. I have bought a new laptop and a running watch this year, but both needed replacing earlier rather than wait to November. I usually go on holiday in the autumn and I want to have money to spend at Christmas, so I don't really want to go making major purchases at the moment. I could do with a new telly and I'd like an espresso machine but both can wait for the New Year
A new deal on climate change has just been proposed at COP29 as almost 200 countries meet in Baku, the Azerbaijani capital. The deal proposes wealthier countries give $250bn (£199bn) per year by 2035 to developing nations to help tackle climate change. The figure is up from the $100bn a year currently in place.
It's a shakedown and Starmer is stupid enough to fall for it.
We are so going to beggar ourselves as a nation over this sort of nonsense.
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Because almost everyone famous has a social media agent or manager to post stuff for them. On the plus side #RachelFromAccounts is trending on TwiX.
Mr. rkrkrk, I do wonder with things like that how much primary evidence comes through the sieve of Chinese official filtration.
I'm not an expert but would think it very difficult to fake that. You'd need to introduce different lineages of covid at different evolutionary points to the right environmental/animal samples and hope someone ran the right analysis later.
A new deal on climate change has just been proposed at COP29 as almost 200 countries meet in Baku, the Azerbaijani capital. The deal proposes wealthier countries give $250bn (£199bn) per year by 2035 to developing nations to help tackle climate change. The figure is up from the $100bn a year currently in place.
It's a shakedown and Starmer is stupid enough to fall for it.
We are so going to beggar ourselves as a nation over this sort of nonsense.
Yes, the £520m to foreign farmers while taxing our domestic farmers by the same amount is an example of this. Cut that funding and protect our own farmers.
SKS Tories have 4.5 years to make people feel better off.
Otherwise there will be dozens of REF gains from SKS Tories in GE 2029
First Farage came for the Tories, Starmer stayed silent, then when Reform came for Labour there was nobody left to stop their bandwagon with the white working class
The long term result of Starmer playing political games over Brexit could be Farage as Prime Minister.
On current polls it would at most still be the Badenoch Tories most seats with the LDs having balance of power though
According to Baxter on the latest poll (Techne) out yesterday it has Labour on 335 Tories 198 Libs on 66 and Reform on 6. Not too bad after recent events and as this is likely to be the nadir of their fortunes
SKS Tories have 4.5 years to make people feel better off.
Otherwise there will be dozens of REF gains from SKS Tories in GE 2029
First Farage came for the Tories, Starmer stayed silent, then when Reform came for Labour there was nobody left to stop their bandwagon with the white working class
The long term result of Starmer playing political games over Brexit could be Farage as Prime Minister.
On current polls it would at most still be the Badenoch Tories most seats with the LDs having balance of power though
According to Baxter on the latest poll (Techne) out yesterday it has Labour on 335 Tories 198 Libs on 66 and Reform on 6. Not too bad after recent events and as this is likely to be the nadir of their fortunes
Nadir. Lol, next year inflation is going to shoot up and real terms pay is going to be negative. Things are going to get much worse for Labour I think we'll see the Tories with an 8-10 point lead by the end of next year essentials reversing the GE result.
SKS Tories have 4.5 years to make people feel better off.
Otherwise there will be dozens of REF gains from SKS Tories in GE 2029
First Farage came for the Tories, Starmer stayed silent, then when Reform came for Labour there was nobody left to stop their bandwagon with the white working class
The long term result of Starmer playing political games over Brexit could be Farage as Prime Minister.
On current polls it would at most still be the Badenoch Tories most seats with the LDs having balance of power though
According to Baxter on the latest poll (Techne) out yesterday it has Labour on 335 Tories 198 Libs on 66 and Reform on 6. Not too bad after recent events and as this is likely to be the nadir of their fortunes
On More in Common's latest poll the Tories would have most seats in a hung parliament and More in Common were closer to the 2024 GE result than Techne were
SKS Tories have 4.5 years to make people feel better off.
Otherwise there will be dozens of REF gains from SKS Tories in GE 2029
First Farage came for the Tories, Starmer stayed silent, then when Reform came for Labour there was nobody left to stop their bandwagon with the white working class
The long term result of Starmer playing political games over Brexit could be Farage as Prime Minister.
On current polls it would at most still be the Badenoch Tories most seats with the LDs having balance of power though
According to Baxter on the latest poll (Techne) out yesterday it has Labour on 335 Tories 198 Libs on 66 and Reform on 6. Not too bad after recent events and as this is likely to be the nadir of their fortunes
On More in Common's latest poll the Tories would have most seats in a hung parliament and More in Common were closer to the 2024 GE result than Techne were
The nadir in Labour's political fortunes is likely two years away. I would not be surprised to see them polling the teens by that point.
A new deal on climate change has just been proposed at COP29 as almost 200 countries meet in Baku, the Azerbaijani capital. The deal proposes wealthier countries give $250bn (£199bn) per year by 2035 to developing nations to help tackle climate change. The figure is up from the $100bn a year currently in place.
To put the figure in perspective, $250bn is about 0.24% of the current world GDP of $105.4tn.
I have sent a letter of complaint this week to the Electoral Commission and Redbridge electoral services outlining serious irregularities on the night of the count on July 5th in Ilford North, raising questions regarding compliance with electoral law and guidance. I have retained Bindmans LLP and specialist King’s Counsel on this issue and have asked the Electoral Commission to examine the activities of Redbridge Council. https://x.com/LeanneMohamad/status/1859919169002561772?t=w1XQaQaVwo1TtfKf1YXvbQ&s=19
SKS Tories have 4.5 years to make people feel better off.
Otherwise there will be dozens of REF gains from SKS Tories in GE 2029
First Farage came for the Tories, Starmer stayed silent, then when Reform came for Labour there was nobody left to stop their bandwagon with the white working class
The long term result of Starmer playing political games over Brexit could be Farage as Prime Minister.
On current polls it would at most still be the Badenoch Tories most seats with the LDs having balance of power though
According to Baxter on the latest poll (Techne) out yesterday it has Labour on 335 Tories 198 Libs on 66 and Reform on 6. Not too bad after recent events and as this is likely to be the nadir of their fortunes
On More in Common's latest poll the Tories would have most seats in a hung parliament and More in Common were closer to the 2024 GE result than Techne were
With Baxter I'm afraid even under those dire figures Labour still have most seats! I suspect it'll take a long time to get Johnson & Co out of the electorates throats whatever Labour do.
PS Having Priti Patel sitting next to Badenoch would not seem very wise idea when a whole rebrand is called for.
I have sent a letter of complaint this week to the Electoral Commission and Redbridge electoral services outlining serious irregularities on the night of the count on July 5th in Ilford North, raising questions regarding compliance with electoral law and guidance. I have retained Bindmans LLP and specialist King’s Counsel on this issue and have asked the Electoral Commission to examine the activities of Redbridge Council. https://x.com/LeanneMohamad/status/1859919169002561772?t=w1XQaQaVwo1TtfKf1YXvbQ&s=19
I know for a fact he isn't the only one. Remember David Cameron and the Campaign Bus ?
I have sent a letter of complaint this week to the Electoral Commission and Redbridge electoral services outlining serious irregularities on the night of the count on July 5th in Ilford North, raising questions regarding compliance with electoral law and guidance. I have retained Bindmans LLP and specialist King’s Counsel on this issue and have asked the Electoral Commission to examine the activities of Redbridge Council. https://x.com/LeanneMohamad/status/1859919169002561772?t=w1XQaQaVwo1TtfKf1YXvbQ&s=19
I know for a fact he isn't the only one. Remember David Cameron and the Campaign Bus ?
Leanne gives few details but refers to the night of the count so it might just be Trump 2020-like complaints about what observers were allowed to see.
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Her role was variously described as an 'analyst' and an 'economist' in earlier profiles:
"I've got two economics degrees," she says, through gritted teeth. She has also had stints at the Bank of England, the British Embassy in Washington and as an analyst at HBOS...
Unlike Ed Balls, Reeves is untainted by New Labour's love affair with light-touch City regulation (her career at HBOS was based in its retail division up in Yorkshire, not among the high-rollers in the capital).
A junior chess champion from a relatively humble background, she spent 10 years as an economist for the Bank of England, HBOS and at the British embassy in Washington before entering Parliament.
Speaking as someone who has worked as an economist my entire professional life, I find this whole discussion somewhat pointless. Reeves has a bachelor's and masters degree in economics. She worked in a role entitled economist at the BOE (I have never met her myself but I know people who worked with her at the BOE and consider her a talented economist). At HBOS she worked in some role that, it seems, may not have had the job title "economist". But she may well have drawn on her economics training in the job and considered it an "economics job". Referring to herself as an economist across both roles therefore doesn't seem a particularly egregious crime. It's not as if being an economist is such an exalted position in a financial institution - if only it was!
Current bug bear - not only have we imported Black Friday from the USA to the UK, when we don't have Thanksgiving we have the stupidity to have adverts proclaiming the start of 'Black Friday week', No, you feckers, its a day, not a week.
What's wrong with just calling it the pre-Christmas sales?
On a pedantic point, we speak of Easter week and Christmas week ...
Labour hold all 3 seats in the Glasgow by elections. Turnout in Glasgow North East - 12.4%
They looked from pig to man and man to pig.
Tories in Glasgow now on Red List at under 6% as reform move in.
Do we have a ready summary of the actual voting last time? Multiple candidate slates, so difficult to compare without more data easp the rank of the vacating councillor. Ballot Box Scotland hasn't done his (very useful) thing yet alas.
Reported rumour that in the past when the UK PM visited the Dalai Lama, the word wet out across China that investment should not be made in the UK. And it basically wasn't. That sounds credible.
Also talk of whether "always mentioning human rights" as part of the talking points China checklist has made the faintest bit of difference in 30 years.
And potential aspect of the Le Pen trial, which I had not spotted, on the next French election.
They've even got bookmarks:
01:11 The farmers protest 10:50 Is the international order collapsing around us? 13:11 Violence in Amsterdam 16:25 Is Keir Starmer spending too much time abroad? 17:54 UK-China relations 18:45 What is the point of COP? 20:35 EU trade dwarfs every other trading relationship 22:30 Does the West really care about human rights? 26:18 Will Marine Le Pen be barred from standing? 29:49 What have Alastair and Rory been watching recently? 33:59 How did Jeffrey Epstein manage to protect himself?
I've never really been tempted by TRIP - I'm fairly sure I already know what Alastair Campbell thinks about everything (which is that Alastair Campbell is right about everything and Labour is right about everything and anyone to the right, or indeed to the left of him is not only wrong but probably evil) - he doesn't strike me as a man with a lot of nuance. Am I missing out? Rory, on the other hand, strikes me as perhaps a man with too much nuance: on the one hand, on the other hand, you're probably right Alastair.
Am I missing out?
Good question.
I'm not listening to all of it, but I'm getting perspectives that I have not had before and I find interesting. Especially for me, perhaps, the Rory views based on his reflections on experience in several mid-level Ministerial positions.
I've always been somewhere between wary and contemptuous where Bad 'Al is concerned. I haven't come to any reassessment yet; however no on can be evaluated from a single viewpoint so I'm listening and critiquing at once.
I like it. Campbell brings a certain Labour tribalism, and that's a weakness, but otoh he knows more than most how politics works and he explains things well.
Yeah, I think it's at its best when the hosts are speaking from and about their areas of expertise and less good when they're just commenting on the news of the week. But also I think if you don't at least find their personalities and interactions at least modestly entertaining then it's probably not worth the time.
Reported rumour that in the past when the UK PM visited the Dalai Lama, the word wet out across China that investment should not be made in the UK. And it basically wasn't. That sounds credible.
Also talk of whether "always mentioning human rights" as part of the talking points China checklist has made the faintest bit of difference in 30 years.
And potential aspect of the Le Pen trial, which I had not spotted, on the next French election.
They've even got bookmarks:
01:11 The farmers protest 10:50 Is the international order collapsing around us? 13:11 Violence in Amsterdam 16:25 Is Keir Starmer spending too much time abroad? 17:54 UK-China relations 18:45 What is the point of COP? 20:35 EU trade dwarfs every other trading relationship 22:30 Does the West really care about human rights? 26:18 Will Marine Le Pen be barred from standing? 29:49 What have Alastair and Rory been watching recently? 33:59 How did Jeffrey Epstein manage to protect himself?
I've never really been tempted by TRIP - I'm fairly sure I already know what Alastair Campbell thinks about everything (which is that Alastair Campbell is right about everything and Labour is right about everything and anyone to the right, or indeed to the left of him is not only wrong but probably evil) - he doesn't strike me as a man with a lot of nuance. Am I missing out? Rory, on the other hand, strikes me as perhaps a man with too much nuance: on the one hand, on the other hand, you're probably right Alastair.
Am I missing out?
Good question.
I'm not listening to all of it, but I'm getting perspectives that I have not had before and I find interesting. Especially for me, perhaps, the Rory views based on his reflections on experience in several mid-level Ministerial positions.
I've always been somewhere between wary and contemptuous where Bad 'Al is concerned. I haven't come to any reassessment yet; however no on can be evaluated from a single viewpoint so I'm listening and critiquing at once.
I like it. Campbell brings a certain Labour tribalism, and that's a weakness, but otoh he knows more than most how politics works and he explains things well.
If you compare Mandelson and Campbell's takes on Trump, there is a massive gulf in their understanding of how politics works.
SKS Tories have 4.5 years to make people feel better off.
Otherwise there will be dozens of REF gains from SKS Tories in GE 2029
First Farage came for the Tories, Starmer stayed silent, then when Reform came for Labour there was nobody left to stop their bandwagon with the white working class
The long term result of Starmer playing political games over Brexit could be Farage as Prime Minister.
On current polls it would at most still be the Badenoch Tories most seats with the LDs having balance of power though
According to Baxter on the latest poll (Techne) out yesterday it has Labour on 335 Tories 198 Libs on 66 and Reform on 6. Not too bad after recent events and as this is likely to be the nadir of their fortunes
While I'm not as excitable as some to believe that Labour have already lost the next election, I don't think a Baxtering of 335 is likely to prove the nadir of Labour's fortunes.
The ruble's crashes somewhat against the dollar today. Currently at 1 ruble for 0.0097 United States Dollar.
I had expected Trump's win to help stabilise it. Never come to me for predictions...
The euro could end up below parity with the dollar by the time Trump is inaugurated.
Which entirely offsets the impact of tariffs.
Which means that Trump is right to say that the exporters will be the ones bearing the cost of the tariff.
If the Euro falls well below the dollar that actually makes EU imports cheaper in the US so partially offsets tariff costs while making US exports more expensive in the EU
Here's a BoE paper from 2005 co-authored by Rachel Reeves about whether markets react to Bank of England communications. Reeves is listed as being part of the 'Structural Economic Analysis Division'.
SKS Tories have 4.5 years to make people feel better off.
Otherwise there will be dozens of REF gains from SKS Tories in GE 2029
First Farage came for the Tories, Starmer stayed silent, then when Reform came for Labour there was nobody left to stop their bandwagon with the white working class
The long term result of Starmer playing political games over Brexit could be Farage as Prime Minister.
On current polls it would at most still be the Badenoch Tories most seats with the LDs having balance of power though
According to Baxter on the latest poll (Techne) out yesterday it has Labour on 335 Tories 198 Libs on 66 and Reform on 6. Not too bad after recent events and as this is likely to be the nadir of their fortunes
On More in Common's latest poll the Tories would have most seats in a hung parliament and More in Common were closer to the 2024 GE result than Techne were
With Baxter I'm afraid even under those dire figures Labour still have most seats! I suspect it'll take a long time to get Johnson & Co out of the electorates throats whatever Labour do.
PS Having Priti Patel sitting next to Badenoch would not seem very wise idea when a whole rebrand is called for.
Other estimates give the Tories most seats on the MiC poll.
In any case it is not the mere 25% still voting Labour with MiC the Tories can squeeze anymore, that would be the lowest Labour voteshare since 1918, but the 19% voting Reform most of whom love Boris and Priti
Lol, yes. Very few ads I don't like. Trying to think of one. Oh god yes - the one with that woman behaving like a total madam and ending with "what would you do for love?" That makes me go and put the kettle on.
Natalie Portman.
The Daisy, Daisy, Daisy advert makes me want to throw something at the TV plus the Pure Cremation and Funeral Plan ads.
All perfume adverts are inane. I have some sympathy. How does one advertise perfume? You can't see how something smells. Most products, the visual sense helps; with perfume, it doesn't.
But surely no-one can be encouraged to think better of the brand by the inanity produced in the name of selling this stuff?
There is a perfume advert for a product called 'Sauvage'. I cannot see it without wanting to graffiti the 'v' into an 's'.
That was my aftershave when I used to use aftershave. Eau Sauvage. Felt it to be classy.
You don't find men doing this now. They don't seem to feel the need.
I think the cutoff was sometime in the mid 80s. I think aftershave used to be seen as just part of what you did when you shaved. By the time I started shaving in the early 90s, it wasn't. I don't really think anyone under about 55 uses it. It strikes me as quite an odd thing - I don't really want people to be able to smell me. But in this respect I think I am simply just as much a product of generational groupthink as the previous generation were who did use aftershave.
It's an odd thing, smell. Very primitive. Yet it clearly has an impact. I do like it when my wife wears perfume. She once said she'd quite like it if I did use aftershave, but I wasn't altogether sure she was serious and the matter hasn't been raised again since, and in any case even if I was minded to do it (since really, female approval - indeed, the approval of that specific female, is all I am really after in my appearance), I'd be so far out of my comfort zone I wouldn't know where to start. In any case, I rarely shave any more, preferring a trimmer and a 4-8mm stubble; and 95% of my life is spent in circumstances in which any sort of presentational panache would appear massively over the top.
Which raises the question - who does buy this?
My 17 year old uses it. He wouldn't go to school in isolation using it. At this age, they all follow each other. My 16 year nephew does. My daughters boyfriend does. In and out of fashion. Go out on a night out in your town where younger people are, they will be using it.
4.3M men in UK use it every day. 9.5M men in UK use it at least once a week.
Current bug bear - not only have we imported Black Friday from the USA to the UK, when we don't have Thanksgiving we have the stupidity to have adverts proclaiming the start of 'Black Friday week', No, you feckers, its a day, not a week.
What's wrong with just calling it the pre-Christmas sales?
On a pedantic point, we speak of Easter week and Christmas week ...
Easter is a three day (or more festival) and half you not heard of the Twelve Days of Christmas? In older times Christmas did indeed run for 12 days. We are much more retrained now.
A new deal on climate change has just been proposed at COP29 as almost 200 countries meet in Baku, the Azerbaijani capital. The deal proposes wealthier countries give $250bn (£199bn) per year by 2035 to developing nations to help tackle climate change. The figure is up from the $100bn a year currently in place.
To put the figure in perspective, $250bn is about 0.24% of the current world GDP of $105.4tn.
A reminder, though, that none of US, China, India, Brazil or Russia are going to be giving money to anyone.
Were this to happen, it would essentially fall entirely on Western Europe.
A new deal on climate change has just been proposed at COP29 as almost 200 countries meet in Baku, the Azerbaijani capital. The deal proposes wealthier countries give $250bn (£199bn) per year by 2035 to developing nations to help tackle climate change. The figure is up from the $100bn a year currently in place.
To put the figure in perspective, $250bn is about 0.24% of the current world GDP of $105.4tn.
Yebbut - it's eleven times Reeve's black hole... How any wealthy countries are going to step up to be part of that exclusive club?
Here's a BoE paper from 2005 co-authored by Rachel Reeves about whether markets react to Bank of England communications. Reeves is listed as being part of the 'Structural Economic Analysis Division'.
I am freezing. It's Trump's fault. Every day was balmy and bright under Biden, but now it's all snow and ice. It's your fault PB Republcans. CURSE YOU MAGA, BRINGER OF WINTER!
A new deal on climate change has just been proposed at COP29 as almost 200 countries meet in Baku, the Azerbaijani capital. The deal proposes wealthier countries give $250bn (£199bn) per year by 2035 to developing nations to help tackle climate change. The figure is up from the $100bn a year currently in place.
To put the figure in perspective, $250bn is about 0.24% of the current world GDP of $105.4tn.
A reminder, though, that none of US, China, India, Brazil or Russia are going to be giving money to anyone.
Were this to happen, it would essentially fall entirely on Western Europe.
China may be more willing to cough up for climate change action now Trump is returning to power in the US and they see a vacancy for global leadership on an issue. Lula in Brazil is also more likely to cough up than Bolsanoro would have been https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3rx2drd8x8o
I am freezing. It's Trump's fault. Every day was balmy and bright under Biden, but now it's all snow and ice. It's your fault PB Republcans. CURSE YOU MAGA, BRINGER OF WINTER!
Still. Only half an hour until "I can't fucking believe it is dark at 4pm" hour.
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Her role was variously described as an 'analyst' and an 'economist' in earlier profiles:
"I've got two economics degrees," she says, through gritted teeth. She has also had stints at the Bank of England, the British Embassy in Washington and as an analyst at HBOS...
Unlike Ed Balls, Reeves is untainted by New Labour's love affair with light-touch City regulation (her career at HBOS was based in its retail division up in Yorkshire, not among the high-rollers in the capital).
A junior chess champion from a relatively humble background, she spent 10 years as an economist for the Bank of England, HBOS and at the British embassy in Washington before entering Parliament.
Speaking as someone who has worked as an economist my entire professional life, I find this whole discussion somewhat pointless. Reeves has a bachelor's and masters degree in economics. She worked in a role entitled economist at the BOE (I have never met her myself but I know people who worked with her at the BOE and consider her a talented economist). At HBOS she worked in some role that, it seems, may not have had the job title "economist". But she may well have drawn on her economics training in the job and considered it an "economics job". Referring to herself as an economist across both roles therefore doesn't seem a particularly egregious crime. It's not as if being an economist is such an exalted position in a financial institution - if only it was!
Of all the feeble attempts to discredit a seemingly decent person this is one of the most poorly directed. It has nothing to do with the way she carries out her job nor the way she became the first female chancellor.
There was an ex Tory MP who used to work with her who waxed lyrical about her abilities. I'd like to think this witch hunt was sexism but I don't think it is. It's just some very bitter people kicking out uncontrollably at anything that seems vulnerable
Current bug bear - not only have we imported Black Friday from the USA to the UK, when we don't have Thanksgiving we have the stupidity to have adverts proclaiming the start of 'Black Friday week', No, you feckers, its a day, not a week.
What's wrong with just calling it the pre-Christmas sales?
Checks ACM guidelines....ref whistle blows....yellow card....use of term black....
More seriously, however much they try pushing it here, Black Friday never seems to have really caught on. There aren't 1000s queuing overnight to get a cheap telly and then fighting on another in the aisles of Asda when the doors open. I don't even know if its that big a thing in the US anymore.
Serious traffic queues at Brent Cross shopping centre today though. So maybe there is some traction with it.
Here's a BoE paper from 2005 co-authored by Rachel Reeves about whether markets react to Bank of England communications. Reeves is listed as being part of the 'Structural Economic Analysis Division'.
I don't like Reeves or what she is doing but that certainly sounds like an Economist job to me.
I don't think that bit is the problem. It is where she claimed she was an "economist" when she was actually in customer service helping retail customers with their mortgages. Nothing wrong with that as a job, but claiming it is being an economist is the equivalent of a legal secretary claiming they are a "lawyer" and suggesting that they might be a trained solicitor. It was equally misleading when she said she was with the Bank of Scotland when she was actually with the Halifax. I have had many dealings with people trying to mislead people over their career history. This does not look like a slight exaggeration or a mistake. It looks to me like deliberate falsification with the intent to mislead. Anyone else would be disciplined. It is also pretty shabby that she is claiming it was someone acting on her behalf.
The ruble's crashes somewhat against the dollar today. Currently at 1 ruble for 0.0097 United States Dollar.
I had expected Trump's win to help stabilise it. Never come to me for predictions...
The euro could end up below parity with the dollar by the time Trump is inaugurated.
Which entirely offsets the impact of tariffs.
Which means that Trump is right to say that the exporters will be the ones bearing the cost of the tariff.
So, the tax on petrol in the UK is actually a tax on Saudi oil producers? They pay it?
That's not comparable to the effect of tariffs on goods imports to the US.
If the dollar goes up to a level that offsets the tariffs, it means that the price to the importer can stay the same while the US government also brings in revenue.
A $100 value item becomes $91 plus $9 in tariffs with the tariff cost being absorbed by the exporter. The exporters gets fewer dollars for their goods but the dollars are worth more.
Reported rumour that in the past when the UK PM visited the Dalai Lama, the word wet out across China that investment should not be made in the UK. And it basically wasn't. That sounds credible.
Also talk of whether "always mentioning human rights" as part of the talking points China checklist has made the faintest bit of difference in 30 years.
And potential aspect of the Le Pen trial, which I had not spotted, on the next French election.
They've even got bookmarks:
01:11 The farmers protest 10:50 Is the international order collapsing around us? 13:11 Violence in Amsterdam 16:25 Is Keir Starmer spending too much time abroad? 17:54 UK-China relations 18:45 What is the point of COP? 20:35 EU trade dwarfs every other trading relationship 22:30 Does the West really care about human rights? 26:18 Will Marine Le Pen be barred from standing? 29:49 What have Alastair and Rory been watching recently? 33:59 How did Jeffrey Epstein manage to protect himself?
I've never really been tempted by TRIP - I'm fairly sure I already know what Alastair Campbell thinks about everything (which is that Alastair Campbell is right about everything and Labour is right about everything and anyone to the right, or indeed to the left of him is not only wrong but probably evil) - he doesn't strike me as a man with a lot of nuance. Am I missing out? Rory, on the other hand, strikes me as perhaps a man with too much nuance: on the one hand, on the other hand, you're probably right Alastair.
Am I missing out?
Good question.
I'm not listening to all of it, but I'm getting perspectives that I have not had before and I find interesting. Especially for me, perhaps, the Rory views based on his reflections on experience in several mid-level Ministerial positions.
I've always been somewhere between wary and contemptuous where Bad 'Al is concerned. I haven't come to any reassessment yet; however no on can be evaluated from a single viewpoint so I'm listening and critiquing at once.
I like it. Campbell brings a certain Labour tribalism, and that's a weakness, but otoh he knows more than most how politics works and he explains things well.
If you compare Mandelson and Campbell's takes on Trump, there is a massive gulf in their understanding of how politics works.
I haven't heard Mandy's take. He's not coming out with something sympathetic to him and his voters, I hope? If so it'll probably be because he's got an eye on that ambassador job.
I am freezing. It's Trump's fault. Every day was balmy and bright under Biden, but now it's all snow and ice. It's your fault PB Republcans. CURSE YOU MAGA, BRINGER OF WINTER!
And another pandemic, no doubt. Just like last time he was in office.
Reported rumour that in the past when the UK PM visited the Dalai Lama, the word wet out across China that investment should not be made in the UK. And it basically wasn't. That sounds credible.
Also talk of whether "always mentioning human rights" as part of the talking points China checklist has made the faintest bit of difference in 30 years.
And potential aspect of the Le Pen trial, which I had not spotted, on the next French election.
They've even got bookmarks:
01:11 The farmers protest 10:50 Is the international order collapsing around us? 13:11 Violence in Amsterdam 16:25 Is Keir Starmer spending too much time abroad? 17:54 UK-China relations 18:45 What is the point of COP? 20:35 EU trade dwarfs every other trading relationship 22:30 Does the West really care about human rights? 26:18 Will Marine Le Pen be barred from standing? 29:49 What have Alastair and Rory been watching recently? 33:59 How did Jeffrey Epstein manage to protect himself?
I've never really been tempted by TRIP - I'm fairly sure I already know what Alastair Campbell thinks about everything (which is that Alastair Campbell is right about everything and Labour is right about everything and anyone to the right, or indeed to the left of him is not only wrong but probably evil) - he doesn't strike me as a man with a lot of nuance. Am I missing out? Rory, on the other hand, strikes me as perhaps a man with too much nuance: on the one hand, on the other hand, you're probably right Alastair.
Am I missing out?
Good question.
I'm not listening to all of it, but I'm getting perspectives that I have not had before and I find interesting. Especially for me, perhaps, the Rory views based on his reflections on experience in several mid-level Ministerial positions.
I've always been somewhere between wary and contemptuous where Bad 'Al is concerned. I haven't come to any reassessment yet; however no on can be evaluated from a single viewpoint so I'm listening and critiquing at once.
I like it. Campbell brings a certain Labour tribalism, and that's a weakness, but otoh he knows more than most how politics works and he explains things well.
If you compare Mandelson and Campbell's takes on Trump, there is a massive gulf in their understanding of how politics works.
I haven't heard Mandy's take. He's not coming out with something sympathetic to him and his voters, I hope? If so it'll probably be because he's got an eye on that ambassador job.
Here's his interview with Lewis Goodall. Worth watching.
I am freezing. It's Trump's fault. Every day was balmy and bright under Biden, but now it's all snow and ice. It's your fault PB Republcans. CURSE YOU MAGA, BRINGER OF WINTER!
Still. Only half an hour until "I can't fucking believe it is dark at 4pm" hour.
Clear skies so it will be getting dark just that little bit later.
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Her role was variously described as an 'analyst' and an 'economist' in earlier profiles:
"I've got two economics degrees," she says, through gritted teeth. She has also had stints at the Bank of England, the British Embassy in Washington and as an analyst at HBOS...
Unlike Ed Balls, Reeves is untainted by New Labour's love affair with light-touch City regulation (her career at HBOS was based in its retail division up in Yorkshire, not among the high-rollers in the capital).
A junior chess champion from a relatively humble background, she spent 10 years as an economist for the Bank of England, HBOS and at the British embassy in Washington before entering Parliament.
Speaking as someone who has worked as an economist my entire professional life, I find this whole discussion somewhat pointless. Reeves has a bachelor's and masters degree in economics. She worked in a role entitled economist at the BOE (I have never met her myself but I know people who worked with her at the BOE and consider her a talented economist). At HBOS she worked in some role that, it seems, may not have had the job title "economist". But she may well have drawn on her economics training in the job and considered it an "economics job". Referring to herself as an economist across both roles therefore doesn't seem a particularly egregious crime. It's not as if being an economist is such an exalted position in a financial institution - if only it was!
Of all the feeble attempts to discredit a seemingly decent person this is one of the most poorly directed. It has nothing to do with the way she carries out her job nor the way she became the first female chancellor.
There was an ex Tory MP who used to work with her who waxed lyrical about her abilities. I'd like to think this witch hunt was sexism but I don't think it is. It's just some very bitter people kicking out uncontrollably at anything that seems vulnerable
You believe these things because you are singularly unable to criticise anyone who is in the Labour Party because you are of very small brain. Reeves is not even slightly innocent in this. The Labour Party was quite right in calling out Boris Johnson for his dishonesty. It is a shame that they, and their tribalist supporters, do not uphold the principles of honesty when it applies to them. Oh, no, they are except, in the same way as they are OK to take lavish gifts.
Current bug bear - not only have we imported Black Friday from the USA to the UK, when we don't have Thanksgiving we have the stupidity to have adverts proclaiming the start of 'Black Friday week', No, you feckers, its a day, not a week.
What's wrong with just calling it the pre-Christmas sales?
On a pedantic point, we speak of Easter week and Christmas week ...
Easter is a three day (or more festival) and half you not heard of the Twelve Days of Christmas? In older times Christmas did indeed run for 12 days. We are much more retrained now.
But Shrove Tuesday, Ash Wednesday ... to Easter Monday makes a week. Certainly in marketingspeak.
The ruble's crashes somewhat against the dollar today. Currently at 1 ruble for 0.0097 United States Dollar.
I had expected Trump's win to help stabilise it. Never come to me for predictions...
The euro could end up below parity with the dollar by the time Trump is inaugurated.
Which entirely offsets the impact of tariffs.
Which means that Trump is right to say that the exporters will be the ones bearing the cost of the tariff.
So, the tax on petrol in the UK is actually a tax on Saudi oil producers? They pay it?
That's not comparable to the effect of tariffs on goods imports to the US.
Why not? The point of tariffs is to increase the cost of imported goods so that the economy buys less of them if there is a domestic alternative which gains a competitive advantage. But those who persist in buying the more expensive import are the ones who pay the tariff, not the exporter.
So, if I bought a Jag in America after tariffs I would have to pay more for it. And American made cars might look more competitive. But they would be even less competitive here if the UK government responded in kind.
A new deal on climate change has just been proposed at COP29 as almost 200 countries meet in Baku, the Azerbaijani capital. The deal proposes wealthier countries give $250bn (£199bn) per year by 2035 to developing nations to help tackle climate change. The figure is up from the $100bn a year currently in place.
To put the figure in perspective, $250bn is about 0.24% of the current world GDP of $105.4tn.
A reminder, though, that none of US, China, India, Brazil or Russia are going to be giving money to anyone.
Were this to happen, it would essentially fall entirely on Western Europe.
China may be more willing to cough up for climate change action now Trump is returning to power in the US and they see a vacancy for global leadership on an issue. Lula in Brazil is also more likely to cough up than Bolsanoro would have been https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3rx2drd8x8o
The ruble's crashes somewhat against the dollar today. Currently at 1 ruble for 0.0097 United States Dollar.
I had expected Trump's win to help stabilise it. Never come to me for predictions...
The euro could end up below parity with the dollar by the time Trump is inaugurated.
Which entirely offsets the impact of tariffs.
Which means that Trump is right to say that the exporters will be the ones bearing the cost of the tariff.
So, the tax on petrol in the UK is actually a tax on Saudi oil producers? They pay it?
That's not comparable to the effect of tariffs on goods imports to the US.
Why not? The point of tariffs is to increase the cost of imported goods so that the economy buys less of them if there is a domestic alternative which gains a competitive advantage. But those who persist in buying the more expensive import are the ones who pay the tariff, not the exporter.
So, if I bought a Jag in America after tariffs I would have to pay more for it. And American made cars might look more competitive. But they would be even less competitive here if the UK government responded in kind.
The price of a Jaguar (or anything) is dynamic and depends on the market. An imported car doesn't suddenly become more desirable just because there is a tax attached to it. In the real world, if Jaguar want to compete in the US market using imported cars they will have to absorb at least some of the cost of the tax themselves.
I am freezing. It's Trump's fault. Every day was balmy and bright under Biden, but now it's all snow and ice. It's your fault PB Republcans. CURSE YOU MAGA, BRINGER OF WINTER!
Still. Only half an hour until "I can't fucking believe it is dark at 4pm" hour.
Clear skies so it will be getting dark just that little bit later.
Earliest sunset = 14th December, one week before the shortest day (winter solstice).
I am freezing. It's Trump's fault. Every day was balmy and bright under Biden, but now it's all snow and ice. It's your fault PB Republcans. CURSE YOU MAGA, BRINGER OF WINTER!
Still. Only half an hour until "I can't fucking believe it is dark at 4pm" hour.
Clear skies so it will be getting dark just that little bit later.
Otoh we're still a way off the solstice. At that point it will need to change to "ffs, 4pm and it's been dark for 45 minutes". If it doesn't it will be a falsehood and risk being flagged.
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Her role was variously described as an 'analyst' and an 'economist' in earlier profiles:
"I've got two economics degrees," she says, through gritted teeth. She has also had stints at the Bank of England, the British Embassy in Washington and as an analyst at HBOS...
Unlike Ed Balls, Reeves is untainted by New Labour's love affair with light-touch City regulation (her career at HBOS was based in its retail division up in Yorkshire, not among the high-rollers in the capital).
A junior chess champion from a relatively humble background, she spent 10 years as an economist for the Bank of England, HBOS and at the British embassy in Washington before entering Parliament.
Speaking as someone who has worked as an economist my entire professional life, I find this whole discussion somewhat pointless. Reeves has a bachelor's and masters degree in economics. She worked in a role entitled economist at the BOE (I have never met her myself but I know people who worked with her at the BOE and consider her a talented economist). At HBOS she worked in some role that, it seems, may not have had the job title "economist". But she may well have drawn on her economics training in the job and considered it an "economics job". Referring to herself as an economist across both roles therefore doesn't seem a particularly egregious crime. It's not as if being an economist is such an exalted position in a financial institution - if only it was!
Of all the feeble attempts to discredit a seemingly decent person this is one of the most poorly directed. It has nothing to do with the way she carries out her job nor the way she became the first female chancellor.
There was an ex Tory MP who used to work with her who waxed lyrical about her abilities. I'd like to think this witch hunt was sexism but I don't think it is. It's just some very bitter people kicking out uncontrollably at anything that seems vulnerable
You believe these things because you are singularly unable to criticise anyone who is in the Labour Party because you are of very small brain. Reeves is not even slightly innocent in this. The Labour Party was quite right in calling out Boris Johnson for his dishonesty. It is a shame that they, and their tribalist supporters, do not uphold the principles of honesty when it applies to them. Oh, no, they are except, in the same way as they are OK to take lavish gifts.
Hypocrites.
Has Reeves ever been fired for lying to her boss like Johnson was?
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Her role was variously described as an 'analyst' and an 'economist' in earlier profiles:
"I've got two economics degrees," she says, through gritted teeth. She has also had stints at the Bank of England, the British Embassy in Washington and as an analyst at HBOS...
Unlike Ed Balls, Reeves is untainted by New Labour's love affair with light-touch City regulation (her career at HBOS was based in its retail division up in Yorkshire, not among the high-rollers in the capital).
A junior chess champion from a relatively humble background, she spent 10 years as an economist for the Bank of England, HBOS and at the British embassy in Washington before entering Parliament.
Speaking as someone who has worked as an economist my entire professional life, I find this whole discussion somewhat pointless. Reeves has a bachelor's and masters degree in economics. She worked in a role entitled economist at the BOE (I have never met her myself but I know people who worked with her at the BOE and consider her a talented economist). At HBOS she worked in some role that, it seems, may not have had the job title "economist". But she may well have drawn on her economics training in the job and considered it an "economics job". Referring to herself as an economist across both roles therefore doesn't seem a particularly egregious crime. It's not as if being an economist is such an exalted position in a financial institution - if only it was!
Probably the most/only sensible post I have seen on here for many weeks. Aside from the Trumpian arse-licking and PB Tory wishcasting, and a renewed obsession with (shitty, error- strewn) AI, there remains an occasional worthy insight. Thank you!
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Her role was variously described as an 'analyst' and an 'economist' in earlier profiles:
"I've got two economics degrees," she says, through gritted teeth. She has also had stints at the Bank of England, the British Embassy in Washington and as an analyst at HBOS...
Unlike Ed Balls, Reeves is untainted by New Labour's love affair with light-touch City regulation (her career at HBOS was based in its retail division up in Yorkshire, not among the high-rollers in the capital).
A junior chess champion from a relatively humble background, she spent 10 years as an economist for the Bank of England, HBOS and at the British embassy in Washington before entering Parliament.
Speaking as someone who has worked as an economist my entire professional life, I find this whole discussion somewhat pointless. Reeves has a bachelor's and masters degree in economics. She worked in a role entitled economist at the BOE (I have never met her myself but I know people who worked with her at the BOE and consider her a talented economist). At HBOS she worked in some role that, it seems, may not have had the job title "economist". But she may well have drawn on her economics training in the job and considered it an "economics job". Referring to herself as an economist across both roles therefore doesn't seem a particularly egregious crime. It's not as if being an economist is such an exalted position in a financial institution - if only it was!
Of all the feeble attempts to discredit a seemingly decent person this is one of the most poorly directed. It has nothing to do with the way she carries out her job nor the way she became the first female chancellor.
There was an ex Tory MP who used to work with her who waxed lyrical about her abilities. I'd like to think this witch hunt was sexism but I don't think it is. It's just some very bitter people kicking out uncontrollably at anything that seems vulnerable
You believe these things because you are singularly unable to criticise anyone who is in the Labour Party because you are of very small brain. Reeves is not even slightly innocent in this. The Labour Party was quite right in calling out Boris Johnson for his dishonesty. It is a shame that they, and their tribalist supporters, do not uphold the principles of honesty when it applies to them. Oh, no, they are except, in the same way as they are OK to take lavish gifts.
Hypocrites.
Has Reeves ever been fired for lying to her boss like Johnson was?
Allegedly she was forced to resign for lying about having doctor's appointments when she was actually doing Labour party business on the side.
Here's a BoE paper from 2005 co-authored by Rachel Reeves about whether markets react to Bank of England communications. Reeves is listed as being part of the 'Structural Economic Analysis Division'.
I don't like Reeves or what she is doing but that certainly sounds like an Economist job to me.
I don't think that bit is the problem. It is where she claimed she was an "economist" when she was actually in customer service helping retail customers with their mortgages. Nothing wrong with that as a job, but claiming it is being an economist is the equivalent of a legal secretary claiming they are a "lawyer" and suggesting that they might be a trained solicitor. It was equally misleading when she said she was with the Bank of Scotland when she was actually with the Halifax. I have had many dealings with people trying to mislead people over their career history. This does not look like a slight exaggeration or a mistake. It looks to me like deliberate falsification with the intent to mislead. Anyone else would be disciplined. It is also pretty shabby that she is claiming it was someone acting on her behalf.
Here's a BoE paper from 2005 co-authored by Rachel Reeves about whether markets react to Bank of England communications. Reeves is listed as being part of the 'Structural Economic Analysis Division'.
I don't like Reeves or what she is doing but that certainly sounds like an Economist job to me.
I don't think that bit is the problem. It is where she claimed she was an "economist" when she was actually in customer service helping retail customers with their mortgages. Nothing wrong with that as a job, but claiming it is being an economist is the equivalent of a legal secretary claiming they are a "lawyer" and suggesting that they might be a trained solicitor. It was equally misleading when she said she was with the Bank of Scotland when she was actually with the Halifax. I have had many dealings with people trying to mislead people over their career history. This does not look like a slight exaggeration or a mistake. It looks to me like deliberate falsification with the intent to mislead. Anyone else would be disciplined. It is also pretty shabby that she is claiming it was someone acting on her behalf.
Rachel Reeves’s real banking roles revealed after claim she was an economist
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Her role was variously described as an 'analyst' and an 'economist' in earlier profiles:
"I've got two economics degrees," she says, through gritted teeth. She has also had stints at the Bank of England, the British Embassy in Washington and as an analyst at HBOS...
Unlike Ed Balls, Reeves is untainted by New Labour's love affair with light-touch City regulation (her career at HBOS was based in its retail division up in Yorkshire, not among the high-rollers in the capital).
A junior chess champion from a relatively humble background, she spent 10 years as an economist for the Bank of England, HBOS and at the British embassy in Washington before entering Parliament.
Speaking as someone who has worked as an economist my entire professional life, I find this whole discussion somewhat pointless. Reeves has a bachelor's and masters degree in economics. She worked in a role entitled economist at the BOE (I have never met her myself but I know people who worked with her at the BOE and consider her a talented economist). At HBOS she worked in some role that, it seems, may not have had the job title "economist". But she may well have drawn on her economics training in the job and considered it an "economics job". Referring to herself as an economist across both roles therefore doesn't seem a particularly egregious crime. It's not as if being an economist is such an exalted position in a financial institution - if only it was!
Of all the feeble attempts to discredit a seemingly decent person this is one of the most poorly directed. It has nothing to do with the way she carries out her job nor the way she became the first female chancellor.
There was an ex Tory MP who used to work with her who waxed lyrical about her abilities. I'd like to think this witch hunt was sexism but I don't think it is. It's just some very bitter people kicking out uncontrollably at anything that seems vulnerable
You believe these things because you are singularly unable to criticise anyone who is in the Labour Party because you are of very small brain. Reeves is not even slightly innocent in this. The Labour Party was quite right in calling out Boris Johnson for his dishonesty. It is a shame that they, and their tribalist supporters, do not uphold the principles of honesty when it applies to them. Oh, no, they are except, in the same way as they are OK to take lavish gifts.
Hypocrites.
Has Reeves ever been fired for lying to her boss like Johnson was?
Allegedly she was forced to resign for lying about having doctor's appointments when she was actually doing Labour party business on the side.
I am freezing. It's Trump's fault. Every day was balmy and bright under Biden, but now it's all snow and ice. It's your fault PB Republcans. CURSE YOU MAGA, BRINGER OF WINTER!
Still. Only half an hour until "I can't fucking believe it is dark at 4pm" hour.
Clear skies so it will be getting dark just that little bit later.
Earliest sunset = 14th December, one week before the shortest day (winter solstice).
But I know what TT means. It stays lighter longer when it is a clear evening.
I am freezing. It's Trump's fault. Every day was balmy and bright under Biden, but now it's all snow and ice. It's your fault PB Republcans. CURSE YOU MAGA, BRINGER OF WINTER!
Still. Only half an hour until "I can't fucking believe it is dark at 4pm" hour.
Clear skies so it will be getting dark just that little bit later.
Earliest sunset = 14th December, one week before the shortest day (winter solstice).
But I know what TT means. It stays lighter longer when it is a clear evening.
Indeed. Bright twilight here. Thoughts and prayers for the repetitive Doom Monger of Camden Town.
A new deal on climate change has just been proposed at COP29 as almost 200 countries meet in Baku, the Azerbaijani capital. The deal proposes wealthier countries give $250bn (£199bn) per year by 2035 to developing nations to help tackle climate change. The figure is up from the $100bn a year currently in place.
To put the figure in perspective, $250bn is about 0.24% of the current world GDP of $105.4tn.
A reminder, though, that none of US, China, India, Brazil or Russia are going to be giving money to anyone.
Were this to happen, it would essentially fall entirely on Western Europe.
In GDP per capita terms, India is very much among the poor countries, and Brazil and China are also below the world average. Russia is only just in the rich half. The big problem is the US, which is both rich and a high emitter of GHGs. If they refuse to step up to the plate, it's going to be very difficult to drum up enthusiam from anyone else, and so the world is basically screwed.
I am freezing. It's Trump's fault. Every day was balmy and bright under Biden, but now it's all snow and ice. It's your fault PB Republcans. CURSE YOU MAGA, BRINGER OF WINTER!
Still. Only half an hour until "I can't fucking believe it is dark at 4pm" hour.
Clear skies so it will be getting dark just that little bit later.
Otoh we're still a way off the solstice. At that point it will need to change to "ffs, 4pm and it's been dark for 45 minutes". If it doesn't it will be a falsehood and risk being flagged.
In terms of daylight hours we're nearly to the solstice because day length follows a sine wave and daylight hours are being lost most quickly around the equinox.
So, although we are only 67% of the way from equinox to solstice in terms of days passed, we're 85% of the way there in terms of daylight loss. More than that, over 3/4 of that daylight loss is at dawn, dusk only gets earlier by a further 9 minutes from here on in.
Comments
Which dickhead has tried to smuggle some Turkish goat herders moonshine back through customs then....
Met chief Sir Mark Rowley revealed London's spending on policing per head was already lower than cities such as New York
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/31868070/met-police-lose-officers-budget-cuts/
Keir Starmer follows the Theresa May guide to losing elections as crime rises. There soon won't be anyone left to arrest Bibi.
3 stories on the front page currently:
Charged £720 to have a key cut - soaring bills drive leaseholders to breaking point
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy84g9822gro
The feudal hangover that accounts for a fifth of homes
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3e8x0084x5o
'I'm mentally exhausted after £2k service charge hike'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqxwyrzvjdlo
LD voters most in favour, 80% back the Bill followed by Labour voters 77% of whom support it.
Reform voters and Tory voters a little less supportive, 72% and 68% respectively in favour
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/50989-three-quarters-support-assisted-dying-law
Sources have told the i that rather than being an economist, she worked in customer relations and mortgages.
However, a source close to Ms Reeves explained to i the change was as a result of a one of her staff incorrectly listing the job description on the business networking site.
https://inews.co.uk/news/rachel-reeves-banking-roles-revealed-cv-3390856
Embellishing her CV has failed to get me particularly excited, but this...liar, liar, pants on fire.....why is a lacky doing your LinkedIn profile...and you never checked what they put on it..... Come on man.....
Guardian 2011:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2011/oct/23/rachel-reeves-new-era-labour
"I've got two economics degrees," she says, through gritted teeth. She has also had stints at the Bank of England, the British Embassy in Washington and as an analyst at HBOS...
Unlike Ed Balls, Reeves is untainted by New Labour's love affair with light-touch City regulation (her career at HBOS was based in its retail division up in Yorkshire, not among the high-rollers in the capital).
Telegraph 2012:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/9014203/Rachel-Reeves-the-chess-expert-who-may-end-up-as-queen-of-Labour.html
A junior chess champion from a relatively humble background, she spent 10 years as an economist for the Bank of England, HBOS and at the British embassy in Washington before entering Parliament.
To be fair, my Linkedin profile is about seven years out of date. But that undersells me, rather than oversells.
I'd imagine most of the strong opposition comes from people who are religious.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/oct/18/george-carey-archbishop-c-of-e-bishops-lords-back-assisted-dying-bill
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/external-mpc-discussion-paper/2005/do-financial-markets-react-to-boe-communication.pdf
The independent candidate who lost by a mere 528 votes has called in m'learned friends.
A reminder that @Sunil_Prasannan is PB's man on the spot.
I have sent a letter of complaint this week to the Electoral Commission and Redbridge electoral services outlining serious irregularities on the night of the count on July 5th in Ilford North, raising questions regarding compliance with electoral law and guidance. I have retained Bindmans LLP and specialist King’s Counsel on this issue and have asked the Electoral Commission to examine the activities of Redbridge Council.
https://x.com/LeanneMohamad/status/1859919169002561772?t=w1XQaQaVwo1TtfKf1YXvbQ&s=19
PS Having Priti Patel sitting next to Badenoch would not seem very wise idea when a whole rebrand is called for.
https://x.com/LeftieStats/status/1859729121687036385
In any case it is not the mere 25% still voting Labour with MiC the Tories can squeeze anymore, that would be the lowest Labour voteshare since 1918, but the 19% voting Reform most of whom love Boris and Priti
4.3M men in UK use it every day. 9.5M men in UK use it at least once a week.
Not many markets are this big.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/302673/aftershave-and-eau-de-toilette-usage-frequency-in-the-uk/
Were this to happen, it would essentially fall entirely on Western Europe.
Just Starmer?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27fCcZ9PsKc
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3rx2drd8x8o
There was an ex Tory MP who used to work with her who waxed lyrical about her abilities. I'd like to think this witch hunt was sexism but I don't think it is. It's just some very bitter people kicking out uncontrollably at anything that seems vulnerable
If the dollar goes up to a level that offsets the tariffs, it means that the price to the importer can stay the same while the US government also brings in revenue.
A $100 value item becomes $91 plus $9 in tariffs with the tariff cost being absorbed by the exporter. The exporters gets fewer dollars for their goods but the dollars are worth more.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/newly-elected-lib-dem-quits-34164303
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nUY5_ZHEdY
Hypocrites.
So, if I bought a Jag in America after tariffs I would have to pay more for it. And American made cars might look more competitive. But they would be even less competitive here if the UK government responded in kind.
strewn) AI, there remains an occasional worthy insight. Thank you!
NEW THREAD
So, although we are only 67% of the way from equinox to solstice in terms of days passed, we're 85% of the way there in terms of daylight loss. More than that, over 3/4 of that daylight loss is at dawn, dusk only gets earlier by a further 9 minutes from here on in.