Howdy, Stranger!

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

Naughty and nice. Who is on Santa’s list? – politicalbetting.com

245678

Comments

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    Interesting 50 minute video on demographic decline:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzP50zl-6_g

    A brief but important note was that women are likelier in the West to get higher education but relationships/marriage/fertility seem to work best when the man is slightly higher status than the woman. In short, women like moving slightly 'up' with a man and don't like moving down, yet women are doing better than men at education, which is a significant part of that.

    Also interesting to note that the UK, as far as I could tell, is forecast to have the lowest population decline in Europe, just 4% to 2100.

    Yes its not just that. There is now active positive discrimination in favour of women in the workplace which adds to the problem. This is artificially boosting womens status at the expense of men.
    Women: know your place.
    Easy answer to make but if its causing our birthrate to collapse we have a problem. A collapsing birthrate means we need to rely on mass immigration and people dont seem too happy about that.
    It isn’t.

    If you talk to women as people, you will find that a major concern with having children is housing space. That’s on top of all the expenses of bringing up children.

    Living in a 1 bed flat doesn’t exactly encourage 2 child families….
    We need living space.
    {examines map of Russia}

    Yes, we do.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    On topic, the fact that Santa is an anagram of Satan is all the evidence I need.

    User name checks out…
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,632
    CHart said:

    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/dec/14/primary-school-children-left-in-tears-after-vicar-tells-them-santa-isnt-real

    Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?

    I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.

    But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
    I used to believe in Santa and it added greatly to the magic of Christmas. What's odd is I can't remember when I stopped. I know I believed at 7 and I know I didn't believe at 10 but I don't recall the actual revelation - which must have occurred at some point in those 3 years - of the crushing truth that "Santa" was my dad and all the other kids' Santas was their dads, just filling up stockings and putting presents under trees and consuming that left-out mince pie and brandy after we'd all gone to bed. Did somebody tell me? Did my burgeoning powers of logic work it out? You'd have thought I'd remember something as traumatic as that.
    Oh you still believe in Santa mate. You thought Keir Starmer was going to fix the country.
    Lol, me? No, I have very modest expectations of UK governments. I'm notorious for it.
  • CHartCHart Posts: 51

    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    Interesting 50 minute video on demographic decline:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzP50zl-6_g

    A brief but important note was that women are likelier in the West to get higher education but relationships/marriage/fertility seem to work best when the man is slightly higher status than the woman. In short, women like moving slightly 'up' with a man and don't like moving down, yet women are doing better than men at education, which is a significant part of that.

    Also interesting to note that the UK, as far as I could tell, is forecast to have the lowest population decline in Europe, just 4% to 2100.

    Yes its not just that. There is now active positive discrimination in favour of women in the workplace which adds to the problem. This is artificially boosting womens status at the expense of men.
    Women: know your place.
    Easy answer to make but if its causing our birthrate to collapse we have a problem. A collapsing birthrate means we need to rely on mass immigration and people dont seem too happy about that.
    It isn’t.

    If you talk to women as people, you will find that a major concern with having children is housing space. That’s on top of all the expenses of bringing up children.

    Living in a 1 bed flat doesn’t exactly encourage 2 child families….
    We need living space.
    {examines map of Russia}

    Yes, we do.
    Wonder if our young men have the stones to invade France. I look at the heroic ukraine resistance and cant imagine our young men putting up such a fight.
  • I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
  • CHartCHart Posts: 51
    kinabalu said:

    CHart said:

    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/dec/14/primary-school-children-left-in-tears-after-vicar-tells-them-santa-isnt-real

    Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?

    I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.

    But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
    I used to believe in Santa and it added greatly to the magic of Christmas. What's odd is I can't remember when I stopped. I know I believed at 7 and I know I didn't believe at 10 but I don't recall the actual revelation - which must have occurred at some point in those 3 years - of the crushing truth that "Santa" was my dad and all the other kids' Santas was their dads, just filling up stockings and putting presents under trees and consuming that left-out mince pie and brandy after we'd all gone to bed. Did somebody tell me? Did my burgeoning powers of logic work it out? You'd have thought I'd remember something as traumatic as that.
    Oh you still believe in Santa mate. You thought Keir Starmer was going to fix the country.
    Lol, me? No, I have very modest expectations of UK governments. I'm notorious for it.
    Yes great plans seem to be reserved for govts of ther countries. Something to be said for having a long term outlook.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012

    Poor Piers Morgan. Down in 6th place on the naughty list. Or perhaps he'll just be happy to be mentioned alongside the big boys? Is Putin regarded as ineligible for 'naughty'?

    The naughty list is made up of comic book villains not the truly monstrous. If it were otherwise Dominique Pelicot would have featured.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    They aren’t in government.
  • CHartCHart Posts: 51

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Hostage to fortune. In reality i think they would struggle to get it below 250000 without completely crashing our economy.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,632

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    CHart said:

    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    Interesting 50 minute video on demographic decline:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzP50zl-6_g

    A brief but important note was that women are likelier in the West to get higher education but relationships/marriage/fertility seem to work best when the man is slightly higher status than the woman. In short, women like moving slightly 'up' with a man and don't like moving down, yet women are doing better than men at education, which is a significant part of that.

    Also interesting to note that the UK, as far as I could tell, is forecast to have the lowest population decline in Europe, just 4% to 2100.

    Yes its not just that. There is now active positive discrimination in favour of women in the workplace which adds to the problem. This is artificially boosting womens status at the expense of men.
    Women: know your place.
    Easy answer to make but if its causing our birthrate to collapse we have a problem. A collapsing birthrate means we need to rely on mass immigration and people dont seem too happy about that.
    It isn’t.

    If you talk to women as people, you will find that a major concern with having children is housing space. That’s on top of all the expenses of bringing up children.

    Living in a 1 bed flat doesn’t exactly encourage 2 child families….
    We need living space.
    {examines map of Russia}

    Yes, we do.
    Wonder if our young men have the stones to invade France. I look at the heroic ukraine resistance and cant imagine our young men putting up such a fight.
    Unlike the macho men of Russia, the U.K. military doesn’t need to conscript. They volunteer


  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,694
    edited December 15
    CHart said:

    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    Interesting 50 minute video on demographic decline:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzP50zl-6_g

    A brief but important note was that women are likelier in the West to get higher education but relationships/marriage/fertility seem to work best when the man is slightly higher status than the woman. In short, women like moving slightly 'up' with a man and don't like moving down, yet women are doing better than men at education, which is a significant part of that.

    Also interesting to note that the UK, as far as I could tell, is forecast to have the lowest population decline in Europe, just 4% to 2100.

    Yes its not just that. There is now active positive discrimination in favour of women in the workplace which adds to the problem. This is artificially boosting womens status at the expense of men.
    Women: know your place.
    Easy answer to make but if its causing our birthrate to collapse we have a problem. A collapsing birthrate means we need to rely on mass immigration and people dont seem too happy about that.
    It isn’t.

    If you talk to women as people, you will find that a major concern with having children is housing space. That’s on top of all the expenses of bringing up children.

    Living in a 1 bed flat doesn’t exactly encourage 2 child families….
    We need living space.
    {examines map of Russia}

    Yes, we do.
    Wonder if our young men have the stones to invade France. I look at the heroic ukraine resistance and cant imagine our young men putting up such a fight.
    I suspect that the same was said prior to WWI and II. I can't imagine enough of our young men wanting to invade France, but I have no trouble at all imagining them fighting to defend UK if it was attacked.
    In fact a lot of young men volunteered to join the Army in the Boer Wars but were physically unfit. Hence school meals.
    We might find the same now, due to the poor housing.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
  • CHartCHart Posts: 51
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
  • Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    If the government issued 0 visas next year, I suspect you’d be the first complaining if the economy was impacted.
  • CHartCHart Posts: 51

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    If the government issued 0 visas next year, I suspect you’d be the first complaining if the economy was impacted.
    Thats the point im making.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,420
    More migrants removed from UK since Labour elected than in any six months since 2019, Home Office says

    https://news.sky.com/story/more-migrants-removed-from-uk-since-labour-elected-than-in-any-six-months-since-2019-home-office-says-13273888
  • Musk! With a British grandparent he still has time to become a citizen and then our next PM.

    You don't need to be a British citizen to be UK PM.

    Plus Bonar Law was a Maple Leaf.
    At the time of Bonar Law, he would have been considered British wouldn't he still?

    All the Empire was British, so being Canadian wouldn't preclude one from being British.

    Hence Windrush generations later, also British.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,835

    More migrants removed from UK since Labour elected than in any six months since 2019, Home Office says

    https://news.sky.com/story/more-migrants-removed-from-uk-since-labour-elected-than-in-any-six-months-since-2019-home-office-says-13273888

    The largest group, more than one third, are Albanians. Able to be deported thanks to a returns agreement Sunak signed late last year.

  • CHartCHart Posts: 51
    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
  • More migrants removed from UK since Labour elected than in any six months since 2019, Home Office says

    https://news.sky.com/story/more-migrants-removed-from-uk-since-labour-elected-than-in-any-six-months-since-2019-home-office-says-13273888

    I still am not convinced by the PB consensus that Sir Keir Starmer is a dud.

    They seem to be quietly doing a lot. The last lot didn’t seem to actually do anything in the end.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376
    Good to see IPSOS polling about absolute bullshit while refusing to release VI polls for the past six months...
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,778
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    It is so blindingly obvious that we do have the choice and that for economic reasons the choice is to allow quite a large level of immigration.

    I've never understood what understanding supporters of the last government had of its strongly anti-immigration rhetoric, in relation to its actual immigration policy. Was Rishi Sunak so stupid that he didn't realise he had control of immigration? Or did he really appreciate the economic benefits of immigration while promising to save us from foreigners by sending them to Rwanda?
  • kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/dec/14/primary-school-children-left-in-tears-after-vicar-tells-them-santa-isnt-real

    Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?

    I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.

    But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
    I used to believe in Santa and it added greatly to the magic of Christmas. What's odd is I can't remember when I stopped. I know I believed at 7 and I know I didn't believe at 10 but I don't recall the actual revelation - which must have occurred at some point in those 3 years - of the crushing truth that "Santa" was my dad and all the other kids' Santas was their dads, just filling up stockings and putting presents under trees and consuming that left-out mince pie and brandy after we'd all gone to bed. Did somebody tell me? Did my burgeoning powers of logic work it out? You'd have thought I'd remember something as traumatic as that.
    With our kids we took the time to explain that although the actual figure may be imaginary, he was just a reflection of what you might call the Christmas spirit. I know some will scoff at that but it is something I still believe in and try to hold to. For me it is a weird amalgam of Christian and pagan with a large dash of humanist thrown in.

    For the actual revelation, my daughter did the pretending to believe bit until it was so obvious that we could just discuss it openly. My son is 7 years younger than my daughter so I think she had a big hand in easing him over the reveal.
  • Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Automation has been having strides for centuries.

    We will adapt, as we have for centuries, and new jobs will be created where they don't exist currently, which enables productivity growth.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,330
    edited December 15

    Musk! With a British grandparent he still has time to become a citizen and then our next PM.

    You don't need to be a British citizen to be UK PM.

    Plus Bonar Law was a Maple Leaf.
    At the time of Bonar Law, he would have been considered British wouldn't he still?

    All the Empire was British, so being Canadian wouldn't preclude one from being British.

    Hence Windrush generations later, also British.
    Indeed. I mentioned the other day I'd been reading about a Great War Camel pilot in the RFC who was South African but just signed up with the RFC in SA and went on the boat to UK for his training.

    I once looked up the Windrush immigration list for the passengers from Kew online for a friend whose dad was on the famous voyage. The first thing it said was "British".
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,778
    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    Remind us how long ago you were replaced by a 'bot.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,945
    CHart said:

    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    Interesting 50 minute video on demographic decline:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzP50zl-6_g

    A brief but important note was that women are likelier in the West to get higher education but relationships/marriage/fertility seem to work best when the man is slightly higher status than the woman. In short, women like moving slightly 'up' with a man and don't like moving down, yet women are doing better than men at education, which is a significant part of that.

    Also interesting to note that the UK, as far as I could tell, is forecast to have the lowest population decline in Europe, just 4% to 2100.

    Yes its not just that. There is now active positive discrimination in favour of women in the workplace which adds to the problem. This is artificially boosting womens status at the expense of men.
    Women: know your place.
    Easy answer to make but if its causing our birthrate to collapse we have a problem. A collapsing birthrate means we need to rely on mass immigration and people dont seem too happy about that.
    It isn’t.

    If you talk to women as people, you will find that a major concern with having children is housing space. That’s on top of all the expenses of bringing up children.

    Living in a 1 bed flat doesn’t exactly encourage 2 child families….
    We need living space.
    To be fair middle class graduates living in the se are becoming the new proletariat.
    In that case what are working-class non-graduates living in the se?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    It is so blindingly obvious that we do have the choice and that for economic reasons the choice is to allow quite a large level of immigration.

    I've never understood what understanding supporters of the last government had of its strongly anti-immigration rhetoric, in relation to its actual immigration policy. Was Rishi Sunak so stupid that he didn't realise he had control of immigration? Or did he really appreciate the economic benefits of immigration while promising to save us from foreigners by sending them to Rwanda?
    Well, quite

    I respect people that argue for large scale immigration for the economy, as long as they are honest about the social cost. I disagree but respect that

    Similarly, people who want to restrict immigration tightly need to admit it will come at a price - but a much lower price than is generally thought

    The worst of all are the Tories and now Labour, talking tough but letting in millions. I cry foul scorn
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,495

    More migrants removed from UK since Labour elected than in any six months since 2019, Home Office says

    https://news.sky.com/story/more-migrants-removed-from-uk-since-labour-elected-than-in-any-six-months-since-2019-home-office-says-13273888

    I still am not convinced by the PB consensus that Sir Keir Starmer is a dud.

    They seem to be quietly doing a lot. The last lot didn’t seem to actually do anything in the end.
    Why am I not surprised
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    Speaking of technology changing the world, there’s a good article in the guardian about the existential crisis facing universities. As predicted
  • carnforth said:

    More migrants removed from UK since Labour elected than in any six months since 2019, Home Office says

    https://news.sky.com/story/more-migrants-removed-from-uk-since-labour-elected-than-in-any-six-months-since-2019-home-office-says-13273888

    The largest group, more than one third, are Albanians. Able to be deported thanks to a returns agreement Sunak signed late last year.

    And Sunak deserves praise for that. But that’s virtually the only thing he actually did that was positive.

    My view is that Labour will end signing a Rwanda-style deal that just isn’t illegal and wicked. I never opposed the idea of processing these people offshore, it was that if deemed to be legitimate, they weren’t allowed to stay in the UK which was not only immoral but also nonsensical.

    But at any rate, I know the PB consensus is that SKS is done and it is terminal (although oddly I note that despite having similar difficulties at this point, people that said this about Johnson were laughed out of the room - indeed many said he’d govern for a decade) but they’ve put in a lot of foundational changes in the last several months.

    These changes aren’t flashy or probably really worth any poll bounce but I sincerely believe they were the right moves for the country.

    The biggest poll bounce SKS will see will be in my view after the national minimum wage rise comes in and when immigration drops next year (thanks ironically, to Rishi Sunak).

    I don’t underrate Nigel Farage’s chances as PM and I think he’s got to be a good shot. But the fundamental issue with SKS is the comms not (most of) the policies in my mind. The good news is that Farage won’t be against Starmer. He will be against Streeting.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,420
    GIN1138 said:

    Good to see IPSOS polling about absolute bullshit while refusing to release VI polls for the past six months...

    WTF? Ipsos is a private company: they can do whatever polls they want. And it’s not as if there’s any shortage of general election polls.
  • Leon said:

    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    It is so blindingly obvious that we do have the choice and that for economic reasons the choice is to allow quite a large level of immigration.

    I've never understood what understanding supporters of the last government had of its strongly anti-immigration rhetoric, in relation to its actual immigration policy. Was Rishi Sunak so stupid that he didn't realise he had control of immigration? Or did he really appreciate the economic benefits of immigration while promising to save us from foreigners by sending them to Rwanda?
    Well, quite

    I respect people that argue for large scale immigration for the economy, as long as they are honest about the social cost. I disagree but respect that

    Similarly, people who want to restrict immigration tightly need to admit it will come at a price - but a much lower price than is generally thought

    The worst of all are the Tories and now Labour, talking tough but letting in millions. I cry foul scorn
    You support freedom of movement.
  • Chris said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    Remind us how long ago you were replaced by a 'bot.
    “Leon” has been using ChatGPT for months. You can always tell.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,632
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Asylum seekers and non-standard routes, I mainly meant. Although it's also noddy to set precise limits on the overall numbers.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 22,355
    edited December 15
    Leon said:

    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    It is so blindingly obvious that we do have the choice and that for economic reasons the choice is to allow quite a large level of immigration.

    I've never understood what understanding supporters of the last government had of its strongly anti-immigration rhetoric, in relation to its actual immigration policy. Was Rishi Sunak so stupid that he didn't realise he had control of immigration? Or did he really appreciate the economic benefits of immigration while promising to save us from foreigners by sending them to Rwanda?
    Well, quite

    I respect people that argue for large scale immigration for the economy, as long as they are honest about the social cost. I disagree but respect that

    Similarly, people who want to restrict immigration tightly need to admit it will come at a price - but a much lower price than is generally thought

    The worst of all are the Tories and now Labour, talking tough but letting in millions. I cry foul scorn
    I'm entirely comfortable with large scale migration, and think we need large scale investment in new infrastructure like roads to go with it and liberal housing so people who can easily move here can easily build and get a new house - ditto for young people.

    I have contempt for people who are pro-large scale migration but anti-construction and think there's "enough" houses near them already, but lets be generous at letting millions come so long as we don't build any houses for those millions, or our own young people, to live in.
  • CHartCHart Posts: 51
    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376
    edited December 15

    GIN1138 said:

    Good to see IPSOS polling about absolute bullshit while refusing to release VI polls for the past six months...

    WTF? Ipsos is a private company: they can do whatever polls they want. And it’s not as if there’s any shortage of general election polls.
    Of course are a private company and of they can do whatever polls they want.

    And those of us that are waiting for a VI poll from them can pass judgement along the way... Same with YouGov, Survation, Savanta, Redfield, etc, etc. etc.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Automation has been having strides for centuries.

    We will adapt, as we have for centuries, and new jobs will be created where they don't exist currently, which enables productivity growth.
    I don’t believe they will, this time. This time is different

    No one replaced the hand weavers of Lancashire. Machines replaced them. So they went to work in the new manufactories. Then they replaced the factory jobs and people moved to offices to work

    This time there is no new place to go work
  • Of course there is not an insignificant chance that the concept of freedom of movement is going down the pan with the EU likely to reform it anyhow.

    So I wonder if we will end up rejoining the single market in that case and just restricting non-EU immigration very heavily.
  • Andy_JS said:

    CHart said:

    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    RobD said:

    CHart said:

    Interesting 50 minute video on demographic decline:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzP50zl-6_g

    A brief but important note was that women are likelier in the West to get higher education but relationships/marriage/fertility seem to work best when the man is slightly higher status than the woman. In short, women like moving slightly 'up' with a man and don't like moving down, yet women are doing better than men at education, which is a significant part of that.

    Also interesting to note that the UK, as far as I could tell, is forecast to have the lowest population decline in Europe, just 4% to 2100.

    Yes its not just that. There is now active positive discrimination in favour of women in the workplace which adds to the problem. This is artificially boosting womens status at the expense of men.
    Women: know your place.
    Easy answer to make but if its causing our birthrate to collapse we have a problem. A collapsing birthrate means we need to rely on mass immigration and people dont seem too happy about that.
    It isn’t.

    If you talk to women as people, you will find that a major concern with having children is housing space. That’s on top of all the expenses of bringing up children.

    Living in a 1 bed flat doesn’t exactly encourage 2 child families….
    We need living space.
    To be fair middle class graduates living in the se are becoming the new proletariat.
    In that case what are working-class non-graduates living in the se?
    That depends on the level of their skillset.
  • Remember when Polish plumbers were the problem? How strange that rhetoric seemed to disappear.
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Automation has been having strides for centuries.

    We will adapt, as we have for centuries, and new jobs will be created where they don't exist currently, which enables productivity growth.
    I don’t believe they will, this time. This time is different

    No one replaced the hand weavers of Lancashire. Machines replaced them. So they went to work in the new manufactories. Then they replaced the factory jobs and people moved to offices to work

    This time there is no new place to go work
    The four most incorrect words in the English language are "this time is different".

    There are always new places to go to work.

    As machines automate manual labour it frees up more people to work in services or other sectors that benefit from the human touch.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376

    More migrants removed from UK since Labour elected than in any six months since 2019, Home Office says

    https://news.sky.com/story/more-migrants-removed-from-uk-since-labour-elected-than-in-any-six-months-since-2019-home-office-says-13273888

    I still am not convinced by the PB consensus that Sir Keir Starmer is a dud.

    They seem to be quietly doing a lot. The last lot didn’t seem to actually do anything in the end.
    Doing a lot, badly!

    They've virtually tipped us into recession...
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

  • BatteryCorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorse Posts: 4,089
    edited December 15
    GIN1138 said:

    More migrants removed from UK since Labour elected than in any six months since 2019, Home Office says

    https://news.sky.com/story/more-migrants-removed-from-uk-since-labour-elected-than-in-any-six-months-since-2019-home-office-says-13273888

    I still am not convinced by the PB consensus that Sir Keir Starmer is a dud.

    They seem to be quietly doing a lot. The last lot didn’t seem to actually do anything in the end.
    Doing a lot, badly!

    They've virtually tipped us into recession...
    Unlike Rishi Sunak, who actually did.

    Beyond the farmer policy, what do you actually disagree with them on?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,780
    edited December 15

    Remember when Polish plumbers were the problem? How strange that rhetoric seemed to disappear.

    They're a problem for British plumbers, less so for those who want to pay less for a plumber.

    They are also a problem for anyone who needs a plumber in a decade or two as they contribute to reducing the future supply of British plumbers.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    It is so blindingly obvious that we do have the choice and that for economic reasons the choice is to allow quite a large level of immigration.

    I've never understood what understanding supporters of the last government had of its strongly anti-immigration rhetoric, in relation to its actual immigration policy. Was Rishi Sunak so stupid that he didn't realise he had control of immigration? Or did he really appreciate the economic benefits of immigration while promising to save us from foreigners by sending them to Rwanda?
    Well, quite

    I respect people that argue for large scale immigration for the economy, as long as they are honest about the social cost. I disagree but respect that

    Similarly, people who want to restrict immigration tightly need to admit it will come at a price - but a much lower price than is generally thought

    The worst of all are the Tories and now Labour, talking tough but letting in millions. I cry foul scorn
    I'm entirely comfortable with large scale migration, and think we need large scale investment in new infrastructure like roads to go with it and liberal housing so people who can easily move here can easily build and get a new house - ditto for young people.

    I have contempt for people who are pro-large scale migration but anti-construction and think there's "enough" houses near them already, but lets be generous at letting millions come so long as we don't build any houses for those millions, or our own young people, to live in.
    You are at least half honest. You don’t acknowledge the cultural and social cost of large scale immigration - but you do admit we need to build the houses

    So that’s a half round of applause
  • The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.
  • Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Automation has been having strides for centuries.

    We will adapt, as we have for centuries, and new jobs will be created where they don't exist currently, which enables productivity growth.
    I don’t believe they will, this time. This time is different

    No one replaced the hand weavers of Lancashire. Machines replaced them. So they went to work in the new manufactories. Then they replaced the factory jobs and people moved to offices to work

    This time there is no new place to go work
    The four most incorrect words in the English language are "this time is different".

    There are always new places to go to work.

    As machines automate manual labour it frees up more people to work in services or other sectors that benefit from the human touch.
    I hesitate to go down this road as I might get banned. Suffice to say you’re wrong, and there is plentiful evidence you’re wrong
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 22,355
    edited December 15
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Automation has been having strides for centuries.

    We will adapt, as we have for centuries, and new jobs will be created where they don't exist currently, which enables productivity growth.
    I don’t believe they will, this time. This time is different

    No one replaced the hand weavers of Lancashire. Machines replaced them. So they went to work in the new manufactories. Then they replaced the factory jobs and people moved to offices to work

    This time there is no new place to go work
    The four most incorrect words in the English language are "this time is different".

    There are always new places to go to work.

    As machines automate manual labour it frees up more people to work in services or other sectors that benefit from the human touch.
    I hesitate to go down this road as I might get banned. Suffice to say you’re wrong, and there is plentiful evidence you’re wrong
    We have full employment and masses of firms looking for staff.

    We have millions of people working in jobs our predecessors would never have done.

    You are wrong, all the evidence shows that.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,835

    Remember when Polish plumbers were the problem? How strange that rhetoric seemed to disappear.

    Polish plumbers came in the late 90s and early 2000s. Poland was not in the EU then, and they came on work visas.

    Your pal Starmer has been describing our new nurses and care home workers from outside the EU as part of a "disasterous" policy. I wonder how that makes them feel.
  • The problem is that people don’t actually “want” to build houses.

    We see it here all the time. “I love new houses” and I post an example that’s been rejected for no good reason and people say it was right.

    Same with infrastructure, I post dozens of examples of it being rejected. And the usual response is “why can’t they use an existing structure”, “why should it be built there”.

    This is why the government just needs to change the law and remove these people from the equation altogether. They are destroying this country.

    NIMBYs are the real enemy of the state.
  • BatteryCorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorse Posts: 4,089
    edited December 15
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Automation has been having strides for centuries.

    We will adapt, as we have for centuries, and new jobs will be created where they don't exist currently, which enables productivity growth.
    I don’t believe they will, this time. This time is different

    No one replaced the hand weavers of Lancashire. Machines replaced them. So they went to work in the new manufactories. Then they replaced the factory jobs and people moved to offices to work

    This time there is no new place to go work
    The four most incorrect words in the English language are "this time is different".

    There are always new places to go to work.

    As machines automate manual labour it frees up more people to work in services or other sectors that benefit from the human touch.
    I hesitate to go down this road as I might get banned. Suffice to say you’re wrong, and there is plentiful evidence you’re wrong
    What are your qualifications to make this prediction? What knowledge and experience are you drawing from please?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,420

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Automation has been having strides for centuries.

    We will adapt, as we have for centuries, and new jobs will be created where they don't exist currently, which enables productivity growth.
    I don’t believe they will, this time. This time is different

    No one replaced the hand weavers of Lancashire. Machines replaced them. So they went to work in the new manufactories. Then they replaced the factory jobs and people moved to offices to work

    This time there is no new place to go work
    The four most incorrect words in the English language are "this time is different".

    There are always new places to go to work.

    As machines automate manual labour it frees up more people to work in services or other sectors that benefit from the human touch.
    I thought the four most incorrect words in the English language were “surprise on the upside”.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    edited December 15
    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    If the government issued 0 visas next year, I suspect you’d be the first complaining if the economy was impacted.
    Thats the point im making.
    I've tumbled your game! Leon is that you?

    The casual use of punctuation was the giveaway. How many concurrent Leons does that mean we are running at the moment?

    Phew, nearly got caught out by a rogue autocorrect apostrophe.
  • carnforth said:

    Remember when Polish plumbers were the problem? How strange that rhetoric seemed to disappear.

    Polish plumbers came in the late 90s and early 2000s. Poland was not in the EU then, and they came on work visas.

    Your pal Starmer has been describing our new nurses and care home workers from outside the EU as part of a "disasterous" policy. I wonder how that makes them feel.
    He’s not my pal. I just don’t think he’s a dud, yet.

    If they don’t build any houses or change the planning laws for masts, then yes he’s a dud.

    The bad news is that Farage needs to be ready to face Streeting, not Starmer.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

  • The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.

    We could get the same growth rates as France and Germany.

    Plus another half million Roma to live in the poorer parts of northern England.
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    They could already do that and use taxis if they wanted to. Already nothing is preventing them from doing that.

    People like to have their own vehicles for a multitude of reasons. A shortage of taxis is not one of them.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888

    The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.

    We could get the same growth rates as France and Germany.

    Plus another half million Roma to live in the poorer parts of northern England.
    Citation needed.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    Leon said:

    Speaking of technology changing the world, there’s a good article in the guardian about the existential crisis facing universities. As predicted

    I can’t recall you ever predicting a good article in the Guardian.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    They could already do that and use taxis if they wanted to. Already nothing is preventing them from doing that.

    People like to have their own vehicles for a multitude of reasons. A shortage of taxis is not one of them.
    The cost advantage of not owning a car will grow until - for all but the mad or massively rich - it will outweigh any benefits

    It will be like the horse. Once everyone aspired to own a horse. They were the hegemonic form of transport

    Now only eccentric gypsies and rich people in the country own horses. So it shall be for cars
  • The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.

    We could get the same growth rates as France and Germany.

    Plus another half million Roma to live in the poorer parts of northern England.
    Citation needed.
    About what ?

    Its what could happen if we re-join the single market and have freedom of movement with the EU.

    If you don't think there are any Roma in the poorer parts of northern England then have a look around the poorer parts of northern England.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    They could already do that and use taxis if they wanted to. Already nothing is preventing them from doing that.

    People like to have their own vehicles for a multitude of reasons. A shortage of taxis is not one of them.
    The cost advantage of not owning a car will grow until - for all but the mad or massively rich - it will outweigh any benefits

    It will be like the horse. Once everyone aspired to own a horse. They were the hegemonic form of transport

    Now only eccentric gypsies and rich people in the country own horses. So it shall be for cars
    That will take some time.
    But then will happen very quickly.
  • The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.

    We could get the same growth rates as France and Germany.

    Plus another half million Roma to live in the poorer parts of northern England.
    But then you agree that you wouldn’t do anything for economic growth?

    Is it fair to say that Brexit has been objectively a disaster yet?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,807
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Speaking of technology changing the world, there’s a good article in the guardian about the existential crisis facing universities. As predicted

    I can’t recall you ever predicting a good article in the Guardian.
    A value bet at 200/1 perhaps.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Speaking of technology changing the world, there’s a good article in the guardian about the existential crisis facing universities. As predicted

    I can’t recall you ever predicting a good article in the Guardian.
    Students are all using bots to write essays. First class degrees are becoming the norm. Universities are hurtling towards pointlessness, kids will not take on debt to get worthless degrees that don’t lead to a decent job

    Imagine a world where intelligence has a value close to zero, because intelligence will be everywhere and freely available. That’s the future and there ain’t much room for the university
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    They could already do that and use taxis if they wanted to. Already nothing is preventing them from doing that.

    People like to have their own vehicles for a multitude of reasons. A shortage of taxis is not one of them.
    The cost advantage of not owning a car will grow until - for all but the mad or massively rich - it will outweigh any benefits

    It will be like the horse. Once everyone aspired to own a horse. They were the hegemonic form of transport

    Now only eccentric gypsies and rich people in the country own horses. So it shall be for cars
    What cost advantage of not owning one? They're not that expensive to own and if you're using it daily then owning one will still be good value.

    You are viewing taxis as an alternative to cars, but you don't call them taxis for some odd reason, and seem to think they're something new and innovative rather than something that's always been available.

    Horses went away as they were replaced with cars. There is nothing new coming out to replace cars, driverless cars still are cars whereas cars are not horses.

    Yes some people may want a taxi, some people already do, but having your own is still good value.
  • https://x.com/DanielJHannan/status/1868233060380020950

    Would have been best to stay largely in the single market and leave the customs union, like Switzerland. My view on this has never shifted.

    Daniel Hannan is a liar.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    HTS just lost DuraAce’s support.
    https://x.com/TrueSlazac/status/1867967802835132511
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,645

    More migrants removed from UK since Labour elected than in any six months since 2019, Home Office says

    https://news.sky.com/story/more-migrants-removed-from-uk-since-labour-elected-than-in-any-six-months-since-2019-home-office-says-13273888

    I still am not convinced by the PB consensus that Sir Keir Starmer is a dud.

    They seem to be quietly doing a lot. The last lot didn’t seem to actually do anything in the end.
    I think this Labour government will end up being too right wing for me, because it’s full of atheists and not Christian enough. All Around the world people are falling foul of gangs who control their neighbourhoods or fall foul of undemocratic state regime, so they are left with no choice but to walk away from their hometown in search of refuge and kind people who will help them. But this Labour government is boastful about the sign it’s put in the window: go away you are not welcome, we’re full - and boastful about how many more they’ve deported than the previous government.

    It’s unrealistic and childish 😡
  • https://x.com/DanielJHannan/status/1868233060380020950

    Would have been best to stay largely in the single market and leave the customs union, like Switzerland. My view on this has never shifted.

    Daniel Hannan is a liar.

    Daniel Hannan, like our own @Richard_Tyndall has always been anti-EU but pro-Single Market.
  • Driverless cars are genuinely useless in rural areas. I can only imagine a lot of people advocating them here have never actually tried to use one in the countryside.
  • CHartCHart Posts: 51
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,807
    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
    Nothing as long as you tread gently when upstairs.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888

    The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.

    We could get the same growth rates as France and Germany.

    Plus another half million Roma to live in the poorer parts of northern England.
    Citation needed.
    About what ?

    Its what could happen if we re-join the single market and have freedom of movement with the EU.

    If you don't think there are any Roma in the poorer parts of northern England then have a look around the poorer parts of northern England.
    (There seems to have been pretty free movement into the UK since Brexit. Not so easy for would be ex-pats to leave under the circumstances we could before.)

    As a point of order your comment on Roma with specific reference to Northern England.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    edited December 15

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    They could already do that and use taxis if they wanted to. Already nothing is preventing them from doing that.

    People like to have their own vehicles for a multitude of reasons. A shortage of taxis is not one of them.
    The cost advantage of not owning a car will grow until - for all but the mad or massively rich - it will outweigh any benefits

    It will be like the horse. Once everyone aspired to own a horse. They were the hegemonic form of transport

    Now only eccentric gypsies and rich people in the country own horses. So it shall be for cars
    What cost advantage of not owning one? They're not that expensive to own and if you're using it daily then owning one will still be good value.

    You are viewing taxis as an alternative to cars, but you don't call them taxis for some odd reason, and seem to think they're something new and innovative rather than something that's always been available.

    Horses went away as they were replaced with cars. There is nothing new coming out to replace cars, driverless cars still are cars whereas cars are not horses.

    Yes some people may want a taxi, some people already do, but having your own is still good value.
    You lack imagination (but we know that). Half the fun - maybe more than half - in owning a car is the fun of driving. I know this because I enjoy driving - really quite a lot in a place with big open roads

    But human driving will be prohibited once self drive truly arrives (and it’s getting much closer). Because millions of people die every year from human error at the driver seat. Drunk, drugged, sleepy; looking at phone

    Self drive will be far safer. So that means you won’t be allowed to drive. Take away that fun and why have your own car? When you can hire an autonomous e car (fast or as big as you like) for exactly the time you need it?

    Is it really worth the expense of your own car just to hang up furry dice? When you can’t actually drive it? No
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
    They’re ugly af
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942
    edited December 15

    Driverless cars are genuinely useless in rural areas. I can only imagine a lot of people advocating them here have never actually tried to use one in the countryside.

    Why? They wouldn't have to anticipate as many pedestrians and cyclists as in an urban environment. GPS is much better away from tall buildings too, not as may signposts, lights etc etc

    I guess the occasional stray sheep might cause some bother, but for my standard rural drive into the Highlands they will be an absolute dream. Jump in the car at 6am, on the hill by 8.30pm with a couple of hours napping/consulting the OS map.
  • CHartCHart Posts: 51
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    They could already do that and use taxis if they wanted to. Already nothing is preventing them from doing that.

    People like to have their own vehicles for a multitude of reasons. A shortage of taxis is not one of them.
    The cost advantage of not owning a car will grow until - for all but the mad or massively rich - it will outweigh any benefits

    It will be like the horse. Once everyone aspired to own a horse. They were the hegemonic form of transport

    Now only eccentric gypsies and rich people in the country own horses. So it shall be for cars
    What cost advantage of not owning one? They're not that expensive to own and if you're using it daily then owning one will still be good value.

    You are viewing taxis as an alternative to cars, but you don't call them taxis for some odd reason, and seem to think they're something new and innovative rather than something that's always been available.

    Horses went away as they were replaced with cars. There is nothing new coming out to replace cars, driverless cars still are cars whereas cars are not horses.

    Yes some people may want a taxi, some people already do, but having your own is still good value.
    You lack imagination (but we know that). Half the fun - maybe more than half - in owning a car is the fun of driving. I know this because I enjoy driving - really quite a lot in a place with big open roads

    But human driving will be prohibited once self drive truly arrives (and it’s getting much closer). Because millions of people die every year from human error at the driver seat. Drunk, drugged, sleepy; looking at phone

    Self drive will be far safer. So that means you won’t be allowed to drive. Take away that fun and why have your own car? When you can hire an autonomous e car (fast or as big as you like) for exactly the time you need it?

    Is it really worth the expense of your own car just to hang up furry dice? When you can’t actually drive it? No
    Id like to see self driving cars in the lake district lol.
  • The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.

    We could get the same growth rates as France and Germany.

    Plus another half million Roma to live in the poorer parts of northern England.
    But then you agree that you wouldn’t do anything for economic growth?

    Is it fair to say that Brexit has been objectively a disaster yet?
    Well you predicted Brexit would result in mass unemployment and lower wages and we have instead full employment and higher wages.

    Perhaps you're one of those people who regard full employment and higher wages to be 'a disaster' when applied to the working class ?

    And if Brexit is such 'a disaster' is it a disaster which has also affected France, Germany, Italy, USA, Canada etc - all of which are suffering from similar, but often more severe, socioeconomic problems as this country ?

    The reality is that Brexit had relatively little effect on the UK economy.

    Likewise re-joining the single market would have even less effect economically but would probably bring another wave of poorer immigrants.
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    They could already do that and use taxis if they wanted to. Already nothing is preventing them from doing that.

    People like to have their own vehicles for a multitude of reasons. A shortage of taxis is not one of them.
    The cost advantage of not owning a car will grow until - for all but the mad or massively rich - it will outweigh any benefits

    It will be like the horse. Once everyone aspired to own a horse. They were the hegemonic form of transport

    Now only eccentric gypsies and rich people in the country own horses. So it shall be for cars
    What cost advantage of not owning one? They're not that expensive to own and if you're using it daily then owning one will still be good value.

    You are viewing taxis as an alternative to cars, but you don't call them taxis for some odd reason, and seem to think they're something new and innovative rather than something that's always been available.

    Horses went away as they were replaced with cars. There is nothing new coming out to replace cars, driverless cars still are cars whereas cars are not horses.

    Yes some people may want a taxi, some people already do, but having your own is still good value.
    You lack imagination (but we know that). Half the fun - maybe more than half - in owning a car is the fun of driving. I know this because I enjoy driving - really quite a lot in a place with big open roads

    But human driving will be prohibited once self drive truly arrives (and it’s getting much closer). Because millions of people die every year from human error at the driver seat. Drunk, drugged, sleepy; looking at phone

    Self drive will be far safer. So that means you won’t be allowed to drive. Take away that fun and why have your own car? When you can hire an autonomous e car (fast or as big as you like) for exactly the time you need it?

    Is it really worth the expense of your own car just to hang up furry dice? When you can’t actually drive it? No
    You lack imagination, not me.

    My car has my creature comforts in it. Not just (or even!) furry dice, but my children's car booster seats, medicine for my daughter who suffers sometimes from travel sickness, treats, empty reusable shopping bags always left in the boot etc, etc, etc, etc

    Is all that going to be in your e-car?

    For a single pringle with no responsibilities, yes, you may not care about anything else. For families, having your own vehicle is great in more ways than just being available.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    They could already do that and use taxis if they wanted to. Already nothing is preventing them from doing that.

    People like to have their own vehicles for a multitude of reasons. A shortage of taxis is not one of them.
    The cost advantage of not owning a car will grow until - for all but the mad or massively rich - it will outweigh any benefits

    It will be like the horse. Once everyone aspired to own a horse. They were the hegemonic form of transport

    Now only eccentric gypsies and rich people in the country own horses. So it shall be for cars
    What cost advantage of not owning one? They're not that expensive to own and if you're using it daily then owning one will still be good value.

    You are viewing taxis as an alternative to cars, but you don't call them taxis for some odd reason, and seem to think they're something new and innovative rather than something that's always been available.

    Horses went away as they were replaced with cars. There is nothing new coming out to replace cars, driverless cars still are cars whereas cars are not horses.

    Yes some people may want a taxi, some people already do, but having your own is still good value.
    You lack imagination (but we know that). Half the fun - maybe more than half - in owning a car is the fun of driving. I know this because I enjoy driving - really quite a lot in a place with big open roads

    But human driving will be prohibited once self drive truly arrives (and it’s getting much closer). Because millions of people die every year from human error at the driver seat. Drunk, drugged, sleepy; looking at phone

    Self drive will be far safer. So that means you won’t be allowed to drive. Take away that fun and why have your own car? When you can hire an autonomous e car (fast or as big as you like) for exactly the time you need it?

    Is it really worth the expense of your own car just to hang up furry dice? When you can’t actually drive it? No
    Id like to see self driving cars in the lake district lol.
    What is this strange mindset that can’t extrapolate?

    Weird
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,682
    edited December 15

    https://x.com/DanielJHannan/status/1868233060380020950

    Would have been best to stay largely in the single market and leave the customs union, like Switzerland. My view on this has never shifted.

    Daniel Hannan is a liar.

    Not true. Hannan's view on the single market never changed. He was always on favour of membership. It was just the EU he objected to. Indeed during the Referendum camapign he was sidelined for much of the time because of his refusal to toe the Out line on Single Market membership.
  • Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
    They’re ugly af
    New build estates vary.

    They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,709

    Musk! With a British grandparent he still has time to become a citizen and then our next PM.

    Unlike America, we aren't a nativist country.

    Two of our last four PMs have had non-British grandparents.

    Musk! With a British grandparent he still has time to become a citizen and then our next PM.

    Unlike America, we aren't a nativist country.

    Two of our last five PMs have had non-British grandparents.
    We have had a foreign Prime Minister (Bonar Law was Canadian) and might have had one more recently had kiwi Bryan Gould been elected leader of the Labour Party after Neil Kinnock.

    ETA scooped by TSE on ABL.
    How soon we all forget Johnson was an American.

    Even if he renounced his citizenship.
  • Eabhal said:

    Driverless cars are genuinely useless in rural areas. I can only imagine a lot of people advocating them here have never actually tried to use one in the countryside.

    Why? They wouldn't have to anticipate as many pedestrians and cyclists as in an urban environment. GPS is much better away from tall buildings too, not as may signposts, lights etc etc

    I guess the occasional stray sheep might cause some bother, but for my standard rural drive into the Highlands they will be an absolute dream. Jump in the car at 6am, on the hill by 8.30pm with a couple of hours napping/consulting the OS map.
    Try using one on a road with poor mobile phone coverage/impeded GPS/no white lines, I promise you, it will stop working and hand back control to the driver.

    I've used one, they are utterly useless.
  • https://x.com/DanielJHannan/status/1868233060380020950

    Would have been best to stay largely in the single market and leave the customs union, like Switzerland. My view on this has never shifted.

    Daniel Hannan is a liar.

    Not true. Hannan's view on the single market never changed. He was always on favour of membership. It was just the EU he objected to. Indeed during the Referendum camapign he was sidelined for much of the time because of his refusal to toe the Out line on Single Market membership.
    That will be the same Daniel Hannan that supported Johnson's deal?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating

    Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
    They’re ugly af
    New build estates vary.

    They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.

    Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous

    There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,443
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this
    stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I
    can have flowers and stuff, and half the time
    it just sits there, depreciating

    As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.

    As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport

    If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.



  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030
    edited December 15

    Eabhal said:

    Driverless cars are genuinely useless in rural areas. I can only imagine a lot of people advocating them here have never actually tried to use one in the countryside.

    Why? They wouldn't have to anticipate as many pedestrians and cyclists as in an urban environment. GPS is much better away from tall buildings too, not as may signposts, lights etc etc

    I guess the occasional stray sheep might cause some bother, but for my standard rural drive into the Highlands they will be an absolute dream. Jump in the car at 6am, on the hill by 8.30pm with a couple of hours napping/consulting the OS map.
    Try using one on a road with poor mobile phone coverage/impeded GPS/no white lines, I promise you, it will stop working and hand back control to the driver.

    I've used one, they are utterly useless.
    Didn’t someone post something about 80% solutions a few days ago. Aiming for perfection the first time around is a fool’s errand.

    If it is only useful in cities and towns at the moment, where a lot of driving actually takes place, then it should simply be limited to those areas.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,760
    Nigelb said:

    HTS just lost DuraAce’s support.
    https://x.com/TrueSlazac/status/1867967802835132511

    You should all stop giving a fuck what I think. Leave me alone.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,495

    Leon said:

    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    It is so blindingly obvious that we do have the choice and that for economic reasons the choice is to allow quite a large level of immigration.

    I've never understood what understanding supporters of the last government had of its strongly anti-immigration rhetoric, in relation to its actual immigration policy. Was Rishi Sunak so stupid that he didn't realise he had control of immigration? Or did he really appreciate the economic benefits of immigration while promising to save us from foreigners by sending them to Rwanda?
    Well, quite

    I respect people that argue for large scale immigration for the economy, as long as they are honest about the social cost. I disagree but respect that

    Similarly, people who want to restrict immigration tightly need to admit it will come at a price - but a much lower price than is generally thought

    The worst of all are the Tories and now Labour, talking tough but letting in millions. I cry foul scorn
    I'm entirely comfortable with large scale migration, and think we need large scale investment in new infrastructure like roads to go with it and liberal housing so people who can easily move here can easily build and get a new house - ditto for young people.

    I have contempt for people who are pro-large scale migration but anti-construction and think there's "enough" houses near them already, but lets be generous at letting millions come so long as we don't build any houses for those millions, or our own young people, to live in.
    Nuttier than a fruitcake, I would be shocked if you can tie shoelaces.
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    CHart said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.

    Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
    By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
    Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
    No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming

    I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month

    It’s begun
    To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
    Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
    Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
    We just had a big PB debate on this

    Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate

    Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.

    Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.

    There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
    Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent

    Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this
    stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I
    can have flowers and stuff, and half the time
    it just sits there, depreciating

    As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.

    As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport

    If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.



    Absolutely.

    The idea that cars are merely a means to get from A to B is hilarious and not fitting with family life at all.
  • RobD said:

    Eabhal said:

    Driverless cars are genuinely useless in rural areas. I can only imagine a lot of people advocating them here have never actually tried to use one in the countryside.

    Why? They wouldn't have to anticipate as many pedestrians and cyclists as in an urban environment. GPS is much better away from tall buildings too, not as may signposts, lights etc etc

    I guess the occasional stray sheep might cause some bother, but for my standard rural drive into the Highlands they will be an absolute dream. Jump in the car at 6am, on the hill by 8.30pm with a couple of hours napping/consulting the OS map.
    Try using one on a road with poor mobile phone coverage/impeded GPS/no white lines, I promise you, it will stop working and hand back control to the driver.

    I've used one, they are utterly useless.
    Didn’t someone post something about 80% solutions a few days ago. Aiming for perfection the first time around is a fool’s errand.

    If it is only useful in cities and towns at the moment, where a lot of driving actually takes place, then it should simply be limited to those areas.
    I think you are right, it should be limited to only urban areas. But even London does not have perfect GPS (actually a lot of issues with it because of the buildings, tunnels etc) or mobile connectivity, or even white lines.

    But that is a long way from the claims that it's going to be replacing traditional cars in the very short term.
This discussion has been closed.