Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
Bonkers talk about Brexit and a leak from Lab to Reform or somesuch.
Aside from some nebulous idea about "sovereignty", or the ability to eat bananas that look how we goddamn want, the major motivating force behind Brexit was immigration. Surely no one can dispute that.
And since Brexit, immigration has seen a huge increase. While I'm not 100% sure peoples' lives have improved demonstrably. I challenge people, even political sophisticates on here, to name me three sovereign measure that we have implemented now that we couldn't have in the EU (I happen to know one or two).
Which circles back to immigration. Brexit has failed on the one tangible measure that so many people voted for it to address.
People then worry about what voters might think of any party that doesn't continue it.
Madness.
The 'nebulous' idea of sovereignty is the difference between AI growth and investment here and in the EU, and why we aren't at risk of nationally being affected if more countries like Slovakia and Hungary and Germany try and return to 'business as usual' with Russia the way EU member states might be.
The right to determine your own destiny is no small thing.
I'd also argue the EU is in the worst of worlds. It lacks the competitive spirit of numerous nation states doing their own thing to try and be the best, and it lacks the same degree of uniformity and common policy (with corresponding advantage for its relatively large size) that China and the USA has. It's integrated enough to meddle, too integrated to be competitive on a member state level, not integrated enough to take real advantage of its size.
It is mealy mouthed dishonesty to ask for measures that we 'have' implemented, given that as Topping knows, we still have virtually all the EU law that we had when we left on the statute book. Asking what we 'could' implement would be something else entirely.
It's our politicians deciding what to do for our country. Sadly no one asked @Luckyguy1983 what he would do so we are left with the democratic process.
You guys are just the same as the lefties. Socialism is a fantastic political system, just that no one has done it right yet.
A bit of background on steel and aluminum imports ahead of the expected announcement of 25% tariffs (and the cancellation of existing exemptions/ exclusions?) tomorrow --
Bottom line is that the US steel industry failed to take market share as a result of the last round of tariffs, and probably won't this time. The aluminium tariff is even more likely to be self-defeating.
And the impact on China is minor compared to that on US neighbours.
I'm not sure why Trump feels it necessary to piss on every western alliance, but that's undoubtedly what he's doing.
Trump doesn't know any better and his advisers equally aren't very bright.
Steel and Aluminium are the products typical spoken about in 1970-90's conversations about tariffs. So I'm not surprised about the focus on them nor the reality that the raw(ish) materials Trump is adding tariffs on are things that the US market is built around receiving - which will be those steels from Canada / Mexico and heavy oil from Canada going to North East state refineries.
So we have the case that Trump is looking at the obvious text book tariffs without reading anything beyond the headline without regard to the consequences because all he wants is another headline to make his supporters feel like he's doing what he promised. And screw the consequences because those will be felt by other people and true Trump supporters will happily accept the pain (more fool them).
I'm inclined to think that Trump is stuck in his own addled imagination from about the 1970s.
His policies (leaving aside all the damage he is doing to rule of law, international reputation and influence, US economy, building a future, US security and the rest) are focused resolutely on the past.
His energy policies are pre-renewables, focused on fossil fuels - 1970s, Since the 1970s UK demand for oil has approximately halved for example, unlike the USA. One of our reasons for continuing a rapid pivot to renewables is a greater degree self-protection from the lobotomised elephant which is now the USA.
His social policies eg around women as second class citizens are 1950s or maybe 1920s.
His policies around race go back even further.
His international and economic policies are based on an imaginary version of the 1890s, when William Randolph Hearst could foment a war by fake media coverage and the Goverment would follow through.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
FPT: The President Must vs the rule of law clash is coming to a head more quickly than I expected.
He has 2 court rulings stopping allegedly illegal access to state records in in its tracks whilst the Courts consider - one from an Obama appointed judge, and one from a Regan appointee. His GOGEy setup is getting a its wings clipped.
MAGA peeps are going for the the Obama appointee, and demanded that he be impeached, and that he be allowed to do whatever he wants. But not the other one.
He's going to get his wings and his balls clipped if he does not watch it.
Of all the marks of fascism, the 'ignoring the rule of law' one (governments obey court orders) IMHO is the most significant at the moment for the USA. An irresisible force meets an immoveable object right there, and it can't be hidden for long where there is a free media. Others can be fudged or done gradually or complexified. This can't.
On one of the Bulwark podcasts they other day they were saying the problem is that if the court ruling is ignored the next step is a contempt ruling and then the use of US Marshalls to take offender into custody (if necessary to stop further contempt). Marshalls are under DoJ which is now totally Trump 2.0 controlled.
US is headed (only one month in!!!) to worst constitutional crisis in decades if not longer.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
But have you ever been to you? Strictly speaking that’s just bragging without the humble.
A bit of background on steel and aluminum imports ahead of the expected announcement of 25% tariffs (and the cancellation of existing exemptions/ exclusions?) tomorrow --
Bottom line is that the US steel industry failed to take market share as a result of the last round of tariffs, and probably won't this time. The aluminium tariff is even more likely to be self-defeating.
And the impact on China is minor compared to that on US neighbours.
I'm not sure why Trump feels it necessary to piss on every western alliance, but that's undoubtedly what he's doing.
Trump doesn't know any better and his advisers equally aren't very bright.
Steel and Aluminium are the products typical spoken about in 1970-90's conversations about tariffs. So I'm not surprised about the focus on them nor the reality that the raw(ish) materials Trump is adding tariffs on are things that the US market is built around receiving - which will be those steels from Canada / Mexico and heavy oil from Canada going to North East state refineries.
So we have the case that Trump is looking at the obvious text book tariffs without reading anything beyond the headline without regard to the consequences because all he wants is another headline to make his supporters feel like he's doing what he promised. And screw the consequences because those will be felt by other people and true Trump supporters will happily accept the pain (more fool them).
I'm inclined to think that Trump is stuck in his own addled imagination from about the 1970s.
His policies (leaving aside all the damage he is doing to rule of law, international reputation and influence, US economy, building a future, US security and the rest) are focused resolutely on the past.
His energy policies are pre-renewables, focused on fossil fuels - 1970s, Since the 1970s UK demand for oil has approximately halved for example, unlike the USA. One of our reasons for continuing a rapid pivot to renewables is a greater degree self-protection from the lobotomised elephant which is now the USA.
His social policies eg around women as second class citizens are 1950s or maybe 1920s.
His policies around race go back even further.
His international and economic policies are based on an imaginary version of the 1890s, when William Randolph Hearst could foment a war by fake media coverage and the Goverment would follow through.
A future will not be created by racing backwards.
Yes.
Which is another resemblance to Boulangerism - Forward! To! The! Past!
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The Ritz UK insists men wearing suits and ties at all times, so some days I wore a morning suit, replete with top hat.
Claridge’s is the best, you can wear anything and they don’t bat an eyelid.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
A bit of background on steel and aluminum imports ahead of the expected announcement of 25% tariffs (and the cancellation of existing exemptions/ exclusions?) tomorrow --
Bottom line is that the US steel industry failed to take market share as a result of the last round of tariffs, and probably won't this time. The aluminium tariff is even more likely to be self-defeating.
And the impact on China is minor compared to that on US neighbours.
I'm not sure why Trump feels it necessary to piss on every western alliance, but that's undoubtedly what he's doing.
Trump doesn't know any better and his advisers equally aren't very bright.
Steel and Aluminium are the products typical spoken about in 1970-90's conversations about tariffs. So I'm not surprised about the focus on them nor the reality that the raw(ish) materials Trump is adding tariffs on are things that the US market is built around receiving - which will be those steels from Canada / Mexico and heavy oil from Canada going to North East state refineries.
So we have the case that Trump is looking at the obvious text book tariffs without reading anything beyond the headline without regard to the consequences because all he wants is another headline to make his supporters feel like he's doing what he promised. And screw the consequences because those will be felt by other people and true Trump supporters will happily accept the pain (more fool them).
I'm inclined to think that Trump is stuck in his own addled imagination from about the 1970s.
His policies (leaving aside all the damage he is doing to rule of law, international reputation and influence, US economy, building a future, US security and the rest) are focused resolutely on the past.
His energy policies are pre-renewables, focused on fossil fuels - 1970s, Since the 1970s UK demand for oil has approximately halved for example, unlike the USA. One of our reasons for continuing a rapid pivot to renewables is a greater degree self-protection from the lobotomised elephant which is now the USA.
His social policies eg around women as second class citizens are 1950s or maybe 1920s.
His policies around race go back even further.
His international and economic policies are based on an imaginary version of the 1890s, when William Randolph Hearst could foment a war by fake media coverage and the Goverment would follow through.
A future will not be created by racing backwards.
Yes.
Which is another resemblance to Boulangerism - Forward! To! The! Past!
I'm not familiar with that one.
Is this a baguette version of "let them eat cake"?
(Goes to look it up with breakfast.)
Update: I see he topped himself. Self-defenestration is one possible solution for Trump, I guess.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
But have you ever been to you? Strictly speaking that’s just bragging without the humble.
True, as somebody once observed after I described myself as the grandson of humble immigrants ‘I see the humility gene was wiped out within two generations.’
On bat tunnels, jumping spiders and European Union Law, there are two main pieces of UK legislation that govern the protection of species, The Wildlife and Countryside Act of 1981, and more importantly in a recent context (because we were still able to build things in the 80s and 90s), The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations of 2017.
Both were implemented in order to enshrine EU law, despite the fact that in 2017, we'd already voted to leave.
The Wildlife and Countryside Act of 1981 enshrined the Birds Directive and the Bern Convention into UK law. It was enacted primarily to implement these European Council Directives: 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds and the Bern Convention, which focuses on the conservation of wild flora and fauna and their natural habitats in Europe.
The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 implements guidelines from the European Union's Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC) and the Wild Birds Directive (2009/147/EC) specifically within the UK context.
This regulation applies to anyone planning land or property development projects and requires compliance with strict parameters, such as conducting appropriate ecology surveys and obtaining a European Protected Species Licence (EPSL) when necessary.
It also mandates that any plan or project proposal affecting a European site must undergo a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) to ensure it does not significantly harm the designated features of the site.
The regulation is enforced by various organisations including the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), and Natural England, among others.
Hopefully this helps some PBers who have been in denial over this issue.
Stanley Johnson (dad of Boris) had a lot to do with the Birds Directive. Quite a hero to many in conservstion. His influence and example probably accounts for the distinctly green tinge of Boris's pronouncements which is one of his saving graces (along with the humour and writing ability).
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
So, exactly one hotel outside the UK, and that was Paris
I don't wish to humblebrag, but in the last three years I have stayed, inter alia, and in rough order, in hotels of all kinds (tiny hostels to global top 50) in these countries:
Sri Lanka Turkey The USA Germany Greece Georgia Armenia Turkey (again) Montenegro Italy Portugal Spain The USA (again) Iceland Thailand Egypt Spain (again) The USA (again) Poland Ukraine France Italy The Maldives Cambodia Thailand Cambodia (again) Colombia France (again) Italy Moldova Ukraine (again) France (again) Montenegro (again) Canada Kosovo Switzerland Japan South Korea The Philippines Colombia (again) Thailand (again) Myanmar Thailand (again)
I submit that my experience of hotels is just a tiny tiny tiny bit wider than yours, and my description of the ground floor brasserie of the Novotel Sukhmvit on soi 4, Klong Thoei, Bangkok, as "posh-ish", is therefore exact and well-founded
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
So, exactly one hotel outside the UK, and that was Paris
I don't wish to humblebrag, but in the last three years I have stayed, inter alia, and in rough order, in hotels of all kinds (tiny hostels to global top 50) in these countries:
Sri Lanka Turkey The USA Germany Greece Georgia Armenia Turkey (again) Montenegro Italy Portugal The USA (again) Iceland Thailand Egypt Spain The USA (again) Poland Ukraine France Italy The Maldives Cambodia Thailand Cambodia (again) Colombia France (again) Italy Moldova Ukraine (again) France (again) Montenegro (again) Canada Kosovo Switzerland Japan South Korea Colombia (again) Thailand (again) Myanmar Thailand (again)
i submit that my experience of hotels is just a tiny tiny tiny bit wider than yours, and my description of the ground floor brasserie of the Novotel Sukhmvit on soi 4, Klong Thoei, Bangkok, as "posh-ish", is therefore exact and well-founded
There’s two that are outside the UK in that list, and I suggest you look up the term ‘inter alia’ that was in my original post.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The Ritz UK insists men wearing suits and ties at all times, so some days I wore a morning suit, replete with top hat.
A bit of background on steel and aluminum imports ahead of the expected announcement of 25% tariffs (and the cancellation of existing exemptions/ exclusions?) tomorrow --
Bottom line is that the US steel industry failed to take market share as a result of the last round of tariffs, and probably won't this time. The aluminium tariff is even more likely to be self-defeating.
And the impact on China is minor compared to that on US neighbours.
I'm not sure why Trump feels it necessary to piss on every western alliance, but that's undoubtedly what he's doing.
Trump doesn't know any better and his advisers equally aren't very bright.
Steel and Aluminium are the products typical spoken about in 1970-90's conversations about tariffs. So I'm not surprised about the focus on them nor the reality that the raw(ish) materials Trump is adding tariffs on are things that the US market is built around receiving - which will be those steels from Canada / Mexico and heavy oil from Canada going to North East state refineries.
So we have the case that Trump is looking at the obvious text book tariffs without reading anything beyond the headline without regard to the consequences because all he wants is another headline to make his supporters feel like he's doing what he promised. And screw the consequences because those will be felt by other people and true Trump supporters will happily accept the pain (more fool them).
I'm inclined to think that Trump is stuck in his own addled imagination from about the 1970s.
His policies (leaving aside all the damage he is doing to rule of law, international reputation and influence, US economy, building a future, US security and the rest) are focused resolutely on the past.
His energy policies are pre-renewables, focused on fossil fuels - 1970s, Since the 1970s UK demand for oil has approximately halved for example, unlike the USA. One of our reasons for continuing a rapid pivot to renewables is a greater degree self-protection from the lobotomised elephant which is now the USA.
His social policies eg around women as second class citizens are 1950s or maybe 1920s.
His policies around race go back even further.
His international and economic policies are based on an imaginary version of the 1890s, when William Randolph Hearst could foment a war by fake media coverage and the Goverment would follow through.
A future will not be created by racing backwards.
Yes.
Which is another resemblance to Boulangerism - Forward! To! The! Past!
I'm not familiar with that one.
Is this a baguette version of "let them eat cake"?
(Goes to look it up with breakfast.)
One of the early examples of the populist strongman* adapted to mass democratic politics. The earlier caudillos of South America used voting (on occasion). Boulanger combined their shtick with Naplleonic (both 1 & 3) style use of elections and extended it.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
At least a Singaporean Chinese and an Israeli still have to criticise us using our language.
And it's amusing hearing an Israeli criticising our government given how utterly and completely incompetent, corrupt and generally dire theirs is. Starmer may be a dismal failure as PM, but he hasn't had the unique distinction of being an indicted war criminal while being wanted in his own country for staggering corruption. Nor has he had to wage a war for national survival because of his own government's complacency and incompetence.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The Ritz UK insists men wearing suits and ties at all times, so some days I wore a morning suit, replete with top hat.
How ghastly.
I know, I wasn’t allowed to wear my Prada or Dolce & Gabbana trainers.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
So, exactly one hotel outside the UK, and that was Paris
I don't wish to humblebrag, but in the last three years I have stayed, inter alia, and in rough order, in hotels of all kinds (tiny hostels to global top 50) in these countries:
Sri Lanka Turkey The USA Germany Greece Georgia Armenia Turkey (again) Montenegro Italy Portugal Spain The USA (again) Iceland Thailand Egypt Spain (again) The USA (again) Poland Ukraine France Italy The Maldives Cambodia Thailand Cambodia (again) Colombia France (again) Italy Moldova Ukraine (again) France (again) Montenegro (again) Canada Kosovo Switzerland Japan South Korea The Philippines Colombia (again) Thailand (again) Myanmar Thailand (again)
I submit that my experience of hotels is just a tiny tiny tiny bit wider than yours, and my description of the ground floor brasserie of the Novotel Sukhmvit on soi 4, Klong Thoei, Bangkok, as "posh-ish", is therefore exact and well-founded
If I say so myself, that is quite a fucking list, in just 3 years
Meanwhile, and if pointing out other posters' imbecility doesn't do it, this certainly might, I watched for the first time It's a Wonderful Life last night. Now, it's not Christmas so maybe I was lacking some bonhomie and sentimentality, but it was pretty much a meh film. Yes ofc goodwill to all men, etc, but I was expecting something darker, something more moving and profound.
FPT: The President Must vs the rule of law clash is coming to a head more quickly than I expected.
He has 2 court rulings stopping allegedly illegal access to state records in in its tracks whilst the Courts consider - one from an Obama appointed judge, and one from a Regan appointee. His GOGEy setup is getting a its wings clipped.
MAGA peeps are going for the the Obama appointee, and demanded that he be impeached, and that he be allowed to do whatever he wants. But not the other one.
He's going to get his wings and his balls clipped if he does not watch it.
Of all the marks of fascism, the 'ignoring the rule of law' one (governments obey court orders) IMHO is the most significant at the moment for the USA. An irresisible force meets an immoveable object right there, and it can't be hidden for long where there is a free media. Others can be fudged or done gradually or complexified. This can't.
On one of the Bulwark podcasts they other day they were saying the problem is that if the court ruling is ignored the next step is a contempt ruling and then the use of US Marshalls to take offender into custody (if necessary to stop further contempt). Marshalls are under DoJ which is now totally Trump 2.0 controlled.
US is headed (only one month in!!!) to worst constitutional crisis in decades if not longer.
Musk is the scion of Trump. He's been given a broad/vague remit to go and demolish whatever he sees fit - Trump gets a load of stuff done without being directly responsible. If its a success he claims the credit, if its a disaster he blames Musk.
Here and now? Musk has to be given access. He can't legally have access but Trump is above the law. The courts can rule as they like - they can't enforce a government to obey if the government ignores them or better still discards their authority.
It isn't a constitutional crisis. Trump said he would act as a dictator on day 1. And won the election. You get what you voted for, and this is the result.
Bonkers talk about Brexit and a leak from Lab to Reform or somesuch.
Aside from some nebulous idea about "sovereignty", or the ability to eat bananas that look how we goddamn want, the major motivating force behind Brexit was immigration. Surely no one can dispute that.
And since Brexit, immigration has seen a huge increase. While I'm not 100% sure peoples' lives have improved demonstrably. I challenge people, even political sophisticates on here, to name me three sovereign measure that we have implemented now that we couldn't have in the EU (I happen to know one or two).
Which circles back to immigration. Brexit has failed on the one tangible measure that so many people voted for it to address.
People then worry about what voters might think of any party that doesn't continue it.
Madness.
The 'nebulous' idea of sovereignty is the difference between AI growth and investment here and in the EU, and why we aren't at risk of nationally being affected if more countries like Slovakia and Hungary and Germany try and return to 'business as usual' with Russia the way EU member states might be.
The right to determine your own destiny is no small thing.
I'd also argue the EU is in the worst of worlds. It lacks the competitive spirit of numerous nation states doing their own thing to try and be the best, and it lacks the same degree of uniformity and common policy (with corresponding advantage for its relatively large size) that China and the USA has. It's integrated enough to meddle, too integrated to be competitive on a member state level, not integrated enough to take real advantage of its size.
It is mealy mouthed dishonesty to ask for measures that we 'have' implemented, given that as Topping knows, we still have virtually all the EU law that we had when we left on the statute book. Asking what we 'could' implement would be something else entirely.
It's our politicians deciding what to do for our country. Sadly no one asked @Luckyguy1983 what he would do so we are left with the democratic process.
You guys are just the same as the lefties. Socialism is a fantastic political system, just that no one has done it right yet.
Guff. It isn't the fault of Brexit that politicians and administrators have been too shit to actually change any of the laws that we are no longer required to follow. Precisely nobody during Brexit on either side argued that we'd remain subject to every damaging piece of EU idiocy on the statute book. On the contrary, your lot warned us of a dangerous 'bonfire of workers rights' and the deeply concerning advent of 'Singapore on Sea'.
However, it seems likely that the next Government will remove EU laws and take full advantage of our freedoms. Just rejoice at that news.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Indeed, the power of bespoke tailoring is something most people do not understand.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
At least a Singaporean Chinese and an Israeli still have to criticise us using our language.
And it's amusing hearing an Israeli criticising our government given how utterly and completely incompetent, corrupt and generally dire theirs is. Starmer may be a dismal failure as PM, but he hasn't had the unique distinction of being an indicted war criminal while being wanted in his own country for staggering corruption. Nor has he had to wage a war for national survival because of his own government's complacency and incompetence.
I did think of all these counterpoints but
1. It was more interesting to sit quietly and overhear a genuine and informed opinion - neither of them struck me as anti-British, it was said more in sorrow than in anger
2. As I've noted, I found it hard to contradict their opinions (so I did not try, also I didn't want to cause a scene over my seafood pasta (which was rather nice))
In other utterly off-topic news, had a great weekend. A very tough period in retail, so we opened up the shop on Friday and Saturday to run kids arts and crafts sessions. Best takings in a year and positive feedback for future sessions. And I've had a great week of YouTube - a deliberately provocative video released last Tuesday to drive massive comments traffic (pump-priming the algorithm) and then a big video Friday which took off like a rocket. 2nd best single day revenue ever on Saturday.
Only on PB do people argue about the correct setting for Novotel on the posho-meter scale based on how many first class hotels they have stayed at recently.
My rather different assessment of Novotel is they can be very good value if you sign up to Accor's loyalty programme and book far enough ahead. And if the Novotel is fully booked, there's always an Ibis...
FPT: The President Must vs the rule of law clash is coming to a head more quickly than I expected.
He has 2 court rulings stopping allegedly illegal access to state records in in its tracks whilst the Courts consider - one from an Obama appointed judge, and one from a Regan appointee. His GOGEy setup is getting a its wings clipped.
MAGA peeps are going for the the Obama appointee, and demanded that he be impeached, and that he be allowed to do whatever he wants. But not the other one.
He's going to get his wings and his balls clipped if he does not watch it.
Of all the marks of fascism, the 'ignoring the rule of law' one (governments obey court orders) IMHO is the most significant at the moment for the USA. An irresisible force meets an immoveable object right there, and it can't be hidden for long where there is a free media. Others can be fudged or done gradually or complexified. This can't.
On one of the Bulwark podcasts they other day they were saying the problem is that if the court ruling is ignored the next step is a contempt ruling and then the use of US Marshalls to take offender into custody (if necessary to stop further contempt). Marshalls are under DoJ which is now totally Trump 2.0 controlled.
US is headed (only one month in!!!) to worst constitutional crisis in decades if not longer.
Musk is the scion of Trump. He's been given a broad/vague remit to go and demolish whatever he sees fit - Trump gets a load of stuff done without being directly responsible. If its a success he claims the credit, if its a disaster he blames Musk.
Here and now? Musk has to be given access. He can't legally have access but Trump is above the law. The courts can rule as they like - they can't enforce a government to obey if the government ignores them or better still discards their authority.
It isn't a constitutional crisis. Trump said he would act as a dictator on day 1. And won the election. You get what you voted for, and this is the result.
I don't think they are being quite that bold yet.
They are engaging with the legal process and appealing rulings.
Bonkers talk about Brexit and a leak from Lab to Reform or somesuch.
Aside from some nebulous idea about "sovereignty", or the ability to eat bananas that look how we goddamn want, the major motivating force behind Brexit was immigration. Surely no one can dispute that.
And since Brexit, immigration has seen a huge increase. While I'm not 100% sure peoples' lives have improved demonstrably. I challenge people, even political sophisticates on here, to name me three sovereign measure that we have implemented now that we couldn't have in the EU (I happen to know one or two).
Which circles back to immigration. Brexit has failed on the one tangible measure that so many people voted for it to address.
People then worry about what voters might think of any party that doesn't continue it.
Madness.
The 'nebulous' idea of sovereignty is the difference between AI growth and investment here and in the EU, and why we aren't at risk of nationally being affected if more countries like Slovakia and Hungary and Germany try and return to 'business as usual' with Russia the way EU member states might be.
The right to determine your own destiny is no small thing.
I'd also argue the EU is in the worst of worlds. It lacks the competitive spirit of numerous nation states doing their own thing to try and be the best, and it lacks the same degree of uniformity and common policy (with corresponding advantage for its relatively large size) that China and the USA has. It's integrated enough to meddle, too integrated to be competitive on a member state level, not integrated enough to take real advantage of its size.
It is mealy mouthed dishonesty to ask for measures that we 'have' implemented, given that as Topping knows, we still have virtually all the EU law that we had when we left on the statute book. Asking what we 'could' implement would be something else entirely.
It's our politicians deciding what to do for our country. Sadly no one asked @Luckyguy1983 what he would do so we are left with the democratic process.
You guys are just the same as the lefties. Socialism is a fantastic political system, just that no one has done it right yet.
Guff. It isn't the fault of Brexit that politicians and administrators have been too shit to actually change any of the laws that we are no longer required to follow. Precisely nobody during Brexit on either side argued that we'd remain subject to every damaging piece of EU idiocy on the statute book. On the contrary, your lot warned us of a dangerous 'bonfire of workers rights' and the deeply concerning advent of 'Singapore on Sea'.
However, it seems likely that the next Government will remove EU laws and take full advantage of our freedoms. Just rejoice at that news.
Jam tomorrow, eh?
As I said, just like the socialists. Next time will be different, just you wait.
Small children could have told you that nothing would change because - wait for it - we were and are a sovereign nation and by voting Brexit you don't all of a sudden change British politicians for some other species.
And as for "it seems likely..." which I assume relates to Reform winning the next GE. Well that is the most bonkers thing on here I've heard for a while and I'm happy to bet against it happening.
A bit of background on steel and aluminum imports ahead of the expected announcement of 25% tariffs (and the cancellation of existing exemptions/ exclusions?) tomorrow --
Bottom line is that the US steel industry failed to take market share as a result of the last round of tariffs, and probably won't this time. The aluminium tariff is even more likely to be self-defeating.
And the impact on China is minor compared to that on US neighbours.
I'm not sure why Trump feels it necessary to piss on every western alliance, but that's undoubtedly what he's doing.
Trump doesn't know any better and his advisers equally aren't very bright.
Steel and Aluminium are the products typical spoken about in 1970-90's conversations about tariffs. So I'm not surprised about the focus on them nor the reality that the raw(ish) materials Trump is adding tariffs on are things that the US market is built around receiving - which will be those steels from Canada / Mexico and heavy oil from Canada going to North East state refineries.
So we have the case that Trump is looking at the obvious text book tariffs without reading anything beyond the headline without regard to the consequences because all he wants is another headline to make his supporters feel like he's doing what he promised. And screw the consequences because those will be felt by other people and true Trump supporters will happily accept the pain (more fool them).
I'm inclined to think that Trump is stuck in his own addled imagination from about the 1970s.
His policies (leaving aside all the damage he is doing to rule of law, international reputation and influence, US economy, building a future, US security and the rest) are focused resolutely on the past.
His energy policies are pre-renewables, focused on fossil fuels - 1970s, Since the 1970s UK demand for oil has approximately halved for example, unlike the USA. One of our reasons for continuing a rapid pivot to renewables is a greater degree self-protection from the lobotomised elephant which is now the USA.
His social policies eg around women as second class citizens are 1950s or maybe 1920s.
His policies around race go back even further.
His international and economic policies are based on an imaginary version of the 1890s, when William Randolph Hearst could foment a war by fake media coverage and the Goverment would follow through.
A future will not be created by racing backwards.
Trump hasn't got past Mercantilism, which puts him back to the 18th Century.
As that chart shows while most voters want a closer relationship with the EU, full rejoin is divisive. Hence even the LDs only want to rejoin a customs union not the full EU for now.
If Starmer went the odds are Labour members would choose Rayner over Streeting and Cooper. While more socialist than they are Rayner is also accepting of Brexit representing a strongly Leave seat. While Starmer was the one pushing for a second EU referendum in 2019
Its astonishing that this sort of nonsense is still being pumped out. Regulatory alignment "could" result in 2.2% of additional growth.
If you take the example of AI, for example, it is possible that non alignment with the overly restrictive EU regime "could" create x% of additional growth in the UK (and possibly result in us being taken over by AI, but that is another issue).
Whether we want to align with the EU in any given area is something that is in our discretion. There are some areas where it makes sense to do so. Doing so effectively requires mutual recognition at any given point in time. It is up to both sides to decide whether or not to grant that, whether we have the same regulations or not. If the price of mutual recognition is that we undertake to impose any restriction dreamed up by Brussels in the future it is too high a price to pay.
It's nonsense essentially all the trade experts agree with. Removing trade frictions increases trade, which in turn increases GDP. It won't all happen because the EU won't sign up to it all. But some will
There isn’t a neat correlation between wealth and trade. Some of the poorest countries do a lot of trade as a percentage of GDP and some of the richest do less.
"Some of the poorest countries do a lot of trade as a percentage of GDP"
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Indeed, the power of bespoke tailoring is something most people do not understand.
Enforcing a dress code misses the point though. It's like trying to enforce good manners.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Only on PB do people argue about the correct setting for Novotel on the posho-meter scale based on how many first class hotels they have stayed at recently.
My rather different assessment of Novotel is they can be very good value if you sign up to Accor's loyalty programme and book far enough ahead. And if the Novotel is fully booked, there's always an Ibis...
Amusingly, the Novotel I am referring to is this one:
However they have seperate doors leading to different lobbies, which then lead to the exact same lifts
So if you're staying at the Novotel (which I have done a few times) and your cab/tuktuk drops you at the wrong door from a jaunt in the city you then have a great test of your status anxiety. Do you just think "fuck it" and walk in the Ibis door as it is nearer, thereby mingling with all the @TheScreamingEagles types who barely ever go abroad, or do you walk an extra thirty feet and go in your proper plusher Novotel lobby, even though you will end up in the exact same lift?
I confess sometimes I have done the latter, which is absurdly shallow. I pretend it's coz it's more soothing with better aircon and leather seats and nicer well travelled people, but really it's just coz I don't want to be seen walking into an Ibis
Is Badenoch value for next PM? In the normal course of events, the Opposition leader is a good bet for next PM. Yes, the Tories have gotten into the habit of dumping their leaders frequently, but they’ve changed the party rules and it is now harder to do that. Yes, Reform UK are surging in the polls, but minor parties have done that before and soon fallen back.
Do Conservative supporters have a view on how polarising Badenoch is?
AFAICS she is marmite amongst Tory MPs, and when you only have a rump party left that does not seem to be a good position in which to have placed yourself.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Indeed, the power of bespoke tailoring is something most people do not understand.
Enforcing a dress code misses the point though. It's like trying to enforce good manners.
To be honest, I think it was the Ritz, one of the restaurant managers said it was to avoid incidents, they said a female rap star who turned up wearing what was described as a dental floss thin skirt and a nipple patch.
Its astonishing that this sort of nonsense is still being pumped out. Regulatory alignment "could" result in 2.2% of additional growth.
If you take the example of AI, for example, it is possible that non alignment with the overly restrictive EU regime "could" create x% of additional growth in the UK (and possibly result in us being taken over by AI, but that is another issue).
Whether we want to align with the EU in any given area is something that is in our discretion. There are some areas where it makes sense to do so. Doing so effectively requires mutual recognition at any given point in time. It is up to both sides to decide whether or not to grant that, whether we have the same regulations or not. If the price of mutual recognition is that we undertake to impose any restriction dreamed up by Brussels in the future it is too high a price to pay.
Similar to the idiocy sometimes mentioned here of "taxes on work are higher in the EU therefore we have scope to increase them in the UK without damaging the economy".
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
Only on PB do people argue about the correct setting for Novotel on the posho-meter scale based on how many first class hotels they have stayed at recently.
My rather different assessment of Novotel is they can be very good value if you sign up to Accor's loyalty programme and book far enough ahead. And if the Novotel is fully booked, there's always an Ibis...
Amusingly, the Novotel I am referring to is this one:
However they have seperate doors leading to different lobbies, which then lead to the exact same lifts
So if you're staying at the Novotel (which I have done a few times) and your cab/tuktuk drops you at the wrong door from a jaunt in the city you then have a great test of your status anxiety. Do you just think "fuck it" and walk in the Ibis door as it is nearer, thereby mingling with all the @TheScreamingEagles types who barely ever go abroad, or do you walk an extra thirty feet and go in your proper plusher Novotel lobby, even though you will end up in the exact same lift?
I confess sometimes I have done the latter, which is absurdly shallow. I pretend it's coz it's more soothing with better aircon and leather seats and nicer well travelled people, but really it's just coz I don't want to be seen walking into an Ibis
How pathetic is that?
Sounds like the hotel brand battles I see at some airports - multiple IHG brands or multiple Ibis brands adjacent to each other on the same site.
I'm a Hilton whore, and I struggle to see the distinctive differences between Hilton / DoubleTree or Hampton / Garden Inn. Or where the posher brand is an older property difference between any of them.
Bonkers talk about Brexit and a leak from Lab to Reform or somesuch.
Aside from some nebulous idea about "sovereignty", or the ability to eat bananas that look how we goddamn want, the major motivating force behind Brexit was immigration. Surely no one can dispute that.
And since Brexit, immigration has seen a huge increase. While I'm not 100% sure peoples' lives have improved demonstrably. I challenge people, even political sophisticates on here, to name me three sovereign measure that we have implemented now that we couldn't have in the EU (I happen to know one or two).
Which circles back to immigration. Brexit has failed on the one tangible measure that so many people voted for it to address.
People then worry about what voters might think of any party that doesn't continue it.
Madness.
Misleading, EU immigration to the UK has fallen sharply since free movement was ended.
Non EU immigration rose initially but Rishi and Cleverly cut it back with tighter visa and wage requirements for immigrants workers and their departments
Do any of our expats or people with Usonian links get any impression whether people are sticking it out or leaving?
I'm not very well connected, however the impression I get is that numbers of those who can are seeking to leave. And people asked to consider relocating there are thinking very carefully, with varying attitudes by different parts of the country, as it is so regionalised.
It would make us a "rule taker" once more, and I very much doubt would deliver anything like the benefits mooted, but it would hobble us.
Which means there's probably a real risk that negotiator extraordinaire Starmer does it.
If you don't want Starmer to do it (and I can understand your reluctance), could we not get Lord Frost?
The UK always seems to have really bad negotiators. Don't forget Boris Johnson...
That's a really good reason to stay out of the EU, as being in is a constant negotiation about most areas of your economy and national life. And we got shafted over and over again.
The only time we didn't in my lifetime was the rebate in the early 80s and that took many years and all of Margaret's stubbornness to get a bit of our own money back.
I don't think the UK has a choice about non-negotiation. Leaving the the EU makes it a lot harder for us - we don't have a vote any more, which is how Thatcher got her rebate.
But the amount of matters on which we have to negotiate is a tiny fraction of what it used to be. We don't negotiate on rebates any more because we pay hardly anything in, and what we do is a legacy of our aborted membership.
And we have a legitimate choice about whether to implement what comes out of the negotiations we do unfortunately have to mess up, rather than just rubber-stamping it in Parliament to give the illusion of democracy, as we did with around 80% of our laws before we left.
In the UK data suggest that from 1997 to 2009 6.8% of primary legislation (Statutes) and 14.1% of secondary legislation (Statutory Instruments) had a role in implementing EU obligations, although the degree of involvement varied from passing reference to explicit implementation.
It would make us a "rule taker" once more, and I very much doubt would deliver anything like the benefits mooted, but it would hobble us.
Which means there's probably a real risk that negotiator extraordinaire Starmer does it.
Don’t worry, Starmer is far too lacking in moral fibre (ie courage) to do anything like that. I’m mildly surprised about how cowardly Starmer & co have been. The pre GE suggestion was that Labour were only pretending to be Tory lite to placate the red tops and would pivot progressive when they had their majority. Turns out they were exactly who they said they were.
John Harris in the Guardian yesterday is a good Starmer-critical read.
Normally when you see an article like this, you'd suspect it had been 'planted' with a friendly journalist by someone on political manoevers. But I'd expect Harris's record of freethinking 'truth to power' journalism would hopefully prevent him from sinking so low?
Bonkers talk about Brexit and a leak from Lab to Reform or somesuch.
Aside from some nebulous idea about "sovereignty", or the ability to eat bananas that look how we goddamn want, the major motivating force behind Brexit was immigration. Surely no one can dispute that.
And since Brexit, immigration has seen a huge increase. While I'm not 100% sure peoples' lives have improved demonstrably. I challenge people, even political sophisticates on here, to name me three sovereign measure that we have implemented now that we couldn't have in the EU (I happen to know one or two).
Which circles back to immigration. Brexit has failed on the one tangible measure that so many people voted for it to address.
People then worry about what voters might think of any party that doesn't continue it.
Madness.
Misleading, EU immigration to the UK has fallen sharply since free movement was ended.
Non EU immigration rose initially but Rishi and Cleverly cut it back with tighter visa and wage requirements for immigrants workers and their departments
Question - how can you say you "cut it [immigration] back" having presided over a vast increase in migration? "We cut taxes" you say as you increase taxes "We cut migration" you say as you increase migration "40 new hospitals" you say despite most not being new, or a hospital, or being scheduled this decade "20,000 new police officers" you say having cut numbers so drastically that the effects are palpable
I can only assume that you actually believe this stuff, because otherwise you're all just massive liars. SO the question is why you believe this stuff? This is just adding - how on earth can you believe that an increase is a cut?
You see that 6 point deficit to Reform? That it keeps getting bigger? That they're taking the votes and members and donors off you? Its because you lie and lie and lie and they're stupid lies we can all see are lies.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Indeed, the power of bespoke tailoring is something most people do not understand.
Enforcing a dress code misses the point though. It's like trying to enforce good manners.
On the contrary. It can let everyone relax and clothes are all of a sudden not important. No one is going to be looking to see if your suit is Welsh & Jefferies or Dege.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Indeed, the power of bespoke tailoring is something most people do not understand.
Enforcing a dress code misses the point though. It's like trying to enforce good manners.
To be honest, I think it was the Ritz, one of the restaurant managers said it was to avoid incidents, they said a female rap star who turned up wearing what was described as a dental floss thin skirt and a nipple patch.
Money cannot buy class.
I never go to the cocktail bar at the Ritz - because people like that stay there.
Only on PB do people argue about the correct setting for Novotel on the posho-meter scale based on how many first class hotels they have stayed at recently.
My rather different assessment of Novotel is they can be very good value if you sign up to Accor's loyalty programme and book far enough ahead. And if the Novotel is fully booked, there's always an Ibis...
Amusingly, the Novotel I am referring to is this one:
However they have seperate doors leading to different lobbies, which then lead to the exact same lifts
So if you're staying at the Novotel (which I have done a few times) and your cab/tuktuk drops you at the wrong door from a jaunt in the city you then have a great test of your status anxiety. Do you just think "fuck it" and walk in the Ibis door as it is nearer, thereby mingling with all the @TheScreamingEagles types who barely ever go abroad, or do you walk an extra thirty feet and go in your proper plusher Novotel lobby, even though you will end up in the exact same lift?
I confess sometimes I have done the latter, which is absurdly shallow. I pretend it's coz it's more soothing with better aircon and leather seats and nicer well travelled people, but really it's just coz I don't want to be seen walking into an Ibis
How pathetic is that?
Sounds like the hotel brand battles I see at some airports - multiple IHG brands or multiple Ibis brands adjacent to each other on the same site.
I'm a Hilton whore, and I struggle to see the distinctive differences between Hilton / DoubleTree or Hampton / Garden Inn. Or where the posher brand is an older property difference between any of them.
It honestly depends where you are
Novotel is a good example of this. Solidly upmarket in Asia, but not 5 star. Perceived as a mid range chain hotel in Europe
Hilton can be all over the place. Very much gone down hill in Europe/USA, stll OK in Asia, and high end in Africa/MENA
Guaranteed luxe worldwide would be Four Seasons, Aman, Belmond, Shangri-La etc
Bonkers talk about Brexit and a leak from Lab to Reform or somesuch.
Aside from some nebulous idea about "sovereignty", or the ability to eat bananas that look how we goddamn want, the major motivating force behind Brexit was immigration. Surely no one can dispute that.
And since Brexit, immigration has seen a huge increase. While I'm not 100% sure peoples' lives have improved demonstrably. I challenge people, even political sophisticates on here, to name me three sovereign measure that we have implemented now that we couldn't have in the EU (I happen to know one or two).
Which circles back to immigration. Brexit has failed on the one tangible measure that so many people voted for it to address.
People then worry about what voters might think of any party that doesn't continue it.
Madness.
Misleading, EU immigration to the UK has fallen sharply since free movement was ended.
Non EU immigration rose initially but Rishi and Cleverly cut it back with tighter visa and wage requirements for immigrants workers and their departments
So has immigration since Brexit:
a) risen b) fallen c) stayed around the same level.
FPT: The President Must vs the rule of law clash is coming to a head more quickly than I expected.
He has 2 court rulings stopping allegedly illegal access to state records in in its tracks whilst the Courts consider - one from an Obama appointed judge, and one from a Regan appointee. His GOGEy setup is getting a its wings clipped.
MAGA peeps are going for the the Obama appointee, and demanded that he be impeached, and that he be allowed to do whatever he wants. But not the other one.
He's going to get his wings and his balls clipped if he does not watch it.
Of all the marks of fascism, the 'ignoring the rule of law' one (governments obey court orders) IMHO is the most significant at the moment for the USA. An irresisible force meets an immoveable object right there, and it can't be hidden for long where there is a free media. Others can be fudged or done gradually or complexified. This can't.
On one of the Bulwark podcasts they other day they were saying the problem is that if the court ruling is ignored the next step is a contempt ruling and then the use of US Marshalls to take offender into custody (if necessary to stop further contempt). Marshalls are under DoJ which is now totally Trump 2.0 controlled.
US is headed (only one month in!!!) to worst constitutional crisis in decades if not longer.
Musk is the scion of Trump. He's been given a broad/vague remit to go and demolish whatever he sees fit - Trump gets a load of stuff done without being directly responsible. If its a success he claims the credit, if its a disaster he blames Musk.
Here and now? Musk has to be given access. He can't legally have access but Trump is above the law. The courts can rule as they like - they can't enforce a government to obey if the government ignores them or better still discards their authority.
It isn't a constitutional crisis. Trump said he would act as a dictator on day 1. And won the election. You get what you voted for, and this is the result.
I don't think they are being quite that bold yet.
They are engaging with the legal process and appealing rulings.
They are acting illegally. The courts shut a small part down. They appeal one to make the point. They either bully the judges into acquiescence and thus win the appeal, or they go down the contempt / supreme court route. Eitehr way, they win the test case and simply don't need to worry about the courts after that.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Lula. Probably others.
I was thinking of the Brazilians. but don't they all only have one name? Like the footballers?
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Indeed, the power of bespoke tailoring is something most people do not understand.
Enforcing a dress code misses the point though. It's like trying to enforce good manners.
To be honest, I think it was the Ritz, one of the restaurant managers said it was to avoid incidents, they said a female rap star who turned up wearing what was described as a dental floss thin skirt and a nipple patch.
Money cannot buy class.
I never go to the cocktail bar at the Ritz - because people like that stay there.
The bar at the Corinthia is much better.
Only two public bars are worth going to - those at Dukes and the Stafford.
At Dukes you are only allowed two martinis. The last but one time I was there, I had just sat down when a guy from the other side of the room stood up, made to walk towards the door, and fell headfirst into a table on his way.
Is Badenoch value for next PM? In the normal course of events, the Opposition leader is a good bet for next PM. Yes, the Tories have gotten into the habit of dumping their leaders frequently, but they’ve changed the party rules and it is now harder to do that. Yes, Reform UK are surging in the polls, but minor parties have done that before and soon fallen back.
Do Conservative supporters have a view on how polarising Badenoch is?
AFAICS she is marmite amongst Tory MPs, and when you only have a rump party left that does not seem to be a good position in which to have placed yourself.
Badenoch won the Tory MPs and members votes
True, but it doesn't stop @MattW point being true as well.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Indeed, the power of bespoke tailoring is something most people do not understand.
Enforcing a dress code misses the point though. It's like trying to enforce good manners.
To be honest, I think it was the Ritz, one of the restaurant managers said it was to avoid incidents, they said a female rap star who turned up wearing what was described as a dental floss thin skirt and a nipple patch.
Money cannot buy class.
I never go to the cocktail bar at the Ritz - because people like that stay there.
The bar at the Corinthia is much better.
Only two public bars are worth going to - those at Dukes and the Stafford.
At Dukes you are only allowed two martinis. The last but one time I was there, I had just sat down when a guy from the other side of the room stood up, made to walk towards the door, and fell headfirst into a table on his way.
I had three there, so I think that is something of an urban myth
Nonetheless, it should indeed be the rule. Because three left me a gibbeing wreck, and I can generally handle martinis
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
I wonder if there’s a conscious urge to sound ultra Israeli as well as all the other ultras. I read that Netanyahu’s grandfather changed his name from Mielikowsky to Netanyahu after emigrating from Poland so I guess that there’s an element of that. Bibi’s dad lived to 102 which is depressing when considering how long Bibi might be exerting his malign influence on the world.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
In real life I don't think I've ever met an Israeli.
So that leaves a few Israeli politicians who are on the television.
Now Netanyahu lived in the USA when he was young and then returned to go to university there in his twenties and then worked there for a few more years.
That will have influenced his accent.
If he had lived instead in England, Australia or even a different part of the USA his accent would likely be different.
It would make us a "rule taker" once more, and I very much doubt would deliver anything like the benefits mooted, but it would hobble us.
Which means there's probably a real risk that negotiator extraordinaire Starmer does it.
Don’t worry, Starmer is far too lacking in moral fibre (ie courage) to do anything like that. I’m mildly surprised about how cowardly Starmer & co have been. The pre GE suggestion was that Labour were only pretending to be Tory lite to placate the red tops and would pivot progressive when they had their majority. Turns out they were exactly who they said they were.
John Harris in the Guardian yesterday is a good Starmer-critical read.
Normally when you see an article like this, you'd suspect it had been 'planted' with a friendly journalist by someone on political manoevers. But I'd expect Harris's record of freethinking 'truth to power' journalism would hopefully prevent him from sinking so low?
He took over 1,250 words to say what I said in one phrase: They. Don't. Know. How. To. Fly. The. Plane.
This is absolutely the problem.
In fact I would twist the metaphor slightly - the senior people don't know how to plan the routes.
From what I hear, by-and-large junior ministers and civil servants are getting on pretty well with the job of flying the planes, but route planning and ATC is totally borked.
It would make us a "rule taker" once more, and I very much doubt would deliver anything like the benefits mooted, but it would hobble us.
Which means there's probably a real risk that negotiator extraordinaire Starmer does it.
Don’t worry, Starmer is far too lacking in moral fibre (ie courage) to do anything like that. I’m mildly surprised about how cowardly Starmer & co have been. The pre GE suggestion was that Labour were only pretending to be Tory lite to placate the red tops and would pivot progressive when they had their majority. Turns out they were exactly who they said they were.
There is nothing Tory lite about Starmer hammering pensioners, business owners and farmers
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Lula. Probably others.
I was thinking of the Brazilians. but don't they all only have one name? Like the footballers?
Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva
But maybe you're right, being known mononymously is maybe more common there, at least among footballers. We have royalty and pop stars.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Indeed, the power of bespoke tailoring is something most people do not understand.
Enforcing a dress code misses the point though. It's like trying to enforce good manners.
To be honest, I think it was the Ritz, one of the restaurant managers said it was to avoid incidents, they said a female rap star who turned up wearing what was described as a dental floss thin skirt and a nipple patch.
Money cannot buy class.
I never go to the cocktail bar at the Ritz - because people like that stay there.
The bar at the Corinthia is much better.
Only two public bars are worth going to - those at Dukes and the Stafford.
At Dukes you are only allowed two martinis. The last but one time I was there, I had just sat down when a guy from the other side of the room stood up, made to walk towards the door, and fell headfirst into a table on his way.
Dukes has fallen terribly. Since the renovation a few years back, they are selling the place as hard as they can. Used to be like a club.
There was a select band of people who were allowed more than 2 martinis. A friend made it to 3.75, once.
The Stafford is quite good - it hasn't disappeared up its own arse, as Dukes did.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
In real life I don't think I've ever met an Israeli.
So that leaves a few Israeli politicians who are on the television.
Now Netanyahu lived in the USA when he was young and then returned to go to university there in his twenties and then worked there for a few more years.
That will have influenced his accent.
If he had lived instead in England, Australia or even a different part of the USA his accent would likely be different.
Well I've met Israelis all over the world, young and old, and they nearly all have a strong accent (unless they've spent most of their lives outside Israel)
And Netanyahu is a pretty classic example
If you watch TV and listen to Israeli vox pops that's what Israelis sound like. It is not particularly pretty, a little harsh, but maybe no worse than thick Strine or Saffer
One of the ironies of the US is that the red states who vote republican and like to complain about the federal govt are actually hugely subsidised by it. A sort of Atlas shrugged John Galt in reverse situation.
With Musk and Trump gumming up the distribution of federal dollars, those red states may learn quite quickly how much they depend on their fellow Americans.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Indeed, the power of bespoke tailoring is something most people do not understand.
Enforcing a dress code misses the point though. It's like trying to enforce good manners.
To be honest, I think it was the Ritz, one of the restaurant managers said it was to avoid incidents, they said a female rap star who turned up wearing what was described as a dental floss thin skirt and a nipple patch.
Money cannot buy class.
I never go to the cocktail bar at the Ritz - because people like that stay there.
The bar at the Corinthia is much better.
Only two public bars are worth going to - those at Dukes and the Stafford.
At Dukes you are only allowed two martinis. The last but one time I was there, I had just sat down when a guy from the other side of the room stood up, made to walk towards the door, and fell headfirst into a table on his way.
I had three there, so I think that is something of an urban myth
Nonetheless, it should indeed be the rule. Because three left me a gibbeing wreck, and I can generally handle martinis
The reason for the Rule Of 2 was so that they could easily refuse to serve those who couldn't handle it.
Do any of our expats or people with Usonian links get any impression whether people are sticking it out or leaving?
I'm not very well connected, however the impression I get is that numbers of those who can are seeking to leave. And people asked to consider relocating there are thinking very carefully, with varying attitudes by different parts of the country, as it is so regionalised.
I have a very good American friend, not prone to hysteria, who is certainly thinking of leaving. She told me she and her husband are trying to figure out if it's 1935. She said that she had seen the 2016 Trump win as an aberration but that now she might just have to accept that this is what the US is now.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
In real life I don't think I've ever met an Israeli.
So that leaves a few Israeli politicians who are on the television.
Now Netanyahu lived in the USA when he was young and then returned to go to university there in his twenties and then worked there for a few more years.
That will have influenced his accent.
If he had lived instead in England, Australia or even a different part of the USA his accent would likely be different.
Well I've met Israelis all over the world, young and old, and they nearly all have a strong accent (unless they've spent most of their lives outside Israel)
And Netanyahu is a pretty classic example
If you watch TV and listen to Israeli vox pops that's what Israelis sound like. It is not particularly pretty, a little harsh, but maybe no worse than thick Strine or Saffer
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
I wonder if there’s a conscious urge to sound ultra Israeli as well as all the other ultras. I read that Netanyahu’s grandfather changed his name from Mielikowsky to Netanyahu after emigrating from Poland so I guess that there’s an element of that. Bibi’s dad lived to 102 which is depressing when considering how long Bibi might be exerting his malign influence on the world.
Accents are fascinating. As Israel is such a new country the accent must also be new. I imagine it is impacted by
1. Yiddish, the old language (of so many) 2. Hebrew, the new language 3. The Arabic all around them
Plus smaller bits of American and British English?
Bonkers talk about Brexit and a leak from Lab to Reform or somesuch.
Aside from some nebulous idea about "sovereignty", or the ability to eat bananas that look how we goddamn want, the major motivating force behind Brexit was immigration. Surely no one can dispute that.
And since Brexit, immigration has seen a huge increase. While I'm not 100% sure peoples' lives have improved demonstrably. I challenge people, even political sophisticates on here, to name me three sovereign measure that we have implemented now that we couldn't have in the EU (I happen to know one or two).
Which circles back to immigration. Brexit has failed on the one tangible measure that so many people voted for it to address.
People then worry about what voters might think of any party that doesn't continue it.
Madness.
The 'nebulous' idea of sovereignty is the difference between AI growth and investment here and in the EU, and why we aren't at risk of nationally being affected if more countries like Slovakia and Hungary and Germany try and return to 'business as usual' with Russia the way EU member states might be.
The right to determine your own destiny is no small thing.
I'd also argue the EU is in the worst of worlds. It lacks the competitive spirit of numerous nation states doing their own thing to try and be the best, and it lacks the same degree of uniformity and common policy (with corresponding advantage for its relatively large size) that China and the USA has. It's integrated enough to meddle, too integrated to be competitive on a member state level, not integrated enough to take real advantage of its size.
It is mealy mouthed dishonesty to ask for measures that we 'have' implemented, given that as Topping knows, we still have virtually all the EU law that we had when we left on the statute book. Asking what we 'could' implement would be something else entirely.
It's our politicians deciding what to do for our country. Sadly no one asked @Luckyguy1983 what he would do so we are left with the democratic process.
You guys are just the same as the lefties. Socialism is a fantastic political system, just that no one has done it right yet.
Guff. It isn't the fault of Brexit that politicians and administrators have been too shit to actually change any of the laws that we are no longer required to follow. Precisely nobody during Brexit on either side argued that we'd remain subject to every damaging piece of EU idiocy on the statute book. On the contrary, your lot warned us of a dangerous 'bonfire of workers rights' and the deeply concerning advent of 'Singapore on Sea'.
However, it seems likely that the next Government will remove EU laws and take full advantage of our freedoms. Just rejoice at that news.
Can you list some of these laws?
Hint: There isn't one about straight bananas
Now I am sure you can find a few marginal ones, but most people won't want to get rid of them.
Also distinguish between the actual EU requirement and our gold plating.
PS Please quote the law and not something someone has made up.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
In real life I don't think I've ever met an Israeli.
So that leaves a few Israeli politicians who are on the television.
Now Netanyahu lived in the USA when he was young and then returned to go to university there in his twenties and then worked there for a few more years.
That will have influenced his accent.
If he had lived instead in England, Australia or even a different part of the USA his accent would likely be different.
Well I've met Israelis all over the world, young and old, and they nearly all have a strong accent (unless they've spent most of their lives outside Israel)
And Netanyahu is a pretty classic example
If you watch TV and listen to Israeli vox pops that's what Israelis sound like. It is not particularly pretty, a little harsh, but maybe no worse than thick Strine or Saffer
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
In real life I don't think I've ever met an Israeli.
So that leaves a few Israeli politicians who are on the television.
Now Netanyahu lived in the USA when he was young and then returned to go to university there in his twenties and then worked there for a few more years.
That will have influenced his accent.
If he had lived instead in England, Australia or even a different part of the USA his accent would likely be different.
Well I've met Israelis all over the world, young and old, and they nearly all have a strong accent (unless they've spent most of their lives outside Israel)
And Netanyahu is a pretty classic example
If you watch TV and listen to Israeli vox pops that's what Israelis sound like. It is not particularly pretty, a little harsh, but maybe no worse than thick Strine or Saffer
Wikipedia says only 2% of Israelis are native English speakers, while 53% are native Hebrew speakers.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Indeed, the power of bespoke tailoring is something most people do not understand.
Enforcing a dress code misses the point though. It's like trying to enforce good manners.
To be honest, I think it was the Ritz, one of the restaurant managers said it was to avoid incidents, they said a female rap star who turned up wearing what was described as a dental floss thin skirt and a nipple patch.
Money cannot buy class.
I never go to the cocktail bar at the Ritz - because people like that stay there.
The bar at the Corinthia is much better.
Only two public bars are worth going to - those at Dukes and the Stafford.
At Dukes you are only allowed two martinis. The last but one time I was there, I had just sat down when a guy from the other side of the room stood up, made to walk towards the door, and fell headfirst into a table on his way.
Dukes has fallen terribly. Since the renovation a few years back, they are selling the place as hard as they can. Used to be like a club.
There was a select band of people who were allowed more than 2 martinis. A friend made it to 3.75, once.
The Stafford is quite good - it hasn't disappeared up its own arse, as Dukes did.
I mean they've all changed. But still I'd take them over other public bars. That said, both the Blue Bar and the bar at the MO are good if you're in that kind of mood.
Bonkers talk about Brexit and a leak from Lab to Reform or somesuch.
Aside from some nebulous idea about "sovereignty", or the ability to eat bananas that look how we goddamn want, the major motivating force behind Brexit was immigration. Surely no one can dispute that.
And since Brexit, immigration has seen a huge increase. While I'm not 100% sure peoples' lives have improved demonstrably. I challenge people, even political sophisticates on here, to name me three sovereign measure that we have implemented now that we couldn't have in the EU (I happen to know one or two).
Which circles back to immigration. Brexit has failed on the one tangible measure that so many people voted for it to address.
People then worry about what voters might think of any party that doesn't continue it.
Madness.
Misleading, EU immigration to the UK has fallen sharply since free movement was ended.
Non EU immigration rose initially but Rishi and Cleverly cut it back with tighter visa and wage requirements for immigrants workers and their departments
So has immigration since Brexit:
a) risen b) fallen c) stayed around the same level.
Just one point, trying to kep the issue simple. It is comprehensible that occasionally there needs to be significant net migration as a rational response to something something. However, in the long run is it not the case that, if this works at all, by now - with many millions over a short time - then those who have already (net) arrived + their descendents would be part of the currently stable situation (in and out roughly in balance). And if not now, then when?
Its astonishing that this sort of nonsense is still being pumped out. Regulatory alignment "could" result in 2.2% of additional growth.
If you take the example of AI, for example, it is possible that non alignment with the overly restrictive EU regime "could" create x% of additional growth in the UK (and possibly result in us being taken over by AI, but that is another issue).
Whether we want to align with the EU in any given area is something that is in our discretion. There are some areas where it makes sense to do so. Doing so effectively requires mutual recognition at any given point in time. It is up to both sides to decide whether or not to grant that, whether we have the same regulations or not. If the price of mutual recognition is that we undertake to impose any restriction dreamed up by Brussels in the future it is too high a price to pay.
It's nonsense essentially all the trade experts agree with. Removing trade frictions increases trade, which in turn increases GDP. It won't all happen because the EU won't sign up to it all. But some will
There isn’t a neat correlation between wealth and trade. Some of the poorest countries do a lot of trade as a percentage of GDP and some of the richest do less.
Well: there is a very clear positive correlation between country size and amount of trade.
The smaller the country, the less likely they are to be able to do produce everything themselves. So you need to control for that.
Ultimately, you have to ask yourself a question: is the government the best arbiter of where you spend your money, or should people (as much as possible) be allowed to make their own decisions?
For humour value, I asked ChatGPT to list the 10 countries where trade was the highest proportion of GDP. You will be staggered to learn that none are poor, and 8 of the 10 are among the richest countries in the world.
Erm, assuming trade means specifically foreign trade, I'd guess the top 10 are mainly small countries. Places like the United States will do an awful lot of trade internally that will not be captured in these figures.
Similarly, as a thought experiment, suppose Boris was right and the EU did tomorrow declare itself a single state. Overnight, a lot of what is now international trade would become internal but the man on the Parisian omnibus would notice no difference to the Euro in his pocket.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
I think to an extent all politicians are characters. They have to be. Who we are in private is likely going to be a bit different to the public appearance. This is at the heart of the Whatsapp issues - people blow off steam, say mean/offensive things etc all the time, but not in public. When it gets out then people get very upset (or in some cases get performatively upset). I think Gordon Brown genuinely did think that he had had tea with a bigot and said so. He would never have said that knowingly on camera. So yes Johnson uses Boris as an act. Fine. But Starmer is also playing a character. They all are.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
In real life I don't think I've ever met an Israeli.
So that leaves a few Israeli politicians who are on the television.
Now Netanyahu lived in the USA when he was young and then returned to go to university there in his twenties and then worked there for a few more years.
That will have influenced his accent.
If he had lived instead in England, Australia or even a different part of the USA his accent would likely be different.
Well I've met Israelis all over the world, young and old, and they nearly all have a strong accent (unless they've spent most of their lives outside Israel)
And Netanyahu is a pretty classic example
If you watch TV and listen to Israeli vox pops that's what Israelis sound like. It is not particularly pretty, a little harsh, but maybe no worse than thick Strine or Saffer
Wikipedia says only 2% of Israelis are native English speakers, while 53% are native Hebrew speakers.
Yes, on my visits to Israel I've often been surprised at how BADLY some speak English. Because we only hear English-speakers from Israel (albeit accented) on TV we presume it is almost the main language there. It really is not. Hebrew absolutely dominates, despite it being a language re-invented from whole cloth in the 20th century, to go with the new country
A lesson to independent Ireland there, you too could have done it, with Gaelic. But you didn't
Do any of our expats or people with Usonian links get any impression whether people are sticking it out or leaving?
I'm not very well connected, however the impression I get is that numbers of those who can are seeking to leave. And people asked to consider relocating there are thinking very carefully, with varying attitudes by different parts of the country, as it is so regionalised.
I have a very good American friend, not prone to hysteria, who is certainly thinking of leaving. She told me she and her husband are trying to figure out if it's 1935. She said that she had seen the 2016 Trump win as an aberration but that now she might just have to accept that this is what the US is now.
Moving countries is a big thing, and I suspect only likely to happen at certain key life stages or in the face of some really overwhelmingly bad politics... One of the additional barriers I suspect is that US wages are so high. Many Americans would have to take a big pay cut to do the same work somewhere else.
Having said all that, I had the chance to emigrate to America and turned it down. I would probably be wealthier, unhealthier and even more obsessed with politics!
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
I think to an extent all politicians are characters. They have to be. Who we are in private is likely going to be a bit different to the public appearance. This is at the heart of the Whatsapp issues - people blow off steam, say mean/offensive things etc all the time, but not in public. When it gets out then people get very upset (or in some cases get performatively upset). I think Gordon Brown genuinely did think that he had had tea with a bigot and said so. He would never have said that knowingly on camera. So yes Johnson uses Boris as an act. Fine. But Starmer is also playing a character. They all are.
WE all are. Everyone plays a part and has an act, depending on context
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
In real life I don't think I've ever met an Israeli.
So that leaves a few Israeli politicians who are on the television.
Now Netanyahu lived in the USA when he was young and then returned to go to university there in his twenties and then worked there for a few more years.
That will have influenced his accent.
If he had lived instead in England, Australia or even a different part of the USA his accent would likely be different.
Well I've met Israelis all over the world, young and old, and they nearly all have a strong accent (unless they've spent most of their lives outside Israel)
And Netanyahu is a pretty classic example
If you watch TV and listen to Israeli vox pops that's what Israelis sound like. It is not particularly pretty, a little harsh, but maybe no worse than thick Strine or Saffer
Wikipedia says only 2% of Israelis are native English speakers, while 53% are native Hebrew speakers.
Yes, on my visits to Israel I've often been surprised at how BADLY some speak English. Because we only hear English-speakers from Israel (albeit accented) on TV we presume it is almost the main language there. It really is not. Hebrew absolutely dominates, despite it being a language re-invented from whole cloth in the 20th century, to go with the new country
A lesson to independent Ireland there, you too could have done it, with Gaelic. But you didn't
If 99% of Israel's population had been English speakers it might have been a bit harder.
Bonkers talk about Brexit and a leak from Lab to Reform or somesuch.
Aside from some nebulous idea about "sovereignty", or the ability to eat bananas that look how we goddamn want, the major motivating force behind Brexit was immigration. Surely no one can dispute that.
And since Brexit, immigration has seen a huge increase. While I'm not 100% sure peoples' lives have improved demonstrably. I challenge people, even political sophisticates on here, to name me three sovereign measure that we have implemented now that we couldn't have in the EU (I happen to know one or two).
Which circles back to immigration. Brexit has failed on the one tangible measure that so many people voted for it to address.
People then worry about what voters might think of any party that doesn't continue it.
Madness.
The 'nebulous' idea of sovereignty is the difference between AI growth and investment here and in the EU, and why we aren't at risk of nationally being affected if more countries like Slovakia and Hungary and Germany try and return to 'business as usual' with Russia the way EU member states might be.
The right to determine your own destiny is no small thing.
I'd also argue the EU is in the worst of worlds. It lacks the competitive spirit of numerous nation states doing their own thing to try and be the best, and it lacks the same degree of uniformity and common policy (with corresponding advantage for its relatively large size) that China and the USA has. It's integrated enough to meddle, too integrated to be competitive on a member state level, not integrated enough to take real advantage of its size.
It is mealy mouthed dishonesty to ask for measures that we 'have' implemented, given that as Topping knows, we still have virtually all the EU law that we had when we left on the statute book. Asking what we 'could' implement would be something else entirely.
It's our politicians deciding what to do for our country. Sadly no one asked @Luckyguy1983 what he would do so we are left with the democratic process.
You guys are just the same as the lefties. Socialism is a fantastic political system, just that no one has done it right yet.
Guff. It isn't the fault of Brexit that politicians and administrators have been too shit to actually change any of the laws that we are no longer required to follow. Precisely nobody during Brexit on either side argued that we'd remain subject to every damaging piece of EU idiocy on the statute book. On the contrary, your lot warned us of a dangerous 'bonfire of workers rights' and the deeply concerning advent of 'Singapore on Sea'.
However, it seems likely that the next Government will remove EU laws and take full advantage of our freedoms. Just rejoice at that news.
Jam tomorrow, eh?
As I said, just like the socialists. Next time will be different, just you wait.
Small children could have told you that nothing would change because - wait for it - we were and are a sovereign nation and by voting Brexit you don't all of a sudden change British politicians for some other species.
And as for "it seems likely..." which I assume relates to Reform winning the next GE. Well that is the most bonkers thing on here I've heard for a while and I'm happy to bet against it happening.
It must be embarrassing having to deploy these shite arguments here time after time because of your peculiar predilection for the sclerotic superstate and our temporary membership thereof.
Do any of our expats or people with Usonian links get any impression whether people are sticking it out or leaving?
I'm not very well connected, however the impression I get is that numbers of those who can are seeking to leave. And people asked to consider relocating there are thinking very carefully, with varying attitudes by different parts of the country, as it is so regionalised.
I have a very good American friend, not prone to hysteria, who is certainly thinking of leaving. She told me she and her husband are trying to figure out if it's 1935. She said that she had seen the 2016 Trump win as an aberration but that now she might just have to accept that this is what the US is now.
Moving countries is a big thing, and I suspect only likely to happen at certain key life stages or in the face of some really overwhelmingly bad politics... One of the additional barriers I suspect is that US wages are so high. Many Americans would have to take a big pay cut to do the same work somewhere else.
Having said all that, I had the chance to emigrate to America and turned it down. I would probably be wealthier, unhealthier and even more obsessed with politics!
OTOH a US pension can go a long way elsewhere. I have American friends who have retired to Costa Rica and Greece. Ecuador isn't looking as attractive these days.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
I wonder if there’s a conscious urge to sound ultra Israeli as well as all the other ultras. I read that Netanyahu’s grandfather changed his name from Mielikowsky to Netanyahu after emigrating from Poland so I guess that there’s an element of that. Bibi’s dad lived to 102 which is depressing when considering how long Bibi might be exerting his malign influence on the world.
Accents are fascinating. As Israel is such a new country the accent must also be new. I imagine it is impacted by
1. Yiddish, the old language (of so many) 2. Hebrew, the new language 3. The Arabic all around them
Plus smaller bits of American and British English?
Tricky to separate the conscious from the unconscious ( guess it’s mainly the latter). I imagine there are Tel Avi, Jerusalem and Haifa accents, and kibbutzim and city ones.
It would make us a "rule taker" once more, and I very much doubt would deliver anything like the benefits mooted, but it would hobble us.
Which means there's probably a real risk that negotiator extraordinaire Starmer does it.
Don’t worry, Starmer is far too lacking in moral fibre (ie courage) to do anything like that. I’m mildly surprised about how cowardly Starmer & co have been. The pre GE suggestion was that Labour were only pretending to be Tory lite to placate the red tops and would pivot progressive when they had their majority. Turns out they were exactly who they said they were.
With added complications courtesy of Slab up here. I'm now totally confused what I'd be voting for if I voted for Slab - certainly for Holyrood and even for Westminster (which is the extra surprise amuse-bouche - it really shouldn't be for a Unionist party trying to out-Unionist th e others at present).
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
I'm curious as to what an Israeli English accent is.
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
You've honestly never heard an Israeli accent??
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
In real life I don't think I've ever met an Israeli.
So that leaves a few Israeli politicians who are on the television.
Now Netanyahu lived in the USA when he was young and then returned to go to university there in his twenties and then worked there for a few more years.
That will have influenced his accent.
If he had lived instead in England, Australia or even a different part of the USA his accent would likely be different.
Well I've met Israelis all over the world, young and old, and they nearly all have a strong accent (unless they've spent most of their lives outside Israel)
And Netanyahu is a pretty classic example
If you watch TV and listen to Israeli vox pops that's what Israelis sound like. It is not particularly pretty, a little harsh, but maybe no worse than thick Strine or Saffer
Wikipedia says only 2% of Israelis are native English speakers, while 53% are native Hebrew speakers.
Yes, on my visits to Israel I've often been surprised at how BADLY some speak English. Because we only hear English-speakers from Israel (albeit accented) on TV we presume it is almost the main language there. It really is not. Hebrew absolutely dominates, despite it being a language re-invented from whole cloth in the 20th century, to go with the new country
A lesson to independent Ireland there, you too could have done it, with Gaelic. But you didn't
If 99% of Israel's population had been English speakers it might have been a bit harder.
But NO ONE spoke Hebrew. Whereas half of Ireland spoke Gaelic. Here is the incredible story:
"The modern Hebrew language is one of the most remarkable linguistic revivals in history. It went from being a primarily liturgical and scholarly language for nearly 1,500 years to becoming the spoken, national language of Israel in the 20th century. The revival was largely due to the efforts of Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, along with other Zionist pioneers and educators.
Ancient Hebrew and Its Decline Hebrew was originally the spoken language of the ancient Israelites, developing around 1200 BCE. It was the language of the Hebrew Bible and remained in use for centuries. However, following the Babylonian exile (6th century BCE) and later the Roman destruction of the Second Temple (70 CE), Hebrew gradually ceased to be a commonly spoken vernacular. Instead, it became a "holy language" (Lashon HaKodesh) used in religious texts
Eliezer Ben-Yehuda – The Driving Force
Eliezer Ben-Yehuda (1858–1922) is often credited as the father of modern Hebrew. Born in Lithuania, he was deeply influenced by European nationalist movements and the idea that a revived Jewish nation needed a modern, spoken Hebrew language.
Standardizing Hebrew: Ben-Yehuda worked tirelessly to modernize Hebrew, making it suitable for everyday speech. He created new words, borrowing from biblical, rabbinic, and foreign sources. He coined words for modern concepts such as "train" (רכבת, rakevet), "newspaper" (עיתון, iton), and "ice cream" (גלידה, glida).
First Hebrew-Speaking Household: Ben-Yehuda insisted that his family speak only Hebrew, even raising his son, Itamar Ben-Avi, as the first modern native Hebrew speaker.
The Hebrew Dictionary: He compiled the first modern Hebrew dictionary, a monumental effort to document and expand the language.
Educational Efforts: He promoted Hebrew as the primary language of Jewish schools in Palestine, replacing Yiddish, Arabic, and other languages.
Challenges and Resistance
Not all Jews embraced the idea of speaking Hebrew as a modern language. Orthodox Jewish communities resisted, viewing Hebrew as sacred and unsuitable for daily use. Secular Jews who spoke Yiddish or other languages also opposed the change. Despite this, Ben-Yehuda and his supporters succeeded in making Hebrew the language of Jewish settlement in Palestine.
Institutionalization and Growth
In 1922, the British Mandate authorities recognized Hebrew as one of the three official languages of Palestine (alongside English and Arabic).
With the establishment of Israel in 1948, Hebrew became the official language of the state."
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
I think to an extent all politicians are characters. They have to be. Who we are in private is likely going to be a bit different to the public appearance. This is at the heart of the Whatsapp issues - people blow off steam, say mean/offensive things etc all the time, but not in public. When it gets out then people get very upset (or in some cases get performatively upset). I think Gordon Brown genuinely did think that he had had tea with a bigot and said so. He would never have said that knowingly on camera. So yes Johnson uses Boris as an act. Fine. But Starmer is also playing a character. They all are.
Jeremy Vine tells a good story about Boris. As a guest speaker Boris turns up late, just before he is on, appears hassled, asks who the audience is and asks questions, scribbles stuff on a scrap of paper, gives up, goes on and does a cracking speech.
Jeremy is impressed.
Months later Jeremy is in the same position again with him (and others) waiting for Boris just before he is due to go on stage for a speech. Boris goes through an identical routine.
Jeremy now realises it is an act.
No criticism. He does it well.
PS I have organised a number of big events and always got grilled by the keynote speaker. The most interesting was by a magician who wanted me to identify individuals with specific traits.
This site looks useful as a starting point for information for those who want to follow the progress of the general issue of whether the USA government intends to oust the 'rule of law' (governments have to obey the law, and obey court orders, as in the UK), and how it might do so. As at this moment, USA has a lot of independent minded lawyers and a high degree of freedom of speech. Both issues to watch.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
So, exactly one hotel outside the UK, and that was Paris
I don't wish to humblebrag, but in the last three years I have stayed, inter alia, and in rough order, in hotels of all kinds (tiny hostels to global top 50) in these countries:
Sri Lanka Turkey The USA Germany Greece Georgia Armenia Turkey (again) Montenegro Italy Portugal Spain The USA (again) Iceland Thailand Egypt Spain (again) The USA (again) Poland Ukraine France Italy The Maldives Cambodia Thailand Cambodia (again) Colombia France (again) Italy Moldova Ukraine (again) France (again) Montenegro (again) Canada Kosovo Switzerland Japan South Korea The Philippines Colombia (again) Thailand (again) Myanmar Thailand (again)
I submit that my experience of hotels is just a tiny tiny tiny bit wider than yours, and my description of the ground floor brasserie of the Novotel Sukhmvit on soi 4, Klong Thoei, Bangkok, as "posh-ish", is therefore exact and well-founded
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
So, exactly one hotel outside the UK, and that was Paris
I don't wish to humblebrag, but in the last three years I have stayed, inter alia, and in rough order, in hotels of all kinds (tiny hostels to global top 50) in these countries:
Sri Lanka Turkey The USA Germany Greece Georgia Armenia Turkey (again) Montenegro Italy Portugal Spain The USA (again) Iceland Thailand Egypt Spain (again) The USA (again) Poland Ukraine France Italy The Maldives Cambodia Thailand Cambodia (again) Colombia France (again) Italy Moldova Ukraine (again) France (again) Montenegro (again) Canada Kosovo Switzerland Japan South Korea The Philippines Colombia (again) Thailand (again) Myanmar Thailand (again)
I submit that my experience of hotels is just a tiny tiny tiny bit wider than yours, and my description of the ground floor brasserie of the Novotel Sukhmvit on soi 4, Klong Thoei, Bangkok, as "posh-ish", is therefore exact and well-founded
If I say so myself, that is quite a fucking list, in just 3 years
No wonder you are so ignorant about politics back at home.
It would make us a "rule taker" once more, and I very much doubt would deliver anything like the benefits mooted, but it would hobble us.
Which means there's probably a real risk that negotiator extraordinaire Starmer does it.
Don’t worry, Starmer is far too lacking in moral fibre (ie courage) to do anything like that. I’m mildly surprised about how cowardly Starmer & co have been. The pre GE suggestion was that Labour were only pretending to be Tory lite to placate the red tops and would pivot progressive when they had their majority. Turns out they were exactly who they said they were.
John Harris in the Guardian yesterday is a good Starmer-critical read.
Normally when you see an article like this, you'd suspect it had been 'planted' with a friendly journalist by someone on political manoevers. But I'd expect Harris's record of freethinking 'truth to power' journalism would hopefully prevent him from sinking so low?
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
Of course its phony. It isn't his given name, as you rightly point out. But who cares? Boris is in the past - what does it matter?
Can you accept that Rejoin is not a silver bullet solution to all our problems? If things were objectively better before Brexit then we would not have had Brexit. Our decline - the thing we need to arrest - started long long before Brexit, and won't be fixed by magically reversing course.
The point is originally mine and it is FPT
It's a conversation I overheard a couple of hours ago, here's what I posted:
Sitting in a posh-ish Bangkok restaurant having lunch. Overheard two older businessmen discussing global politics - one Israeli (judging by the accent) - one Singaporean Chinese (I think)
They did a quick resume of the world:
America - still powerful, Trump is mad
China - scary
France - perhaps the most beautiful country, really poor politicians
Russia - scary
Britain - “it just gets worse and worse every year, Boris was bad enough, this new guy is terrible. Brits aren’t the brightest”
Oh dear. However they did then spend 10 minutes discussing British cultural references - from the royals to Piers Morgan - so at least we’re still talked about
[from this I took several lessons, one of which is: Boris might be unique in being a leading politician known worldwide by his first name]
Why do you make your lies so transparent.
In which fucking universe is a Novotel posh-ish?
When it's soi 4, Klong Toie, Bangkok. Given that you never travel outside Sheffield-Manchester, lol, you wouldn't really understand these things
Novotel is quite a chic brand in Asia, but 4 star rather than 5. So, posh-ish
I don’t wish to humble brag but in the last three years I’ve stayed at, inter alia, Claridge’s, The Berkeley, The Maybourne Riveria, The Ritz Paris, the Waldorf Astoria in Edinburgh.
One assumes your dress sense saw you thrown out of them all?
The best places have no dress code.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Not quite. They (dress codes) are a welcome relief and island of certainty in a chaotic world.
Indeed, the power of bespoke tailoring is something most people do not understand.
Enforcing a dress code misses the point though. It's like trying to enforce good manners.
To be honest, I think it was the Ritz, one of the restaurant managers said it was to avoid incidents, they said a female rap star who turned up wearing what was described as a dental floss thin skirt and a nipple patch.
Money cannot buy class.
I never go to the cocktail bar at the Ritz - because people like that stay there.
The bar at the Corinthia is much better.
Only two public bars are worth going to - those at Dukes and the Stafford.
At Dukes you are only allowed two martinis. The last but one time I was there, I had just sat down when a guy from the other side of the room stood up, made to walk towards the door, and fell headfirst into a table on his way.
Dukes has fallen terribly. Since the renovation a few years back, they are selling the place as hard as they can. Used to be like a club.
There was a select band of people who were allowed more than 2 martinis. A friend made it to 3.75, once.
The Stafford is quite good - it hasn't disappeared up its own arse, as Dukes did.
I mean they've all changed. But still I'd take them over other public bars. That said, both the Blue Bar and the bar at the MO are good if you're in that kind of mood.
I think the point I had with Dukes is when they turned away a couple of ladies I know (long time occasionals at Duke's to boot), purely because they weren't looking for a big spending evening. I've seen them do similar to others.
The Corinthia bar has disastrous decor. But the cocktails are very good. And the pianist at the end of the bar has talent.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
I think to an extent all politicians are characters. They have to be. Who we are in private is likely going to be a bit different to the public appearance. This is at the heart of the Whatsapp issues - people blow off steam, say mean/offensive things etc all the time, but not in public. When it gets out then people get very upset (or in some cases get performatively upset). I think Gordon Brown genuinely did think that he had had tea with a bigot and said so. He would never have said that knowingly on camera. So yes Johnson uses Boris as an act. Fine. But Starmer is also playing a character. They all are.
Jeremy Vine tells a good story about Boris. As a guest speaker Boris turns up late, just before he is on, appears hassled, asks who the audience is and asks questions, scribbles stuff on a scrap of paper, gives up, goes on and does a cracking speech.
Jeremy is impressed.
Months later Jeremy is in the same position again with him (and others) waiting for Boris just before he is due to go on stage for a speech. Boris goes through an identical routine.
Jeremy now realises it is an act.
No criticism. He does it well.
PS I have organised a number of big events and always got grilled by the keynote speaker. The most interesting was by a magician who wanted me to identify individuals with specific traits.
Yes, I've heard that story too. There were some more details - about how he started telling exactly the same joke and 'forgot' the punchline in exactly the same place both times. As you say, a performative character, very amusing in roles such as speaker or compere or entertainer, where he couldn't do much harm.
If as a politician, behind the act he'd actually spent hours mastering the detail of his brief and could bring real knowledge, analysis and understanding to what he was doing, you'd almost be prepared to forgive the performative shtick. Sadly the act wasn't a disguise behind which lurked a capable and conscientious genius, but a cover for actual sloppy and casual incompetence, that had allowed him to get away with skipping the real work since his schooldays.
Bonkers talk about Brexit and a leak from Lab to Reform or somesuch.
Aside from some nebulous idea about "sovereignty", or the ability to eat bananas that look how we goddamn want, the major motivating force behind Brexit was immigration. Surely no one can dispute that.
And since Brexit, immigration has seen a huge increase. While I'm not 100% sure peoples' lives have improved demonstrably. I challenge people, even political sophisticates on here, to name me three sovereign measure that we have implemented now that we couldn't have in the EU (I happen to know one or two).
Which circles back to immigration. Brexit has failed on the one tangible measure that so many people voted for it to address.
People then worry about what voters might think of any party that doesn't continue it.
Madness.
The 'nebulous' idea of sovereignty is the difference between AI growth and investment here and in the EU, and why we aren't at risk of nationally being affected if more countries like Slovakia and Hungary and Germany try and return to 'business as usual' with Russia the way EU member states might be.
The right to determine your own destiny is no small thing.
I'd also argue the EU is in the worst of worlds. It lacks the competitive spirit of numerous nation states doing their own thing to try and be the best, and it lacks the same degree of uniformity and common policy (with corresponding advantage for its relatively large size) that China and the USA has. It's integrated enough to meddle, too integrated to be competitive on a member state level, not integrated enough to take real advantage of its size.
It is mealy mouthed dishonesty to ask for measures that we 'have' implemented, given that as Topping knows, we still have virtually all the EU law that we had when we left on the statute book. Asking what we 'could' implement would be something else entirely.
It's our politicians deciding what to do for our country. Sadly no one asked @Luckyguy1983 what he would do so we are left with the democratic process.
You guys are just the same as the lefties. Socialism is a fantastic political system, just that no one has done it right yet.
Guff. It isn't the fault of Brexit that politicians and administrators have been too shit to actually change any of the laws that we are no longer required to follow. Precisely nobody during Brexit on either side argued that we'd remain subject to every damaging piece of EU idiocy on the statute book. On the contrary, your lot warned us of a dangerous 'bonfire of workers rights' and the deeply concerning advent of 'Singapore on Sea'.
However, it seems likely that the next Government will remove EU laws and take full advantage of our freedoms. Just rejoice at that news.
Jam tomorrow, eh?
As I said, just like the socialists. Next time will be different, just you wait.
Small children could have told you that nothing would change because - wait for it - we were and are a sovereign nation and by voting Brexit you don't all of a sudden change British politicians for some other species.
And as for "it seems likely..." which I assume relates to Reform winning the next GE. Well that is the most bonkers thing on here I've heard for a while and I'm happy to bet against it happening.
It must be embarrassing having to deploy these shite arguments here time after time because of your peculiar predilection for the sclerotic superstate and our temporary membership thereof.
"But if only we had had different politicians wah, wah, wah"
It would make us a "rule taker" once more, and I very much doubt would deliver anything like the benefits mooted, but it would hobble us.
Which means there's probably a real risk that negotiator extraordinaire Starmer does it.
Don’t worry, Starmer is far too lacking in moral fibre (ie courage) to do anything like that. I’m mildly surprised about how cowardly Starmer & co have been. The pre GE suggestion was that Labour were only pretending to be Tory lite to placate the red tops and would pivot progressive when they had their majority. Turns out they were exactly who they said they were.
With added complications courtesy of Slab up here. I'm now totally confused what I'd be voting for if I voted for Slab - certainly for Holyrood and even for Westminster (which is the extra surprise amuse-bouche - it really shouldn't be for a Unionist party trying to out-Unionist th e others at present).
The line being pushed by Labour friendly media in Scotland, ie most of it, is that fresh faced, idealistic Sarwar (lol) is being constrained by reactionary Starmer & co. In truth Sarwar is more charmlessly centrist than Starmer, and the unspoken assumption that the good ship SLab would rise on a UK tide of progressive positivity has been mercilessly battered.
Bonkers talk about Brexit and a leak from Lab to Reform or somesuch.
Aside from some nebulous idea about "sovereignty", or the ability to eat bananas that look how we goddamn want, the major motivating force behind Brexit was immigration. Surely no one can dispute that.
And since Brexit, immigration has seen a huge increase. While I'm not 100% sure peoples' lives have improved demonstrably. I challenge people, even political sophisticates on here, to name me three sovereign measure that we have implemented now that we couldn't have in the EU (I happen to know one or two).
Which circles back to immigration. Brexit has failed on the one tangible measure that so many people voted for it to address.
People then worry about what voters might think of any party that doesn't continue it.
Madness.
The 'nebulous' idea of sovereignty is the difference between AI growth and investment here and in the EU, and why we aren't at risk of nationally being affected if more countries like Slovakia and Hungary and Germany try and return to 'business as usual' with Russia the way EU member states might be.
The right to determine your own destiny is no small thing.
I'd also argue the EU is in the worst of worlds. It lacks the competitive spirit of numerous nation states doing their own thing to try and be the best, and it lacks the same degree of uniformity and common policy (with corresponding advantage for its relatively large size) that China and the USA has. It's integrated enough to meddle, too integrated to be competitive on a member state level, not integrated enough to take real advantage of its size.
It is mealy mouthed dishonesty to ask for measures that we 'have' implemented, given that as Topping knows, we still have virtually all the EU law that we had when we left on the statute book. Asking what we 'could' implement would be something else entirely.
It's our politicians deciding what to do for our country. Sadly no one asked @Luckyguy1983 what he would do so we are left with the democratic process.
You guys are just the same as the lefties. Socialism is a fantastic political system, just that no one has done it right yet.
Guff. It isn't the fault of Brexit that politicians and administrators have been too shit to actually change any of the laws that we are no longer required to follow. Precisely nobody during Brexit on either side argued that we'd remain subject to every damaging piece of EU idiocy on the statute book. On the contrary, your lot warned us of a dangerous 'bonfire of workers rights' and the deeply concerning advent of 'Singapore on Sea'.
However, it seems likely that the next Government will remove EU laws and take full advantage of our freedoms. Just rejoice at that news.
Jam tomorrow, eh?
As I said, just like the socialists. Next time will be different, just you wait.
Small children could have told you that nothing would change because - wait for it - we were and are a sovereign nation and by voting Brexit you don't all of a sudden change British politicians for some other species.
And as for "it seems likely..." which I assume relates to Reform winning the next GE. Well that is the most bonkers thing on here I've heard for a while and I'm happy to bet against it happening.
It must be embarrassing having to deploy these shite arguments here time after time because of your peculiar predilection for the sclerotic superstate and our temporary membership thereof.
"But if only we had had different politicians wah, wah, wah"
Just listen to yourself.
It is somewhat of a feature of national politics that Governments operate their own policies. Thankfully (unlike with the EU) the facility exists to dispose of them democratically. That happened to the last lot, and looks set to happen to the current excrescence.
This is off-topic but from yesterday's thread, especially for Blanche.
Infinity is not a real number. You cannot reason that if infinity = infinity + 3 or infinity = 3 * infinity (and infinity isn't 0) then the infinity on the LHS must mean something different from (and larger than) the infinity on the RHS.
I'll tell you something else that can be put into one-to-one correspondence with the set of positive integers. This is the set of all numbers that can be defined using a finite string of characters taken from a finite collection of characters. For example, the collection can be the 26 letters of the alphabet used in English (feel free to add in the yogh and whatever else appears in the OED), plus the space character, plus some punctuation marks, and feel free to add in some Greek characters too, and you can add in some mathematical symbols such as + if you like. Add in capitals. Add in whatever you want. Just keep it finite. Let's say you have 100 altogether. All numbers definable using a finite number of these characters (e.g. "The result of dividing a circle's circumference by its diameter") are countable. There are the same number of them as there are of positive integers. It's called aleph null.
To put them into one-to-one correspondence with the positive integers, all you have to do is count up all the one-character ones (there are no more than 100 of them), then the two-character ones (there are no more than 10000), the three-character ones (no more than 1 million), etc.
So all the irrational numbers you can define using English - they make a countable set too.
Tons of people, including for some reason many politicians, go by something other than their first name. Saying its for his character is such a lame way of making that quite normal thing look phony.
It is phony
His family don't call him Boris. They use his first name.
He only uses it "professionally", when running for office.
It's a character.
I think to an extent all politicians are characters. They have to be. Who we are in private is likely going to be a bit different to the public appearance. This is at the heart of the Whatsapp issues - people blow off steam, say mean/offensive things etc all the time, but not in public. When it gets out then people get very upset (or in some cases get performatively upset). I think Gordon Brown genuinely did think that he had had tea with a bigot and said so. He would never have said that knowingly on camera. So yes Johnson uses Boris as an act. Fine. But Starmer is also playing a character. They all are.
Jeremy Vine tells a good story about Boris. As a guest speaker Boris turns up late, just before he is on, appears hassled, asks who the audience is and asks questions, scribbles stuff on a scrap of paper, gives up, goes on and does a cracking speech.
Jeremy is impressed.
Months later Jeremy is in the same position again with him (and others) waiting for Boris just before he is due to go on stage for a speech. Boris goes through an identical routine.
Jeremy now realises it is an act.
No criticism. He does it well.
PS I have organised a number of big events and always got grilled by the keynote speaker. The most interesting was by a magician who wanted me to identify individuals with specific traits.
Yes, I've heard that story too. There were some more details - about how he started telling exactly the same joke and 'forgot' the punchline in exactly the same place both times. As you say, a performative character, very amusing in roles such as speaker or compere or entertainer, where he couldn't do much harm.
If as a politician, behind the act he'd actually spent hours mastering the detail of his brief and could bring real knowledge, analysis and understanding to what he was doing, you'd almost be prepared to forgive the performative shtick. Sadly the act wasn't a disguise behind which lurked a capable and conscientious genius, but a cover for actual sloppy and casual incompetence, that had allowed him to get away with skipping the real work since his schooldays.
A friend, years ago, attended one of those city dinners. The guest was Vinny Jones. Who did the raffle thing. When they tried to open the raffle tumbler thing, the lock was apparently jammed. So Vinny Jones stomped it to pieces to get the tickets out.
A week or two later the same friend got an invite to another dinner. The guest was Vinny Jones. The stomping was repeated.....
Its astonishing that this sort of nonsense is still being pumped out. Regulatory alignment "could" result in 2.2% of additional growth.
If you take the example of AI, for example, it is possible that non alignment with the overly restrictive EU regime "could" create x% of additional growth in the UK (and possibly result in us being taken over by AI, but that is another issue).
Whether we want to align with the EU in any given area is something that is in our discretion. There are some areas where it makes sense to do so. Doing so effectively requires mutual recognition at any given point in time. It is up to both sides to decide whether or not to grant that, whether we have the same regulations or not. If the price of mutual recognition is that we undertake to impose any restriction dreamed up by Brussels in the future it is too high a price to pay.
It's nonsense essentially all the trade experts agree with. Removing trade frictions increases trade, which in turn increases GDP. It won't all happen because the EU won't sign up to it all. But some will
Our law, for all practical purposes, remains EU law but that has not stopped the EU refusing to grant mutual recognition of our standards in agriculture etc. And that is their right, just as it is our right to do the same. Aligned regulation (which we basically have) achieves nothing without this.
The EU want to continue taking a lot of fish out of our waters. They seem to be offering a deal on mutual recognition in exchange. It is for our government to decide if that is a good deal for UK plc or not. As with all deals the devil will be in the detail of what is being given for what.
The point in your first paragraph is that the EU would be required by treaty to accept UK goods on equal basis for as long as the UK is dynamically aligned to their regulations. That is difference from now. The previous government refused to accept alignment but didn't make any moves to move out of alignment because it doesn't make sense to do so. Hence why the whole thing is a mistake.
Comments
You guys are just the same as the lefties. Socialism is a fantastic political system, just that no one has done it right yet.
His policies (leaving aside all the damage he is doing to rule of law, international reputation and influence, US economy, building a future, US security and the rest) are focused resolutely on the past.
His energy policies are pre-renewables, focused on fossil fuels - 1970s, Since the 1970s UK demand for oil has approximately halved for example, unlike the USA. One of our reasons for continuing a rapid pivot to renewables is a greater degree self-protection from the lobotomised elephant which is now the USA.
His social policies eg around women as second class citizens are 1950s or maybe 1920s.
His policies around race go back even further.
His international and economic policies are based on an imaginary version of the 1890s, when William Randolph Hearst could foment a war by fake media coverage and the Goverment would follow through.
A future will not be created by racing backwards.
US is headed (only one month in!!!) to worst constitutional crisis in decades if not longer.
Strictly speaking that’s just bragging without the humble.
Which is another resemblance to Boulangerism - Forward! To! The! Past!
Claridge’s is the best, you can wear anything and they don’t bat an eyelid.
I associated dress codes with night clubs which have vodka/RedBull on special.
Is this a baguette version of "let them eat cake"?
(Goes to look it up with breakfast.)
Update: I see he topped himself. Self-defenestration is one possible solution for Trump, I guess.
I don't wish to humblebrag, but in the last three years I have stayed, inter alia, and in rough order, in hotels of all kinds (tiny hostels to global top 50) in these countries:
Sri Lanka
Turkey
The USA
Germany
Greece
Georgia
Armenia
Turkey (again)
Montenegro
Italy
Portugal
Spain
The USA (again)
Iceland
Thailand
Egypt
Spain (again)
The USA (again)
Poland
Ukraine
France
Italy
The Maldives
Cambodia
Thailand
Cambodia (again)
Colombia
France (again)
Italy
Moldova
Ukraine (again)
France (again)
Montenegro (again)
Canada
Kosovo
Switzerland
Japan
South Korea
The Philippines
Colombia (again)
Thailand (again)
Myanmar
Thailand (again)
I submit that my experience of hotels is just a tiny tiny tiny bit wider than yours, and my description of the ground floor brasserie of the Novotel Sukhmvit on soi 4, Klong Thoei, Bangkok, as "posh-ish", is therefore exact and well-founded
Like fine landscapes, posh/top hotels or restaurants are best treated as a *very* occasional thing. A treat.
If you experience them all the time, you do not get nearly as much out of the experience. You become jaded.
*Turned out to be a man of straw.
And it's amusing hearing an Israeli criticising our government given how utterly and completely incompetent, corrupt and generally dire theirs is. Starmer may be a dismal failure as PM, but he hasn't had the unique distinction of being an indicted war criminal while being wanted in his own country for staggering corruption. Nor has he had to wage a war for national survival because of his own government's complacency and incompetence.
6.5/10.
Here and now? Musk has to be given access. He can't legally have access but Trump is above the law. The courts can rule as they like - they can't enforce a government to obey if the government ignores them or better still discards their authority.
It isn't a constitutional crisis. Trump said he would act as a dictator on day 1. And won the election. You get what you voted for, and this is the result.
Probably because Lincoln is on it.
However, it seems likely that the next Government will remove EU laws and take full advantage of our freedoms. Just rejoice at that news.
1. It was more interesting to sit quietly and overhear a genuine and informed opinion - neither of them struck me as anti-British, it was said more in sorrow than in anger
2. As I've noted, I found it hard to contradict their opinions (so I did not try, also I didn't want to cause a scene over my seafood pasta (which was rather nice))
I refuse to stay at hotels that do not have a concierge.
My rather different assessment of Novotel is they can be very good value if you sign up to Accor's loyalty programme and book far enough ahead. And if the Novotel is fully booked, there's always an Ibis...
They are engaging with the legal process and appealing rulings.
As I said, just like the socialists. Next time will be different, just you wait.
Small children could have told you that nothing would change because - wait for it - we were and are a sovereign nation and by voting Brexit you don't all of a sudden change British politicians for some other species.
And as for "it seems likely..." which I assume relates to Reform winning the next GE. Well that is the most bonkers thing on here I've heard for a while and I'm happy to bet against it happening.
If Starmer went the odds are Labour members would choose Rayner over Streeting and Cooper. While more socialist than they are Rayner is also accepting of Brexit representing a strongly Leave seat. While Starmer was the one pushing for a second EU referendum in 2019
Ghana
Senegal
Chad
Somalia
Mozambique
Whereas the following countries have a lower trade openness index:
Israel
New Zealand
Australia
Japan
USA
Wouldn't most globetrotting Israelis have an English accent influenced by whatever country they studied / worked / lived in when younger ?
Or did this bloke just sound like Benny Net ?
https://th.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g293916-d15180337-Reviews-Novotel_Bangkok_Sukhumvit_4-Bangkok.html
... and it shares the same premises as the Ibis
However they have seperate doors leading to different lobbies, which then lead to the exact same lifts
So if you're staying at the Novotel (which I have done a few times) and your cab/tuktuk drops you at the wrong door from a jaunt in the city you then have a great test of your status anxiety. Do you just think "fuck it" and walk in the Ibis door as it is nearer, thereby mingling with all the @TheScreamingEagles types who barely ever go abroad, or do you walk an extra thirty feet and go in your proper plusher Novotel lobby, even though you will end up in the exact same lift?
I confess sometimes I have done the latter, which is absurdly shallow. I pretend it's coz it's more soothing with better aircon and leather seats and nicer well travelled people, but really it's just coz I don't want to be seen walking into an Ibis
How pathetic is that?
Money cannot buy class.
Think indeed about Bibi Netanyahu speaking English. That is an Israeli accent. It is one of the most distinctive accents in the "Anglophone" world
I'm a Hilton whore, and I struggle to see the distinctive differences between Hilton / DoubleTree or Hampton / Garden Inn. Or where the posher brand is an older property difference between any of them.
Non EU immigration rose initially but Rishi and Cleverly cut it back with tighter visa and wage requirements for immigrants workers and their departments
Do any of our expats or people with Usonian links get any impression whether people are sticking it out or leaving?
I'm not very well connected, however the impression I get is that numbers of those who can are seeking to leave. And people asked to consider relocating there are thinking very carefully, with varying attitudes by different parts of the country, as it is so regionalised.
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP10-62/RP10-62.pdf
says
In the UK data suggest that from 1997 to 2009 6.8% of primary legislation (Statutes) and
14.1% of secondary legislation (Statutory Instruments) had a role in implementing EU
obligations, although the degree of involvement varied from passing reference to explicit
implementation.
"We cut taxes" you say as you increase taxes
"We cut migration" you say as you increase migration
"40 new hospitals" you say despite most not being new, or a hospital, or being scheduled this decade
"20,000 new police officers" you say having cut numbers so drastically that the effects are palpable
I can only assume that you actually believe this stuff, because otherwise you're all just massive liars. SO the question is why you believe this stuff? This is just adding - how on earth can you believe that an increase is a cut?
You see that 6 point deficit to Reform? That it keeps getting bigger? That they're taking the votes and members and donors off you? Its because you lie and lie and lie and they're stupid lies we can all see are lies.
So why do it?
The bar at the Corinthia is much better.
Novotel is a good example of this. Solidly upmarket in Asia, but not 5 star. Perceived as a mid range chain hotel in Europe
Hilton can be all over the place. Very much gone down hill in Europe/USA, stll OK in Asia, and high end in Africa/MENA
Guaranteed luxe worldwide would be Four Seasons, Aman, Belmond, Shangri-La etc
a) risen
b) fallen
c) stayed around the same level.
At Dukes you are only allowed two martinis. The last but one time I was there, I had just sat down when a guy from the other side of the room stood up, made to walk towards the door, and fell headfirst into a table on his way.
Nonetheless, it should indeed be the rule. Because three left me a gibbeing wreck, and I can generally handle martinis
Bibi’s dad lived to 102 which is depressing when considering how long Bibi might be exerting his malign influence on the world.
So that leaves a few Israeli politicians who are on the television.
Now Netanyahu lived in the USA when he was young and then returned to go to university there in his twenties and then worked there for a few more years.
That will have influenced his accent.
If he had lived instead in England, Australia or even a different part of the USA his accent would likely be different.
In fact I would twist the metaphor slightly - the senior people don't know how to plan the routes.
From what I hear, by-and-large junior ministers and civil servants are getting on pretty well with the job of flying the planes, but route planning and ATC is totally borked.
But maybe you're right, being known mononymously is maybe more common there, at least among footballers. We have royalty and pop stars.
There was a select band of people who were allowed more than 2 martinis. A friend made it to 3.75, once.
The Stafford is quite good - it hasn't disappeared up its own arse, as Dukes did.
And Netanyahu is a pretty classic example
If you watch TV and listen to Israeli vox pops that's what Israelis sound like. It is not particularly pretty, a little harsh, but maybe no worse than thick Strine or Saffer
With Musk and Trump gumming up the distribution of federal dollars, those red states may learn quite quickly how much they depend on their fellow Americans.
1. Yiddish, the old language (of so many)
2. Hebrew, the new language
3. The Arabic all around them
Plus smaller bits of American and British English?
Hint: There isn't one about straight bananas
Now I am sure you can find a few marginal ones, but most people won't want to get rid of them.
Also distinguish between the actual EU requirement and our gold plating.
PS Please quote the law and not something someone has made up.
Similarly, as a thought experiment, suppose Boris was right and the EU did tomorrow declare itself a single state. Overnight, a lot of what is now international trade would become internal but the man on the Parisian omnibus would notice no difference to the Euro in his pocket.
So yes Johnson uses Boris as an act. Fine. But Starmer is also playing a character. They all are.
A lesson to independent Ireland there, you too could have done it, with Gaelic. But you didn't
Having said all that, I had the chance to emigrate to America and turned it down. I would probably be wealthier, unhealthier and even more obsessed with politics!
I imagine there are Tel Avi, Jerusalem and Haifa accents, and kibbutzim and city ones.
"The modern Hebrew language is one of the most remarkable linguistic revivals in history. It went from being a primarily liturgical and scholarly language for nearly 1,500 years to becoming the spoken, national language of Israel in the 20th century. The revival was largely due to the efforts of Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, along with other Zionist pioneers and educators.
Ancient Hebrew and Its Decline
Hebrew was originally the spoken language of the ancient Israelites, developing around 1200 BCE. It was the language of the Hebrew Bible and remained in use for centuries. However, following the Babylonian exile (6th century BCE) and later the Roman destruction of the Second Temple (70 CE), Hebrew gradually ceased to be a commonly spoken vernacular. Instead, it became a "holy language" (Lashon HaKodesh) used in religious texts
Eliezer Ben-Yehuda – The Driving Force
Eliezer Ben-Yehuda (1858–1922) is often credited as the father of modern Hebrew. Born in Lithuania, he was deeply influenced by European nationalist movements and the idea that a revived Jewish nation needed a modern, spoken Hebrew language.
Standardizing Hebrew: Ben-Yehuda worked tirelessly to modernize Hebrew, making it suitable for everyday speech. He created new words, borrowing from biblical, rabbinic, and foreign sources. He coined words for modern concepts such as "train" (רכבת, rakevet), "newspaper" (עיתון, iton), and "ice cream" (גלידה, glida).
First Hebrew-Speaking Household: Ben-Yehuda insisted that his family speak only Hebrew, even raising his son, Itamar Ben-Avi, as the first modern native Hebrew speaker.
The Hebrew Dictionary: He compiled the first modern Hebrew dictionary, a monumental effort to document and expand the language.
Educational Efforts: He promoted Hebrew as the primary language of Jewish schools in Palestine, replacing Yiddish, Arabic, and other languages.
Challenges and Resistance
Not all Jews embraced the idea of speaking Hebrew as a modern language. Orthodox Jewish communities resisted, viewing Hebrew as sacred and unsuitable for daily use. Secular Jews who spoke Yiddish or other languages also opposed the change. Despite this, Ben-Yehuda and his supporters succeeded in making Hebrew the language of Jewish settlement in Palestine.
Institutionalization and Growth
In 1922, the British Mandate authorities recognized Hebrew as one of the three official languages of Palestine (alongside English and Arabic).
With the establishment of Israel in 1948, Hebrew became the official language of the state."
Jeremy is impressed.
Months later Jeremy is in the same position again with him (and others) waiting for Boris just before he is due to go on stage for a speech. Boris goes through an identical routine.
Jeremy now realises it is an act.
No criticism. He does it well.
PS I have organised a number of big events and always got grilled by the keynote speaker. The most interesting was by a magician who wanted me to identify individuals with specific traits.
https://www.justsecurity.org/107087/tracker-litigation-legal-challenges-trump-administration/
The Corinthia bar has disastrous decor. But the cocktails are very good. And the pianist at the end of the bar has talent.
If as a politician, behind the act he'd actually spent hours mastering the detail of his brief and could bring real knowledge, analysis and understanding to what he was doing, you'd almost be prepared to forgive the performative shtick. Sadly the act wasn't a disguise behind which lurked a capable and conscientious genius, but a cover for actual sloppy and casual incompetence, that had allowed him to get away with skipping the real work since his schooldays.
Just listen to yourself.
Infinity is not a real number. You cannot reason that if infinity = infinity + 3 or infinity = 3 * infinity (and infinity isn't 0) then the infinity on the LHS must mean something different from (and larger than) the infinity on the RHS.
I'll tell you something else that can be put into one-to-one correspondence with the set of positive integers. This is the set of all numbers that can be defined using a finite string of characters taken from a finite collection of characters. For example, the collection can be the 26 letters of the alphabet used in English (feel free to add in the yogh and whatever else appears in the OED), plus the space character, plus some punctuation marks, and feel free to add in some Greek characters too, and you can add in some mathematical symbols such as + if you like. Add in capitals. Add in whatever you want. Just keep it finite. Let's say you have 100 altogether. All numbers definable using a finite number of these characters (e.g. "The result of dividing a circle's circumference by its diameter") are countable. There are the same number of them as there are of positive integers. It's called aleph null.
To put them into one-to-one correspondence with the positive integers, all you have to do is count up all the one-character ones (there are no more than 100 of them), then the two-character ones (there are no more than 10000), the three-character ones (no more than 1 million), etc.
So all the irrational numbers you can define using English - they make a countable set too.
A week or two later the same friend got an invite to another dinner. The guest was Vinny Jones. The stomping was repeated.....