Barrister working for Letby says Letby is innocent.
As increasingly do a plethora of medical experts who are not working for Letby.
There are enough question marks to warrant serious review of the case now. I would like that to be done with an open mind, which it does not seem you have.
A woman is sitting at her recently deceased husband’s funeral. A man leans in to her and asks, “Do you mind if I say a word?”. “No, go right ahead”, the woman replies.
The man stands, clears his throat, says “Plethora”, and sits back down.
“Thanks”, the woman says, “that means a lot”.
Anyway, I have no role in reviewing Letby's guilt, so my openmindedness or not doesn't really matter. The CCRC is reviewing a submission from her lawyers. I'm sure they will review this with open minds. They can, should they so decide, send it back to the appeals court (which has already rejected 4 appeals, something I'm sure they did with open minds) to re-consider.
The ability of Letby's supporters to organise a publicity campaign that sucks in a plethora of people is not, to my mind, evidence of question marks over the case. But the CCRC will not be concerned with that, only with the evidence and the law.
NEW YORK (AP) — Dow drops 1,150 points as US stocks see the biggest declines in a global sell-off following Trump's latest tariff volley.
The left talk the talk about inequality and asset wealth, but Trump walks the walk.
@timsteno *APPLE SHARES FALL 8.5%, ERASING $255 BILLION IN VALUE
What do you think is the correct value of an Apple share without Trump?
I think yesterday Americans had $225 Billion dollars more in their pension pots
Was that fair value or not? Would you have been a buyer or a seller at those prices?
If you assume that markets are efficient and the market price will be fair value based on all the facts at hand.
So yes prior to Trump yesterday the price was fair value and today it’s still fair value but worth a lot less as the market foresees significantly smaller profits going forward
NEW YORK (AP) — Dow drops 1,150 points as US stocks see the biggest declines in a global sell-off following Trump's latest tariff volley.
The left talk the talk about inequality and asset wealth, but Trump walks the walk.
@timsteno *APPLE SHARES FALL 8.5%, ERASING $255 BILLION IN VALUE
What do you think is the correct value of an Apple share without Trump?
I think yesterday Americans had $225 Billion dollars more in their pension pots
Was that fair value or not? Would you have been a buyer or a seller at those prices?
Pack it in, william. You're just being silly now.
It would be a bit boring if nobody were defending the tariff gambit.
You are not only boring, you're not actually defending the tariff gambit. Unless you sincerely believe that a stock market crash is a good thing because you believe it will reduce inequality. Not that you've ever cared about inequality before today.
So please make an actual sincere defence of the tariff gambit, instead of tedious trolling and endless what-aboutery.
There's an Electoral Calculus MRP poll, partially reported as:
Reform 227 seats, Labour 180 seats Conservative 130 seats.
Despite the criticisms, on current polling, Kemi would be a part of the government, either through a Con/Lab Grand Coalition, or a Con/Reform coalition.
That's a comfortable RefCon majority.
Nigel keeping his head down over Trump tariffs whilst Starmer and Badenoch put their feet in their mouths.
What exactly would you (and Roger?) have Starmer say and do?
Not equivocate like an idiot*. He's a rabbit in the headlights whilst Von Der Leyen and Carney have taken the bull by the horns. They are the new Leaders of the West while Starmer performs lapdog tricks for the smelly one.
* I may be proved wrong.
Why is politics some sort of beauty parade over who 'leads the West' for you? It is an utterly facile and corrosive view of statecraft.
Give me a Swiss style state any day, where you never hear about them in the news, but they just keep going being democratic and getting comparatively richer as everyone else shits the bed trying to 'lead the West'.
Good point. I am a political geek, like many of us here, but I cannot name a single Swiss politician.
There's an Electoral Calculus MRP poll, partially reported as:
Reform 227 seats, Labour 180 seats Conservative 130 seats.
Despite the criticisms, on current polling, Kemi would be a part of the government, either through a Con/Lab Grand Coalition, or a Con/Reform coalition.
That's a comfortable RefCon majority.
Nigel keeping his head down over Trump tariffs whilst Starmer and Badenoch put their feet in their mouths.
What exactly would you (and Roger?) have Starmer say and do?
Not equivocate like an idiot*. He's a rabbit in the headlights whilst Von Der Leyen and Carney have taken the bull by the horns. They are the new Leaders of the West while Starmer performs lapdog tricks for the smelly one.
* I may be proved wrong.
Why is politics some sort of beauty parade over who 'leads the West' for you? It is an utterly facile and corrosive view of statecraft.
Give me a Swiss style state any day, where you never hear about them in the news, but they just keep going being democratic and getting comparatively richer as everyone else shits the bed trying to 'lead the West'.
Good point. I am a political geek, like many of us here, but I cannot name a single Swiss politician.
NEW YORK (AP) — Dow drops 1,150 points as US stocks see the biggest declines in a global sell-off following Trump's latest tariff volley.
The left talk the talk about inequality and asset wealth, but Trump walks the walk.
@timsteno *APPLE SHARES FALL 8.5%, ERASING $255 BILLION IN VALUE
What do you think is the correct value of an Apple share without Trump?
I think yesterday Americans had $225 Billion dollars more in their pension pots
Was that fair value or not? Would you have been a buyer or a seller at those prices?
Pack it in, william. You're just being silly now.
It would be a bit boring if nobody were defending the tariff gambit.
It’s not a game
No, be fair: running the world economy isn't a game, but chatting here IS a game, a bit. Consensus is a bit boring. At the very least, we need to be able to test that consensus. William is gamely providing that role.
To be clear, I think the tariffs are a poor idea. But I'm much happier coming to that conclusion if there is a voice providing the opposite view, even if it's not sincere.
One of the reasons why tariffs have historically failed to “bring back” jobs to an already wealthy country like the United States is twofold.
Let’s say you “succeed” and make it so expensive to import into your country, that you can only viably produce it domestically.
1) Who the hell is going to buy your crap? People couldn’t afford your stuff because you’re too expensive to begin with. And now, since countries retaliated, you are even more expensive as an exporter.
2) Your domestic economy gets crushed by inflation. $2 Chinese t shirts are now $20 Wisconsin t shirts. Domestic consumers cannot afford it either.
DETROIT, April 3 (Reuters) - Stellantis NV, maker of Ram trucks and Jeeps, said on Thursday it was temporarily laying off 900 workers at five U.S. facilities after President Donald Trump's tariffs were announced, and temporarily pausing production at an assembly plant in Mexico and in Canada.
NEW YORK (AP) — Dow drops 1,150 points as US stocks see the biggest declines in a global sell-off following Trump's latest tariff volley.
The left talk the talk about inequality and asset wealth, but Trump walks the walk.
@timsteno *APPLE SHARES FALL 8.5%, ERASING $255 BILLION IN VALUE
What do you think is the correct value of an Apple share without Trump?
I think yesterday Americans had $225 Billion dollars more in their pension pots
Was that fair value or not? Would you have been a buyer or a seller at those prices?
Pack it in, william. You're just being silly now.
It would be a bit boring if nobody were defending the tariff gambit.
You are not only boring, you're not actually defending the tariff gambit. Unless you sincerely believe that a stock market crash is a good thing because you believe it will reduce inequality. Not that you've ever cared about inequality before today.
So please make an actual sincere defence of the tariff gambit, instead of tedious trolling and endless what-aboutery.
All things being equal, lower asset prices mean less inequality. To arrive at the opposite conclusion relies on some variant of the trickle-down theory.
There was a discussion on here a few weeks ago about the advisability of investing in US stocks, especially tech ones. I hope those who were gung-ho were just saying it and did not actually put their money where their mouths were.
The currencies are the ones to be watching. The last time I looked, both the Euro and Sterling were up quite a lot against the dollar. As I understand it, that reduces the cost of US tariffs for us but makes reciprocal ones far more damaging for the Yanks.
The currencies are the ones to be watching. The last time I looked, both the Euro and Sterling were up quite a lot against the dollar. As I understand it, that reduces the cost of US tariffs for us but makes reciprocal ones far more damaging for the Yanks.
But it also makes our exports more expensive in the US, and as tariffs are less than 100%, we lose overall from a stronger currency.
Anyway, don't forget the one golden rule - markets always overshoot (see Dornbusch's Nobel Prize winning insight in 1976), foreign exchange ones in particular.
The currencies are the ones to be watching. The last time I looked, both the Euro and Sterling were up quite a lot against the dollar. As I understand it, that reduces the cost of US tariffs for us but makes reciprocal ones far more damaging for the Yanks.
If the Euro and Sterling are up against the Dollar it compounds the tariffs by making it even more expensive for American buyers of goods priced in Euros or Sterling.
NEW YORK (AP) — Dow drops 1,150 points as US stocks see the biggest declines in a global sell-off following Trump's latest tariff volley.
The left talk the talk about inequality and asset wealth, but Trump walks the walk.
@timsteno *APPLE SHARES FALL 8.5%, ERASING $255 BILLION IN VALUE
What do you think is the correct value of an Apple share without Trump?
I think yesterday Americans had $225 Billion dollars more in their pension pots
Was that fair value or not? Would you have been a buyer or a seller at those prices?
Pack it in, william. You're just being silly now.
It would be a bit boring if nobody were defending the tariff gambit.
You are not only boring, you're not actually defending the tariff gambit. Unless you sincerely believe that a stock market crash is a good thing because you believe it will reduce inequality. Not that you've ever cared about inequality before today.
So please make an actual sincere defence of the tariff gambit, instead of tedious trolling and endless what-aboutery.
All things being equal, lower asset prices mean less inequality. To arrive at the opposite conclusion relies on some variant of the trickle-down theory.
"Asset" prices is a terribly misused term as it lumps together different classes of things.
"Assets" like houses going down in price means more affordability on a cost people are obliged to pay to have a roof over their heads, so makes people who need to buy/rent those things better off, while those who own them are worse off.
"Assets" like stocks going down in price doesn't boost anyone's affordability since nobody needs stocks or shares. Their prices going down harms those who have them and only benefits those who can afford to buy them for cheap expecting future gains.
Lower inequality is not a good thing if that lowered inequality is made up solely from losers and not winners.
The currencies are the ones to be watching. The last time I looked, both the Euro and Sterling were up quite a lot against the dollar. As I understand it, that reduces the cost of US tariffs for us but makes reciprocal ones far more damaging for the Yanks.
If the Euro and Sterling are up against the Dollar it compounds the tariffs by making it even more expensive for American buyers of goods priced in Euros or Sterling.
Absolutely - or it makes it easier for producers of those goods to absorb some of the cost of the tariffs, while making it much harder for US producers hit by reciprocal tariffs to do the same.
The currencies are the ones to be watching. The last time I looked, both the Euro and Sterling were up quite a lot against the dollar. As I understand it, that reduces the cost of US tariffs for us but makes reciprocal ones far more damaging for the Yanks.
If the Euro and Sterling are up against the Dollar it compounds the tariffs by making it even more expensive for American buyers of goods priced in Euros or Sterling.
Hopefully it makes petrol cheaper. Far too expensive at the minute.
Looking at currency and stock market reactions to the US tariffs, now is absolutely not the time to be offering concessions to the Trump administration.
The currencies are the ones to be watching. The last time I looked, both the Euro and Sterling were up quite a lot against the dollar. As I understand it, that reduces the cost of US tariffs for us but makes reciprocal ones far more damaging for the Yanks.
If the Euro and Sterling are up against the Dollar it compounds the tariffs by making it even more expensive for American buyers of goods priced in Euros or Sterling.
Absolutely - or it makes it easier for producers of those goods to absorb some of the cost of the tariffs, while making it much harder for US producers hit by reciprocal tariffs to do the same.
No, it's the other way round. It makes it harder for them to absorb the cost of the tariffs. On the other hand a weaker Dollar offsets the impact of reciprocal tariffs on US producers.
The currencies are the ones to be watching. The last time I looked, both the Euro and Sterling were up quite a lot against the dollar. As I understand it, that reduces the cost of US tariffs for us but makes reciprocal ones far more damaging for the Yanks.
If the Euro and Sterling are up against the Dollar it compounds the tariffs by making it even more expensive for American buyers of goods priced in Euros or Sterling.
Absolutely - or it makes it easier for producers of those goods to absorb some of the cost of the tariffs, while making it much harder for US producers hit by reciprocal tariffs to do the same.
Wrong way round.
A weaker currency makes exports more competitive and imports more expensive, while a stronger currency does the inverse.
So a stronger pound means British exporters are less competitive while imports are cheaper (hence hopefully cheaper petrol which is priced in dollars).
A weaker dollar means American exporters are more competitive, so potentially able to absorb some of the impact of the tariffs, while making imports into America more expensive - on top of which tariffs are now due making them even more expensive.
America is due a great wallop of inflation with this. A falling currency is inflationary and the tax rises announced yesterday are inflationary.
Can I have a gentle wonder and leave myself open to correction of advice, please.
AToW goods, from Nike trainers to Landrovers, are imported into the USA free of any sort of import tax. Presumably a crate, carton or whatever arrives at the dock and may or may not be inspected to ensure it is what the documentation says it is. Under the new arrangements somebody is going to have to ensure that each case etc has been valued and somewhere money has been guaranteed by someone? How much extra time, and more importantly, manpower..... sorry personpower ..... is that going to require. And how far is that going to clog the system?
I've been thinking of the time I was checking exports of pharmaceuticals to Nigeria. At the time Nigeria was going through one of its bouts of financial problems and we had to ensure that the quality control documentation for each shipment was in the Bank in New York the same time as adequate monies were in the Bank.
The currencies are the ones to be watching. The last time I looked, both the Euro and Sterling were up quite a lot against the dollar. As I understand it, that reduces the cost of US tariffs for us but makes reciprocal ones far more damaging for the Yanks.
If the Euro and Sterling are up against the Dollar it compounds the tariffs by making it even more expensive for American buyers of goods priced in Euros or Sterling.
Absolutely - or it makes it easier for producers of those goods to absorb some of the cost of the tariffs, while making it much harder for US producers hit by reciprocal tariffs to do the same.
No, it's the other way round. It makes it harder for them to absorb the cost of the tariffs. On the other hand a weaker Dollar offsets the impact of reciprocal tariffs on US producers.
How does that work? If the tariff on goods worth $100 is $10 for a UK producer - and the Sterling price of that $10 is now lower than it was, there is more potential for the UK producer to swallow some of the cost, isn't there? Likewise, if the tariff on a US producer's goods worth Euros 100 is Euros 20 and the dollar price of that Euros 20 is higher than it was, there is less potential for the US producer to swallow some of the cost, isn't there? What am I missing here?
There's an Electoral Calculus MRP poll, partially reported as:
Reform 227 seats, Labour 180 seats Conservative 130 seats.
Despite the criticisms, on current polling, Kemi would be a part of the government, either through a Con/Lab Grand Coalition, or a Con/Reform coalition.
That's a comfortable RefCon majority.
Nigel keeping his head down over Trump tariffs whilst Starmer and Badenoch put their feet in their mouths.
What exactly would you (and Roger?) have Starmer say and do?
Not equivocate like an idiot*. He's a rabbit in the headlights whilst Von Der Leyen and Carney have taken the bull by the horns. They are the new Leaders of the West while Starmer performs lapdog tricks for the smelly one.
* I may be proved wrong.
Why is politics some sort of beauty parade over who 'leads the West' for you? It is an utterly facile and corrosive view of statecraft.
Give me a Swiss style state any day, where you never hear about them in the news, but they just keep going being democratic and getting comparatively richer as everyone else shits the bed trying to 'lead the West'.
If this is James O'Brien, can somebody tell him to start talking about the inaccessible Silvertown Tunnel disabled people bus !
Alternatively can he just shut up. His show is low rent rage bait where he gets inarticulate people to call up to just be condescending to them. Prick.
You have a whole raft of right wing commentators ( LBC has a shed load throughout the day, Ferrari, Swarbrick and Dale) in the UK broadcast media, please don't deny us Centrist Dads our token centre-left winger. host.
I’m complaining about the format of his show not his politics. 🙄
Fair enough, I'm awarding you a Ray Liotta.
I'd rather listen to a three hour O' Brexit monologue than his Idiot's Corner callers. I quite like Mystery Hour too.
But he doubtless lurks on PB and snaffles our ideas.
I’d rather listen to neither personally. Those shows, from what I see on my Twitter timeline are hardly about informing people or an informative debate.
I’d rather watch some old TV. I’m currently rewatching New Tricks, Paul Temple (with the incredibly suave Francis Matthews, voice of Cpt Scarlet) and Wycliffe. Which is remarkably good.
NEW YORK (AP) — Dow drops 1,150 points as US stocks see the biggest declines in a global sell-off following Trump's latest tariff volley.
The left talk the talk about inequality and asset wealth, but Trump walks the walk.
@timsteno *APPLE SHARES FALL 8.5%, ERASING $255 BILLION IN VALUE
What do you think is the correct value of an Apple share without Trump?
I think yesterday Americans had $225 Billion dollars more in their pension pots
Was that fair value or not? Would you have been a buyer or a seller at those prices?
Pack it in, william. You're just being silly now.
It would be a bit boring if nobody were defending the tariff gambit.
It’s not a game
No it isn’t, it’s deadly serious and there are plenty of voices criticising his approach but others, and you get them on CNBC or Yahoo Finance, defending this approach.
We are in uncharted territory. It does not hurt to get an alternative perspective on whether or not this is actually rational or will work.
Scott Bessent certainly is no fool either.
We will see if these last the course or are a short term gambit for negotiations.
The currencies are the ones to be watching. The last time I looked, both the Euro and Sterling were up quite a lot against the dollar. As I understand it, that reduces the cost of US tariffs for us but makes reciprocal ones far more damaging for the Yanks.
If the Euro and Sterling are up against the Dollar it compounds the tariffs by making it even more expensive for American buyers of goods priced in Euros or Sterling.
Absolutely - or it makes it easier for producers of those goods to absorb some of the cost of the tariffs, while making it much harder for US producers hit by reciprocal tariffs to do the same.
No, it's the other way round. It makes it harder for them to absorb the cost of the tariffs. On the other hand a weaker Dollar offsets the impact of reciprocal tariffs on US producers.
How does that work? If the tariff on goods worth $100 is $10 for a UK producer - and the Sterling price of that $10 is now lower than it was, there is more potential for the UK producer to swallow some of the cost, isn't there? Likewise, if the tariff on a US producer's goods worth Euros 100 is Euros 20 and the dollar price of that Euros 20 is higher than it was, there is less potential for the US producer to swallow some of the cost, isn't there? What am I missing here?
You have the maths the wrong way round.
Imagine an exchange rate of 0.8 dollars to the pound and a transaction of $100 = £80. Now add a 10% tariff so the US consumer has to pay $110 so that the UK producer gets their £80. If the pound weakens then it requires fewer dollars in order for the UK producder to still receive £80 so they can offset the cost of the tariff. If the pound strengthens then their goods become even more expensive in the US.
NEW YORK (AP) — Dow drops 1,150 points as US stocks see the biggest declines in a global sell-off following Trump's latest tariff volley.
The left talk the talk about inequality and asset wealth, but Trump walks the walk.
@timsteno *APPLE SHARES FALL 8.5%, ERASING $255 BILLION IN VALUE
What do you think is the correct value of an Apple share without Trump?
I think yesterday Americans had $225 Billion dollars more in their pension pots
Was that fair value or not? Would you have been a buyer or a seller at those prices?
If you assume that markets are efficient and the market price will be fair value based on all the facts at hand.
So yes prior to Trump yesterday the price was fair value and today it’s still fair value but worth a lot less as the market foresees significantly smaller profits going forward
Exactly. The market is worrying earnings and profits will be adversely impacted and is marking down accordingly. Once it becomes clearer it may rebound or may go further down.
Comments
The man stands, clears his throat, says “Plethora”, and sits back down.
“Thanks”, the woman says, “that means a lot”.
Anyway, I have no role in reviewing Letby's guilt, so my openmindedness or not doesn't really matter. The CCRC is reviewing a submission from her lawyers. I'm sure they will review this with open minds. They can, should they so decide, send it back to the appeals court (which has already rejected 4 appeals, something I'm sure they did with open minds) to re-consider.
The ability of Letby's supporters to organise a publicity campaign that sucks in a plethora of people is not, to my mind, evidence of question marks over the case. But the CCRC will not be concerned with that, only with the evidence and the law.
So yes prior to Trump yesterday the price was fair value and today it’s still fair value but worth a lot less as the market foresees significantly smaller profits going forward
https://x.com/Matt_Turnerr/status/1907792432336392465
So please make an actual sincere defence of the tariff gambit, instead of tedious trolling and endless what-aboutery.
https://x.com/epictrades1/status/1907591302142706113
To be clear, I think the tariffs are a poor idea. But I'm much happier coming to that conclusion if there is a voice providing the opposite view, even if it's not sincere.
One of the reasons why tariffs have historically failed to “bring back” jobs to an already wealthy country like the United States is twofold.
Let’s say you “succeed” and make it so expensive to import into your country, that you can only viably produce it domestically.
1) Who the hell is going to buy your crap? People couldn’t afford your stuff because you’re too expensive to begin with. And now, since countries retaliated, you are even more expensive as an exporter.
2) Your domestic economy gets crushed by inflation. $2 Chinese t shirts are now $20 Wisconsin t shirts. Domestic consumers cannot afford it either.
So no job growth.
History warns us.
https://x.com/SpencerHakimian/status/1907479720179978518
DETROIT, April 3 (Reuters) - Stellantis NV, maker of Ram trucks and Jeeps, said on Thursday it was temporarily laying off 900 workers at five U.S. facilities after President Donald Trump's tariffs were announced, and temporarily pausing production at an assembly plant in Mexico and in Canada.
https://x.com/BoKnowsNews/status/1907793648453874104
https://x.com/ArtCandee/status/1907539116260012471
More than 1500 down now.
Anyway, don't forget the one golden rule - markets always overshoot (see Dornbusch's Nobel Prize winning insight in 1976), foreign exchange ones in particular.
Think the Great Depression meets the Great Financial Crisis meets Covid-19 meets the Hindenburg meets the Rings of Power in terms of disasters.
"Assets" like houses going down in price means more affordability on a cost people are obliged to pay to have a roof over their heads, so makes people who need to buy/rent those things better off, while those who own them are worse off.
"Assets" like stocks going down in price doesn't boost anyone's affordability since nobody needs stocks or shares. Their prices going down harms those who have them and only benefits those who can afford to buy them for cheap expecting future gains.
Lower inequality is not a good thing if that lowered inequality is made up solely from losers and not winners.
News that I’m sure @RochdalePioneers will join me in wondering why it took so long
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c9venlzl7kjo
Sir Starmer's coming home.
Be good to see unleaded back under £1.20
NEW THREAD
A weaker currency makes exports more competitive and imports more expensive, while a stronger currency does the inverse.
So a stronger pound means British exporters are less competitive while imports are cheaper (hence hopefully cheaper petrol which is priced in dollars).
A weaker dollar means American exporters are more competitive, so potentially able to absorb some of the impact of the tariffs, while making imports into America more expensive - on top of which tariffs are now due making them even more expensive.
America is due a great wallop of inflation with this. A falling currency is inflationary and the tax rises announced yesterday are inflationary.
AToW goods, from Nike trainers to Landrovers, are imported into the USA free of any sort of import tax. Presumably a crate, carton or whatever arrives at the dock and may or may not be inspected to ensure it is what the documentation says it is.
Under the new arrangements somebody is going to have to ensure that each case etc has been valued and somewhere money has been guaranteed by someone?
How much extra time, and more importantly, manpower..... sorry personpower ..... is that going to require. And how far is that going to clog the system?
I've been thinking of the time I was checking exports of pharmaceuticals to Nigeria. At the time Nigeria was going through one of its bouts of financial problems and we had to ensure that the quality control documentation for each shipment was in the Bank in New York the same time as adequate monies were in the Bank.
I’d rather watch some old TV. I’m currently rewatching New Tricks, Paul Temple (with the incredibly suave Francis Matthews, voice of Cpt Scarlet) and Wycliffe. Which is remarkably good.
We are in uncharted territory. It does not hurt to get an alternative perspective on whether or not this is actually rational or will work.
Scott Bessent certainly is no fool either.
We will see if these last the course or are a short term gambit for negotiations.
Imagine an exchange rate of 0.8 dollars to the pound and a transaction of $100 = £80. Now add a 10% tariff so the US consumer has to pay $110 so that the UK producer gets their £80. If the pound weakens then it requires fewer dollars in order for the UK producder to still receive £80 so they can offset the cost of the tariff. If the pound strengthens then their goods become even more expensive in the US.
Nvidia was a buy at $153 but now it’s a hold at $105
Honestly !!
https://x.com/convertbond/status/1907773178060964295?s=61