It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
We have done this before. The evidence on this is extremely debatable on the direct effects of sugar tax. Sticking a few pence on sugary drinks doesn't seem to have dissuaded teenage kids drinking lakes full of sugary energy drinks.
A bigger measure / impact was the government convinced the food industry to reduce sugar content in a wide range of food voluntarily. So consumers are consuming less sugar from their food without any idea or via the idea that taxation is nudging them away from full sugar coke to sugar free sparkling water.
Indeed. As I have argued before that to get better health outcomes in the general populace, a good way is to make the foods that we all consume better for us, rather than scolding people about what they eat - where the scolding is probably misguided anyway.
People need to be taught to cook at home.
I'm in my 40s and certainly don't know how to do it, unless it's chilli con carne, lasagne or curry which I learned by rote.
You do realise you can teach yourself?
I did, over a few years. And not in any boring way - it was fun. Cooking is fun. You try new recipes, you use your hands in a pleasurable way, it’s relaxing and convivial. And at the end, you can cook
It’s something that some people just don’t seem to get, even if they try. I’m not quite sure why ?
Yes it’s strange
Some people are just too stupid to cook. You do need a decent IQ to understand measurements and processes and new words
But lots of bright people like @Casino_Royale can’t cook. My dad was a clever man and sort-of-tried to learn to cook - and failed
Humanity is peculiar
Buy meat.
Buy seasoning
Put seasoning on meat.
Put meat in air fryer.
Turn on for time that suits that meat.
Halfway through turn it over.
Take out.
Eat.
What IQ is needed for those instructions? Not everything needs to be super complicated.
Similar instructions can work for veg and potatoes too.
The Boriswave was 100% about ameliorating the economic vandalism of brexit and avoiding any real restructuring. This was predicted ahead of time by those of us who can 𝙴𝚇𝚃𝚁𝙰𝙿𝙾𝙻𝙰𝚃𝙴.
Subcontinent rather than East Asia ? But otherwise, rather more foresight than those who remain astonished and dismayed by the 'Boriswave' that their votes enabled.
Is Boris right about the ‘Boriswave’?
Boris Johnson is trying to wash his hands of the unprecedented wave of migration that has seen more than one million people move to the UK in each of the last three years. He was confronted about this ‘Boriswave’ on the Triggernometry podcast yesterday [in March 2025] and told the hosts that rather than being the result of his decisions, Covid and the Migration Advisory Committee were to blame. Are his explanations convincing? https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/is-boris-right-about-the-boriswave/
The Spectator fisks Boris's claim that the Boriswave was nothing to do with him, honest, a big boy did it and ran away.
Police could search homes and phones after pregnancy loss ... New guidance from the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) on “child death investigation” advises officers to search for “drugs that can terminate pregnancy” in cases involving stillbirths. The NPCC, which sets strategic direction for policing across the country UK, also suggests a woman’s digital devices could be seized to help investigators “establish a woman’s knowledge and intention in relation to the pregnancy”. That could include checking a woman’s internet searches, messages to friends and family, and health apps, “such as menstrual cycle and fertility trackers”, it states.
Where is this nonsense coming from? I know where anti-abortion nonsense comes from, but how did it get into the NPCC? This is, among many other things, a massive waste of police resources.
The problem is that the law in the UK is far more anti-abortion than people realise. All it takes it a small political push & police get the message. Just as with social media prosecutions it’s /much/ easier to go after vulnerable women than it is to chase shoplifters or drug smugglers.
Massive pot bellies, shit tattoos, weird "fash" hair and stupid Rag and Bone men beards. Necking Neck Oil or Madri a vape or a cancer stick and then ordering a burger or pizza. And calling his own son "mate". Yuk.
Very occasionally you get the opposite: a gym freak guy out with others who'll only touch Huel and Water and has got biceps like they've been on steroids. But are as boring as hell.
What a choice.
How did it come to this?
You should come to woke, LGBT-friendly north London. Lots of people with reasonably healthy figures, no or few tattoos, regular hair, eating something on toast with a coffee.
Massive pot bellies, shit tattoos, weird "fash" hair and stupid Rag and Bone men beards. Necking Neck Oil or Madri a vape or a cancer stick and then ordering a burger or pizza. And calling his own son "mate". Yuk.
Very occasionally you get the opposite: a gym freak guy out with others who'll only touch Huel and Water and has got biceps like they've been on steroids. But are as boring as hell.
Massive pot bellies, shit tattoos, weird "fash" hair and stupid Rag and Bone men beards. Necking Neck Oil or Madri a vape or a cancer stick and then ordering a burger or pizza. And calling his own son "mate". Yuk.
Very occasionally you get the opposite: a gym freak guy out with others who'll only touch Huel and Water and has got biceps like they've been on steroids. But are as boring as hell.
What a choice.
How did it come to this?
You need to move to NW1
I was in a pub in Primrose Hill last night, in the lush evening sun
The whole street was like a Beautiful People Convention. Especially notable for astonishingly lovely women aged 20-26, but lots of handsome dudes as well - and nicely preserved oldsters
It’s a definite thing. About 2 years ago there was a horrible fashion for yoot with knives to fetch up on the Hill in the evening. They’ve nearly all disappeared and suddenly it’s rich and glamorous students all congregating. I approve
It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
Sugar is a single thing. Ultra-processed food is lots of different things lumped together.
I've become convinced this is poisoning us. I've seen kids born just six or seven years ago (so after May came to power) already be extremely fat. Everyone is eating shit and ordering terrible pizzas from Deliveroo.
I'm not sure what the right policy response is, but I'm definitely in the something must be done category now.
(hobbyhorse)
This is why we need all the barriers off our footpaths, and all those housing areas which were isolated from each other on bad police advice in the 1980s and 1990s reconnecting - so everyone can walk everywhere, especially to school.
This is on the path where I used to walk to my infant school. I'm aiming to draft a complaint as today's homework: The croquet hoop is 2ft wide and 4ft high, and the "shimmy round the side or through the cage" gap is about 16".
It is a prominently signposted, 2m wide asphalt, walking/wheeling and cycling route. It is a public footpath. Were it useable, that would be some cycles off the roads.
Mum with a pram? Mobility aid? Forget it, since - I reckon - 198x. It was clear in the 1970s, when I was six; I left that school at 7.
(/hobbyhorse)
Has anyone come up with gate/system that prevents livestock/motorised vehicles through, but is not an insurmountable barrier to prams/differently abled etc?
The best that can be done physically is partial - you can keep cars and larger quadbikes out, following the measures in national guidance. Sur-Rons (which are narrower than a mountain bike) and so on, cannot be addressedwithout blocking lawful users, which is not ... lawful.
The populist answer, which feels like it gives a nice easy hit for a Councillor and looks like something is being done, is "whack 'em in and ignore the consequences for anybody who cannot walk and wiggle". People walking/wheeling along a path don't have a local vote usually.
In practice it is a mixture of local environment, character of area, more people using a path reduces ASB, enforcement. Which requires the other sort of barrier - cultural - to be addressed. We don't need much of a change, but it's awkward to achieve. A real answer is culture change.
We have laws now, but many factors which make enforcement on local authorities difficult.
I did an extended comment at midnight a couple of days about the various factors. I might try submitting a header.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
A quick glance at the video of him at a boxing club would instantly dispel that kind of insanity
The man is, physically, pathetically weak
Lucky he sticks to his principles, eh?
Another ridiculously jaundiced view. SDR is truly rife.
In any case muscular rhetoric doesn't require a gym-rat physique, does it. We're talking about his politics not his body.
Massive pot bellies, shit tattoos, weird "fash" hair and stupid Rag and Bone men beards. Necking Neck Oil or Madri a vape or a cancer stick and then ordering a burger or pizza. And calling his own son "mate". Yuk.
Very occasionally you get the opposite: a gym freak guy out with others who'll only touch Huel and Water and has got biceps like they've been on steroids. But are as boring as hell.
What a choice.
How did it come to this?
Thanks for the first hand report from the Reform pub. It’s appreciated that you visited there so that we don’t have to.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
I bet he’d take it with those man boobs and chins!
C'mon put your politics in a jar - he looks good for a man of 62.
Putting politics completely aside, I completely disagree. He was a handsome man with a square jaw in his thirties and forties from what I’ve seen, but looks old and flabby now. Reminds me of Richard Keys
If I look like that in 12 years time I’ll be horrified
Starmer looks nothing like Richard Keys - he has a mouth.
And you said Nigel Farage looks youthful so I'm not sure you're able to keep politics out of it (although I can accept that you're trying to).
Police could search homes and phones after pregnancy loss ... New guidance from the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) on “child death investigation” advises officers to search for “drugs that can terminate pregnancy” in cases involving stillbirths. The NPCC, which sets strategic direction for policing across the country UK, also suggests a woman’s digital devices could be seized to help investigators “establish a woman’s knowledge and intention in relation to the pregnancy”. That could include checking a woman’s internet searches, messages to friends and family, and health apps, “such as menstrual cycle and fertility trackers”, it states.
Where is this nonsense coming from? I know where anti-abortion nonsense comes from, but how did it get into the NPCC? This is, among many other things, a massive waste of police resources.
The problem is that the law in the UK is far more anti-abortion than people realise. All it takes it a small political push & police get the message. Just as with social media prosecutions it’s /much/ easier to go after vulnerable women than it is to chase shoplifters or drug smugglers.
Yes, the law is more anti-abortion than people realise. The 1967 Act was a compromise in order to get it through Parliament, so it delivered legal abortion but with all sorts of caveats. An updated law would be great.
However, I don’t think this is about easy prosecutions. There’s been a step up in investigations, but there have been few successful prosecutions and several high-profile cases have been let off by the courts.
The Polanski and Ramsay/Chowns campaigns offer a starkly different approach for the Greens, so while not attracting much attention, I wonder if it’s a leadership election that could be very consequential for the next general election.
I agree with you and I think this is pretty significant for the direction of UK politics. It deserves more coverage than it gets.
A battle between Corbynite left watermelon greens and the more NIMBY, rural, almost Lib Dem type of Greens.
I did post about it a few days ago but no one really wanted to look at it.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
Ahahahahaha
I guarantee that if you did a word cloud on Starmer the term “muscular” would not appear. He is seen as a weak, pitiable figure, except when he wants to persecute white people
Look at his abysmal polling, which has recently got even worse
You're hopelessly biased. I think you'd admit that.
I am hopelessly biased. I cordially despise him. But the polls are not biased - and his polling is horrible and getting worse
And I'm suggesting that 4 years of day in day out muscular messaging between now and GE29 will lead to people viewing him as muscular. Otherwise, why do it? He's not stupid, you know.
Sadly, this is all self-inflicted. The Johnson/Truss administrations simply destroyed the trust and confidence of their supporters.
Many of their problems predate that.
for example the increase in student fees crippled them among young graduates.
Something which was accentuated by unaffordable housing in southern England.
The Conservatives became reliant upon the support of the over 50s and C2s.
Demographics which Farage could be attractive to.
The Conservatives ceased to be aspirational. Especially for younger people.
If Cameron was serious that we were "all in it together" he should have announced the triple lock would move to a double lock by 2025 (in 15 years time from 2010) which would now be taking effect, and lower stamp duty and incentivised downsizing.
My parents have literally just rejected doing this due to cost, and losing c.£80k in so doing, so are now living in a house that's far too big for them.
What's that 80k calculation? Is that the difference made by Stamp Duty, or is it Inheritance Tax?
The Stamp Duty one would be met by the set of proposals around to replace Council Tax with a 0.5% house value tax, which also incorporate abolition of Stamp Duty.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
Ahahahahaha
I guarantee that if you did a word cloud on Starmer the term “muscular” would not appear. He is seen as a weak, pitiable figure, except when he wants to persecute white people
Look at his abysmal polling, which has recently got even worse
You're hopelessly biased. I think you'd admit that.
I am hopelessly biased. I cordially despise him. But the polls are not biased - and his polling is horrible and getting worse
And I'm suggesting that 4 years of day in day out muscular messaging between now and GE29 will lead to people viewing him as muscular. Otherwise, why do it? He's not stupid, you know.
I expect mere minutes of muscular messaging once the doctors go on strike again
Ed Smylie, the NASA official who led a team of engineers that cobbled together an apparatus made of cardboard, plastic bags and duct tape that saved the Apollo 13 crew in 1970 after an explosion crippled the spacecraft as it sped toward the moon, died on April 21 in Crossville, Tenn. He was 95.
Massive pot bellies, shit tattoos, weird "fash" hair and stupid Rag and Bone men beards. Necking Neck Oil or Madri a vape or a cancer stick and then ordering a burger or pizza. And calling his own son "mate". Yuk.
Very occasionally you get the opposite: a gym freak guy out with others who'll only touch Huel and Water and has got biceps like they've been on steroids. But are as boring as hell.
What a choice.
How did it come to this?
You should come to woke, LGBT-friendly north London. Lots of people with reasonably healthy figures, no or few tattoos, regular hair, eating something on toast with a coffee.
I can't win. I'd then get annoyed by the politics.
It's odd, though. 20 years ago there were definitely more tubby and badly dressed women. By and large, that problem has now started to ameliorate.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
I bet he’d take it with those man boobs and chins!
C'mon put your politics in a jar - he looks good for a man of 62.
Putting politics completely aside, I completely disagree. He was a handsome man with a square jaw in his thirties and forties from what I’ve seen, but looks old and flabby now. Reminds me of Richard Keys
If I look like that in 12 years time I’ll be horrified
Starmer looks nothing like Richard Keys - he has a mouth.
And you said Nigel Farage looks youthful so I'm not sure you're able to keep politics out of it (although I can accept that you're trying to).
Farage used to look older than his years; now he looks younger
Starmer has gone the opposite way. A genuinely handsome man into his 50s but now really quite porcine
NF does NOT look young for his age. Look at his skin and hair and teeth ffs. They tell the story of a million fags.
You and isam are either incapable of using your eyes properly (due to SDR) or you're taking the piss. Either way, it's not a productive conversation and needs to be brought to an end.
Massive pot bellies, shit tattoos, weird "fash" hair and stupid Rag and Bone men beards. Necking Neck Oil or Madri a vape or a cancer stick and then ordering a burger or pizza. And calling his own son "mate". Yuk.
Very occasionally you get the opposite: a gym freak guy out with others who'll only touch Huel and Water and has got biceps like they've been on steroids. But are as boring as hell.
What a choice.
How did it come to this?
Thanks for the first hand report from the Reform pub. It’s appreciated that you visited there so that we don’t have to.
This is a posh pub in rural Hampshire, albeit family friendly. They attract on the weekends.
Massive pot bellies, shit tattoos, weird "fash" hair and stupid Rag and Bone men beards. Necking Neck Oil or Madri a vape or a cancer stick and then ordering a burger or pizza. And calling his own son "mate". Yuk.
Very occasionally you get the opposite: a gym freak guy out with others who'll only touch Huel and Water and has got biceps like they've been on steroids. But are as boring as hell.
What a choice.
How did it come to this?
You need to move to NW1
I was in a pub in Primrose Hill last night, in the lush evening sun
The whole street was like a Beautiful People Convention. Especially notable for astonishingly lovely women aged 20-26, but lots of handsome dudes as well - and nicely preserved oldsters
It’s a definite thing. About 2 years ago there was a horrible fashion for yoot with knives to fetch up on the Hill in the evening. They’ve nearly all disappeared and suddenly it’s rich and glamorous students all congregating. I approve
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
I bet he’d take it with those man boobs and chins!
C'mon put your politics in a jar - he looks good for a man of 62.
Putting politics completely aside, I completely disagree. He was a handsome man with a square jaw in his thirties and forties from what I’ve seen, but looks old and flabby now. Reminds me of Richard Keys
If I look like that in 12 years time I’ll be horrified
Starmer looks nothing like Richard Keys - he has a mouth.
And you said Nigel Farage looks youthful so I'm not sure you're able to keep politics out of it (although I can accept that you're trying to).
I didn't say Farage looks youthful!
You did. I'll go and dig out the post when I have a minute.
“The United States could see one of the sharpest drops in obesity rates globally, thanks to the growing use of weight loss drugs such as Ozempic and Wegovy, according to a new report.
The latest data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) suggests the obesity rate is already starting to decline — from 42 per cent to 40.3 per cent over the past three years — equivalent to 4.1 million adults moving out of the obesity category.
Now, a new analysis by digital health provider Treated estimates that the US could see a further 10.6 per cent reduction in obesity over the next five years, with around 2.17 million people shedding enough weight annually to no longer be classed as obese.”
Only 66% of Brits think they could beat a cat in a fight? We may have a minority of over-confident fighters, but we also have a lot who are pretty underconfident.
I’ve always thought that 34% was my fellow cat owners.
"Your cat may wish to run off and hide afterwards."
And if you actually find where it's hiding you may well find the pill. It's the expression on a cats face when you're trying to administer anything. Pure hatred.
The comparison between the Greens and LibDems in what should (in current theory) be Reform UK areas are interesting, and I'm not sure how engaged localist Greens do against Reform.
For example, there is a group of 6 Greens on Darlington Borough Council, which was 0 in 2015, and 2 in 2019.
These are Harrowgate Hill, College, and Hummersknott wards of Darlington.
Are these the posh bits, or are we into more interesting change?
Sadly, this is all self-inflicted. The Johnson/Truss administrations simply destroyed the trust and confidence of their supporters.
Many of their problems predate that.
for example the increase in student fees crippled them among young graduates.
Something which was accentuated by unaffordable housing in southern England.
The Conservatives became reliant upon the support of the over 50s and C2s.
Demographics which Farage could be attractive to.
The Conservatives ceased to be aspirational. Especially for younger people.
If Cameron was serious that we were "all in it together" he should have announced the triple lock would move to a double lock by 2025 (in 15 years time from 2010) which would now be taking effect, and lower stamp duty and incentivised downsizing.
My parents have literally just rejected doing this due to cost, and losing c.£80k in so doing, so are now living in a house that's far too big for them.
What's that 80k calculation? Is that the difference made by Stamp Duty, or is it Inheritance Tax?
The Stamp Duty one would be met by the set of proposals around to replace Council Tax with a 0.5% house value tax, which also incorporate abolition of Stamp Duty.
I think I came up with the 0.5% figure. Treat with extreme caution. I think you'd want 0.6 to be safe.
It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
We have done this before. The evidence on this is extremely debatable on the direct effects of sugar tax. Sticking a few pence on sugary drinks doesn't seem to have dissuaded teenage kids drinking lakes full of sugary energy drinks.
A bigger measure / impact was the government convinced the food industry to reduce sugar content in a wide range of food voluntarily. So consumers are consuming less sugar from their food without any idea or via the idea that taxation is nudging them away from full sugar coke to sugar free sparkling water.
Indeed. As I have argued before that to get better health outcomes in the general populace, a good way is to make the foods that we all consume better for us, rather than scolding people about what they eat - where the scolding is probably misguided anyway.
People need to be taught to cook at home.
I'm in my 40s and certainly don't know how to do it, unless it's chilli con carne, lasagne or curry which I learned by rote.
"I just let my Mum get on with it," Sunil said, putting his feet up on the coffee table.
It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
We have done this before. The evidence on this is extremely debatable on the direct effects of sugar tax. Sticking a few pence on sugary drinks doesn't seem to have dissuaded teenage kids drinking lakes full of sugary energy drinks.
A bigger measure / impact was the government convinced the food industry to reduce sugar content in a wide range of food voluntarily. So consumers are consuming less sugar from their food without any idea or via the idea that taxation is nudging them away from full sugar coke to sugar free sparkling water.
Indeed. As I have argued before that to get better health outcomes in the general populace, a good way is to make the foods that we all consume better for us, rather than scolding people about what they eat - where the scolding is probably misguided anyway.
People need to be taught to cook at home.
I'm in my 40s and certainly don't know how to do it, unless it's chilli con carne, lasagne or curry which I learned by rote.
"I just let my Mum get on with it," Sunil said, putting his feet up on the coffee table.
Massive pot bellies, shit tattoos, weird "fash" hair and stupid Rag and Bone men beards. Necking Neck Oil or Madri a vape or a cancer stick and then ordering a burger or pizza. And calling his own son "mate". Yuk.
Very occasionally you get the opposite: a gym freak guy out with others who'll only touch Huel and Water and has got biceps like they've been on steroids. But are as boring as hell.
What a choice.
How did it come to this?
You need to move to NW1
I was in a pub in Primrose Hill last night, in the lush evening sun
The whole street was like a Beautiful People Convention. Especially notable for astonishingly lovely women aged 20-26, but lots of handsome dudes as well - and nicely preserved oldsters
It’s a definite thing. About 2 years ago there was a horrible fashion for yoot with knives to fetch up on the Hill in the evening. They’ve nearly all disappeared and suddenly it’s rich and glamorous students all congregating. I approve
Yup, the pubs in Highgate are all pretty decent. I would say that most people in the pub aren't talking politics and if they are just ignore them, they're just sad sacks.
On male diets I do somewhat agree that men have become completely unhealthy.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
I bet he’d take it with those man boobs and chins!
C'mon put your politics in a jar - he looks good for a man of 62.
Putting politics completely aside, I completely disagree. He was a handsome man with a square jaw in his thirties and forties from what I’ve seen, but looks old and flabby now. Reminds me of Richard Keys
If I look like that in 12 years time I’ll be horrified
Starmer looks nothing like Richard Keys - he has a mouth.
And you said Nigel Farage looks youthful so I'm not sure you're able to keep politics out of it (although I can accept that you're trying to).
Farage used to look older than his years; now he looks younger
Starmer has gone the opposite way. A genuinely handsome man into his 50s but now really quite porcine
NF does NOT look young for his age. Look at his skin and hair and teeth ffs. They tell the story of a million fags.
You and isam are either incapable of using your eyes properly (due to SDR) or you're taking the piss. Either way, it's not a productive conversation and needs to be brought to an end.
SKS looks younger and better than NF.
FACT.
If only there was a saying that encapsulated this problem we are having!
I wouldn't say either of them looked particularly good for their age, although Farage looks better now than he did a decade ago
You are right, Farage's lower teeth are bad, and they are prominent in caricatures of him, but he is in relatively good nick bodywise for a drinker, I was surprised when he was in Celebrity jungle that he wasn't really flabby, esp as he also has a a big double chin.
But there's no getting away from the fact that Starmer is a flabby porker, even if he was once a handsome man. I wouldn't say he looked good for 62, I assumed he was a bit older
Sadly, this is all self-inflicted. The Johnson/Truss administrations simply destroyed the trust and confidence of their supporters.
Many of their problems predate that.
for example the increase in student fees crippled them among young graduates.
Something which was accentuated by unaffordable housing in southern England.
The Conservatives became reliant upon the support of the over 50s and C2s.
Demographics which Farage could be attractive to.
The Conservatives ceased to be aspirational. Especially for younger people.
If Cameron was serious that we were "all in it together" he should have announced the triple lock would move to a double lock by 2025 (in 15 years time from 2010) which would now be taking effect, and lower stamp duty and incentivised downsizing.
My parents have literally just rejected doing this due to cost, and losing c.£80k in so doing, so are now living in a house that's far too big for them.
What's that 80k calculation? Is that the difference made by Stamp Duty, or is it Inheritance Tax?
The Stamp Duty one would be met by the set of proposals around to replace Council Tax with a 0.5% house value tax, which also incorporate abolition of Stamp Duty.
I think I came up with the 0.5% figure. Treat with extreme caution. I think you'd want 0.6 to be safe.
Thanks for the reply.
I got it from the full set of proposals known as the Proportional Property Tax a couple of years ago, and the proposals have been around for a number of years. They use 0.48%.
It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
We have done this before. The evidence on this is extremely debatable on the direct effects of sugar tax. Sticking a few pence on sugary drinks doesn't seem to have dissuaded teenage kids drinking lakes full of sugary energy drinks.
A bigger measure / impact was the government convinced the food industry to reduce sugar content in a wide range of food voluntarily. So consumers are consuming less sugar from their food without any idea or via the idea that taxation is nudging them away from full sugar coke to sugar free sparkling water.
Indeed. As I have argued before that to get better health outcomes in the general populace, a good way is to make the foods that we all consume better for us, rather than scolding people about what they eat - where the scolding is probably misguided anyway.
People need to be taught to cook at home.
I'm in my 40s and certainly don't know how to do it, unless it's chilli con carne, lasagne or curry which I learned by rote.
You do realise you can teach yourself?
I did, over a few years. And not in any boring way - it was fun. Cooking is fun. You try new recipes, you use your hands in a pleasurable way, it’s relaxing and convivial. And at the end, you can cook
It’s something that some people just don’t seem to get, even if they try. I’m not quite sure why ?
Like doing my own wall-painting or gardening, it's something that I can do if pushed, but would prefer to earn money to pay someone good at it - in the case of food, by eating microwaved food. That said, I've largely given up the microwave since a new relationship (which blossomed to marriage last month), and I reluctantly admit that I'm healthier as a result, and do some of the cooking. But I still don't enjoy it...
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
I bet he’d take it with those man boobs and chins!
C'mon put your politics in a jar - he looks good for a man of 62.
Putting politics completely aside, I completely disagree. He was a handsome man with a square jaw in his thirties and forties from what I’ve seen, but looks old and flabby now. Reminds me of Richard Keys
If I look like that in 12 years time I’ll be horrified
Starmer looks nothing like Richard Keys - he has a mouth.
And you said Nigel Farage looks youthful so I'm not sure you're able to keep politics out of it (although I can accept that you're trying to).
I didn't say Farage looks youthful!
You did. I'll go and dig out the post when I have a minute.
If I said that, it shows that people will say anything to win an argument, because I don't think Farage looks youthful. I think I said he was trimmer than I had expected
It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
We have done this before. The evidence on this is extremely debatable on the direct effects of sugar tax. Sticking a few pence on sugary drinks doesn't seem to have dissuaded teenage kids drinking lakes full of sugary energy drinks.
A bigger measure / impact was the government convinced the food industry to reduce sugar content in a wide range of food voluntarily. So consumers are consuming less sugar from their food without any idea or via the idea that taxation is nudging them away from full sugar coke to sugar free sparkling water.
Indeed. As I have argued before that to get better health outcomes in the general populace, a good way is to make the foods that we all consume better for us, rather than scolding people about what they eat - where the scolding is probably misguided anyway.
People need to be taught to cook at home.
I'm in my 40s and certainly don't know how to do it, unless it's chilli con carne, lasagne or curry which I learned by rote.
You do realise you can teach yourself?
I did, over a few years. And not in any boring way - it was fun. Cooking is fun. You try new recipes, you use your hands in a pleasurable way, it’s relaxing and convivial. And at the end, you can cook
It’s something that some people just don’t seem to get, even if they try. I’m not quite sure why ?
Like doing my own wall-painting or gardening, it's something that I can do if pushed, but would prefer to earn money to pay someone good at it - in the case of food, by eating microwaved food. That said, I've largely given up the microwave since a new relationship (which blossomed to marriage last month), and I reluctantly admit that I'm healthier as a result, and do some of the cooking. But I still don't enjoy it...
Oh congratulations! You may have mentioned this before but well done!
The Polanski and Ramsay/Chowns campaigns offer a starkly different approach for the Greens, so while not attracting much attention, I wonder if it’s a leadership election that could be very consequential for the next general election.
I agree with you and I think this is pretty significant for the direction of UK politics. It deserves more coverage than it gets.
A battle between Corbynite left watermelon greens and the more NIMBY, rural, almost Lib Dem type of Greens.
I did post about it a few days ago but no one really wanted to look at it.
I support the LibDems and we probably do best out of a Polanski win.
Leaving aside policy differences, Polanski comes across to me as a chancer, someone whose top priority is himself, a politician in the mould of Johnson or Trump. I think Johnson and Trump are terrible people, but they did win elections. Maybe he can do wonders for the Greens.
It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
Sugar is a single thing. Ultra-processed food is lots of different things lumped together.
I've become convinced this is poisoning us. I've seen kids born just six or seven years ago (so after May came to power) already be extremely fat. Everyone is eating shit and ordering terrible pizzas from Deliveroo.
I'm not sure what the right policy response is, but I'm definitely in the something must be done category now.
(hobbyhorse)
This is why we need all the barriers off our footpaths, and all those housing areas which were isolated from each other on bad police advice in the 1980s and 1990s reconnecting - so everyone can walk everywhere, especially to school.
This is on the path where I used to walk to my infant school. I'm aiming to draft a complaint as today's homework: The croquet hoop is 2ft wide and 4ft high, and the "shimmy round the side or through the cage" gap is about 16".
It is a prominently signposted, 2m wide asphalt, walking/wheeling and cycling route. It is a public footpath. Were it useable, that would be some cycles off the roads.
Mum with a pram? Mobility aid? Forget it, since - I reckon - 198x. It was clear in the 1970s, when I was six; I left that school at 7.
(/hobbyhorse)
Has anyone come up with gate/system that prevents livestock/motorised vehicles through, but is not an insurmountable barrier to prams/differently abled etc?
The best that can be done physically is partial - you can keep cars and larger quadbikes out, following the measures in national guidance. Sur-Rons (which are narrower than a mountain bike) and so on, cannot be addressedwithout blocking lawful users, which is not ... lawful.
The populist answer, which feels like it gives a nice easy hit for a Councillor and looks like something is being done, is "whack 'em in and ignore the consequences for anybody who cannot walk and wiggle". People walking/wheeling along a path don't have a local vote usually.
In practice it is a mixture of local environment, character of area, more people using a path reduces ASB, enforcement. Which requires the other sort of barrier - cultural - to be addressed. We don't need much of a change, but it's awkward to achieve. A real answer is culture change.
We have laws now, but many factors which make enforcement on local authorities difficult.
I did an extended comment at midnight a couple of days about the various factors. I might try submitting a header.
In a shortish walk on in Cornwall, I twice observed people deliberately leaving farmers gates open and laughing about it.
It’s a small percentage, but it’s enough to make farmers lives hell. And then they become strong opponents of footpaths etc.
If we could come up with an advance on stiles, cattle grids etc. then you would get more people on your side.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
Ahahahahaha
I guarantee that if you did a word cloud on Starmer the term “muscular” would not appear. He is seen as a weak, pitiable figure, except when he wants to persecute white people
Look at his abysmal polling, which has recently got even worse
You're hopelessly biased. I think you'd admit that.
I am hopelessly biased. I cordially despise him. But the polls are not biased - and his polling is horrible and getting worse
And I'm suggesting that 4 years of day in day out muscular messaging between now and GE29 will lead to people viewing him as muscular. Otherwise, why do it? He's not stupid, you know.
“Muscular” is about as far away from an adjective I’d use to describe SKS.
Even if he tries it with his new found Tough Sir Keir twitter persona, try imagining him saying it in his voice - it just sounds forced.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
A quick glance at the video of him at a boxing club would instantly dispel that kind of insanity
The man is, physically, pathetically weak
Lucky he sticks to his principles, eh?
Another ridiculously jaundiced view. SDR is truly rife.
In any case muscular rhetoric doesn't require a gym-rat physique, does it. We're talking about his politics not his body.
FDR, arguably the most powerful president in US history, was barely able to walk.
Sadly, this is all self-inflicted. The Johnson/Truss administrations simply destroyed the trust and confidence of their supporters.
Many of their problems predate that.
for example the increase in student fees crippled them among young graduates.
Something which was accentuated by unaffordable housing in southern England.
The Conservatives became reliant upon the support of the over 50s and C2s.
Demographics which Farage could be attractive to.
The Conservatives ceased to be aspirational. Especially for younger people.
If Cameron was serious that we were "all in it together" he should have announced the triple lock would move to a double lock by 2025 (in 15 years time from 2010) which would now be taking effect, and lower stamp duty and incentivised downsizing.
My parents have literally just rejected doing this due to cost, and losing c.£80k in so doing, so are now living in a house that's far too big for them.
What's that 80k calculation? Is that the difference made by Stamp Duty, or is it Inheritance Tax?
The Stamp Duty one would be met by the set of proposals around to replace Council Tax with a 0.5% house value tax, which also incorporate abolition of Stamp Duty.
I think I came up with the 0.5% figure. Treat with extreme caution. I think you'd want 0.6 to be safe.
Thanks for the reply.
I got it from the full set of proposals known as the Proportional Property Tax a couple of years ago, and the proposals have been around for a number of years. They use 0.48%.
The issue is it would crash the value of small houses in high demand area. That's not necessarily a bad thing on a macro scale, but it would mean the revenues would be lower than expected. £5k per annum on a small terrace in North London...
Massive pot bellies, shit tattoos, weird "fash" hair and stupid Rag and Bone men beards. Necking Neck Oil or Madri a vape or a cancer stick and then ordering a burger or pizza. And calling his own son "mate". Yuk.
Very occasionally you get the opposite: a gym freak guy out with others who'll only touch Huel and Water and has got biceps like they've been on steroids. But are as boring as hell.
What a choice.
How did it come to this?
Thanks for the first hand report from the Reform pub. It’s appreciated that you visited there so that we don’t have to.
This is a posh pub in rural Hampshire, albeit family friendly. They attract on the weekends.
I'd say it's pretty rife now.
Probably not unrelated, is the fact that unless you go to a really good tailor, it's quite difficult to find decent menswear. When I was younger, places like M & S, Dunn's, BHS, all had decent suits, shirts, and ties. So many men just dress like slobs.
You notice the contrast, if you've ever been to Madrid, or Granada. Most of the locals dress immaculately in the evening.
Also, very noticeable, in churches with substantial numbers of Africans in the congregation, is just how immaculately dressed they are.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
I bet he’d take it with those man boobs and chins!
C'mon put your politics in a jar - he looks good for a man of 62.
Putting politics completely aside, I completely disagree. He was a handsome man with a square jaw in his thirties and forties from what I’ve seen, but looks old and flabby now. Reminds me of Richard Keys
If I look like that in 12 years time I’ll be horrified
Starmer looks nothing like Richard Keys - he has a mouth.
And you said Nigel Farage looks youthful so I'm not sure you're able to keep politics out of it (although I can accept that you're trying to).
Farage used to look older than his years; now he looks younger
Starmer has gone the opposite way. A genuinely handsome man into his 50s but now really quite porcine
NF does NOT look young for his age. Look at his skin and hair and teeth ffs. They tell the story of a million fags.
You and isam are either incapable of using your eyes properly (due to SDR) or you're taking the piss. Either way, it's not a productive conversation and needs to be brought to an end.
SKS looks younger and better than NF.
FACT.
If only there was a saying that encapsulated this problem we are having!
I wouldn't say either of them looked particularly good for their age, although Farage looks better now than he did a decade ago
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
Ahahahahaha
I guarantee that if you did a word cloud on Starmer the term “muscular” would not appear. He is seen as a weak, pitiable figure, except when he wants to persecute white people
Look at his abysmal polling, which has recently got even worse
You're hopelessly biased. I think you'd admit that.
I am hopelessly biased. I cordially despise him. But the polls are not biased - and his polling is horrible and getting worse
And I'm suggesting that 4 years of day in day out muscular messaging between now and GE29 will lead to people viewing him as muscular. Otherwise, why do it? He's not stupid, you know.
“Muscular” is about as far away from an adjective I’d use to describe SKS.
Even if he tries it with his new found Tough Sir Keir twitter persona, try imagining him saying it in his voice - it just sounds forced.
Disagree actually. I think he does have an authentic strongman persona and I say this as someone who recoils from that sort of thing.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
I bet he’d take it with those man boobs and chins!
C'mon put your politics in a jar - he looks good for a man of 62.
Putting politics completely aside, I completely disagree. He was a handsome man with a square jaw in his thirties and forties from what I’ve seen, but looks old and flabby now. Reminds me of Richard Keys
If I look like that in 12 years time I’ll be horrified
Starmer looks nothing like Richard Keys - he has a mouth.
And you said Nigel Farage looks youthful so I'm not sure you're able to keep politics out of it (although I can accept that you're trying to).
Farage used to look older than his years; now he looks younger
Starmer has gone the opposite way. A genuinely handsome man into his 50s but now really quite porcine
NF does NOT look young for his age. Look at his skin and hair and teeth ffs. They tell the story of a million fags.
You and isam are either incapable of using your eyes properly (due to SDR) or you're taking the piss. Either way, it's not a productive conversation and needs to be brought to an end.
SKS looks younger and better than NF.
FACT.
If only there was a saying that encapsulated this problem we are having!
I wouldn't say either of them looked particularly good for their age, although Farage looks better now than he did a decade ago
You are right, Farage's lower teeth are bad, and they are prominent in caricatures of him, but he is in relatively good nick bodywise for a drinker, I was surprised when he was in Celebrity jungle that he wasn't really flabby, esp as he also has a a big double chin.
But there's no getting away from the fact that Starmer is a flabby porker, even if he was once a handsome man. I wouldn't say he looked good for 62, I assumed he was a bit older
Also, the job of PM ages people, and now it does so incredibly rapidly. Even Rishi was considerably less dishy at the end of his stint;
Massive pot bellies, shit tattoos, weird "fash" hair and stupid Rag and Bone men beards. Necking Neck Oil or Madri a vape or a cancer stick and then ordering a burger or pizza. And calling his own son "mate". Yuk.
Very occasionally you get the opposite: a gym freak guy out with others who'll only touch Huel and Water and has got biceps like they've been on steroids. But are as boring as hell.
What a choice.
How did it come to this?
Thanks for the first hand report from the Reform pub. It’s appreciated that you visited there so that we don’t have to.
This is a posh pub in rural Hampshire, albeit family friendly. They attract on the weekends.
I'd say it's pretty rife now.
Probably not unrelated, is the fact that unless you go to a really good tailor, it's quite difficult to find decent menswear. When I was younger, places like M & S, Dunn's, BHS, all had decent suits, shirts, and ties. So many men just dress like slobs.
You notice the contrast, if you've ever been to Madrid, or Granada. Most of the locals dress immaculately in the evening.
Also, very noticeable, in churches with substantial numbers of Africans in the congregation, is just how immaculately dressed they are.
There was a posh children's boutique next to the betting shop, catering almost exclusively to Black families for their "Sunday best".
It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
We have done this before. The evidence on this is extremely debatable on the direct effects of sugar tax. Sticking a few pence on sugary drinks doesn't seem to have dissuaded teenage kids drinking lakes full of sugary energy drinks.
A bigger measure / impact was the government convinced the food industry to reduce sugar content in a wide range of food voluntarily. So consumers are consuming less sugar from their food without any idea or via the idea that taxation is nudging them away from full sugar coke to sugar free sparkling water.
Indeed. As I have argued before that to get better health outcomes in the general populace, a good way is to make the foods that we all consume better for us, rather than scolding people about what they eat - where the scolding is probably misguided anyway.
People need to be taught to cook at home.
I'm in my 40s and certainly don't know how to do it, unless it's chilli con carne, lasagne or curry which I learned by rote.
You do realise you can teach yourself?
I did, over a few years. And not in any boring way - it was fun. Cooking is fun. You try new recipes, you use your hands in a pleasurable way, it’s relaxing and convivial. And at the end, you can cook
It’s something that some people just don’t seem to get, even if they try. I’m not quite sure why ?
Like doing my own wall-painting or gardening, it's something that I can do if pushed, but would prefer to earn money to pay someone good at it - in the case of food, by eating microwaved food. That said, I've largely given up the microwave since a new relationship (which blossomed to marriage last month), and I reluctantly admit that I'm healthier as a result, and do some of the cooking. But I still don't enjoy it...
You're a (lucky) outlier, though, Nick. You enjoy your work for its own sake - in your seventies, still.
Those of us who work for a living, and will welcome not having to do so, channel our interests otherwise.
(And I must echo the heart congrats on your happy state.)
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
Ahahahahaha
I guarantee that if you did a word cloud on Starmer the term “muscular” would not appear. He is seen as a weak, pitiable figure, except when he wants to persecute white people
Look at his abysmal polling, which has recently got even worse
You're hopelessly biased. I think you'd admit that.
I am hopelessly biased. I cordially despise him. But the polls are not biased - and his polling is horrible and getting worse
And I'm suggesting that 4 years of day in day out muscular messaging between now and GE29 will lead to people viewing him as muscular. Otherwise, why do it? He's not stupid, you know.
“Muscular” is about as far away from an adjective I’d use to describe SKS.
Even if he tries it with his new found Tough Sir Keir twitter persona, try imagining him saying it in his voice - it just sounds forced.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
Ahahahahaha
I guarantee that if you did a word cloud on Starmer the term “muscular” would not appear. He is seen as a weak, pitiable figure, except when he wants to persecute white people
Look at his abysmal polling, which has recently got even worse
You're hopelessly biased. I think you'd admit that.
I am hopelessly biased. I cordially despise him. But the polls are not biased - and his polling is horrible and getting worse
And I'm suggesting that 4 years of day in day out muscular messaging between now and GE29 will lead to people viewing him as muscular. Otherwise, why do it? He's not stupid, you know.
I expect mere minutes of muscular messaging once the doctors go on strike again
If you don't desist with the mindless Starmer snark I'll start flagging your posts. And I won't stop there.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
I bet he’d take it with those man boobs and chins!
C'mon put your politics in a jar - he looks good for a man of 62.
Putting politics completely aside, I completely disagree. He was a handsome man with a square jaw in his thirties and forties from what I’ve seen, but looks old and flabby now. Reminds me of Richard Keys
If I look like that in 12 years time I’ll be horrified
Starmer looks nothing like Richard Keys - he has a mouth.
And you said Nigel Farage looks youthful so I'm not sure you're able to keep politics out of it (although I can accept that you're trying to).
Farage used to look older than his years; now he looks younger
Starmer has gone the opposite way. A genuinely handsome man into his 50s but now really quite porcine
NF does NOT look young for his age. Look at his skin and hair and teeth ffs. They tell the story of a million fags.
You and isam are either incapable of using your eyes properly (due to SDR) or you're taking the piss. Either way, it's not a productive conversation and needs to be brought to an end.
SKS looks younger and better than NF.
FACT.
If only there was a saying that encapsulated this problem we are having!
I wouldn't say either of them looked particularly good for their age, although Farage looks better now than he did a decade ago
You are right, Farage's lower teeth are bad, and they are prominent in caricatures of him, but he is in relatively good nick bodywise for a drinker, I was surprised when he was in Celebrity jungle that he wasn't really flabby, esp as he also has a a big double chin.
But there's no getting away from the fact that Starmer is a flabby porker, even if he was once a handsome man. I wouldn't say he looked good for 62, I assumed he was a bit older
Also, the job of PM ages people, and now it does so incredibly rapidly. Even Rishi was considerably less dishy at the end of his stint;
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
Ahahahahaha
I guarantee that if you did a word cloud on Starmer the term “muscular” would not appear. He is seen as a weak, pitiable figure, except when he wants to persecute white people
Look at his abysmal polling, which has recently got even worse
You're hopelessly biased. I think you'd admit that.
I am hopelessly biased. I cordially despise him. But the polls are not biased - and his polling is horrible and getting worse
And I'm suggesting that 4 years of day in day out muscular messaging between now and GE29 will lead to people viewing him as muscular. Otherwise, why do it? He's not stupid, you know.
“Muscular” is about as far away from an adjective I’d use to describe SKS.
Even if he tries it with his new found Tough Sir Keir twitter persona, try imagining him saying it in his voice - it just sounds forced.
Disagree actually. I think he does have an authentic strongman persona and I say this as someone who recoils from that sort of thing.
Thickset, suit, glasses – Sir Keir Starmer or a middle-aged Ronnie Kray?
Starmer's tough guy image is undermined by his relatively high-pitched voice. Is plastic surgery on vocal cords a thing?
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
Ahahahahaha
I guarantee that if you did a word cloud on Starmer the term “muscular” would not appear. He is seen as a weak, pitiable figure, except when he wants to persecute white people
Look at his abysmal polling, which has recently got even worse
You're hopelessly biased. I think you'd admit that.
I am hopelessly biased. I cordially despise him. But the polls are not biased - and his polling is horrible and getting worse
And I'm suggesting that 4 years of day in day out muscular messaging between now and GE29 will lead to people viewing him as muscular. Otherwise, why do it? He's not stupid, you know.
I expect mere minutes of muscular messaging once the doctors go on strike again
If you don't desist with the mindless Starmer snark I'll start flagging your posts. And I won't stop there.
I'm just playing along with your Muscles McStarmer comedy routine
Edit - and that was a serious point. He'll fold like a flaccid phallus when the doctors go on strike
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
A quick glance at the video of him at a boxing club would instantly dispel that kind of insanity
The man is, physically, pathetically weak
Lucky he sticks to his principles, eh?
Another ridiculously jaundiced view. SDR is truly rife.
In any case muscular rhetoric doesn't require a gym-rat physique, does it. We're talking about his politics not his body.
FDR, arguably the most powerful president in US history, was barely able to walk.
Yes, an article on that in the Times yesterday. They successfully hid it from the public for years. Doubt you could do that now.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
A quick glance at the video of him at a boxing club would instantly dispel that kind of insanity
The man is, physically, pathetically weak
Lucky he sticks to his principles, eh?
Another ridiculously jaundiced view. SDR is truly rife.
In any case muscular rhetoric doesn't require a gym-rat physique, does it. We're talking about his politics not his body.
FDR, arguably the most powerful president in US history, was barely able to walk.
Yes, an article on that in the Times yesterday. They successfully hid it from the public for years. Doubt you could do that now.
Well the US media gave it a bloody good try with Biden.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
A quick glance at the video of him at a boxing club would instantly dispel that kind of insanity
The man is, physically, pathetically weak
Lucky he sticks to his principles, eh?
Another ridiculously jaundiced view. SDR is truly rife.
In any case muscular rhetoric doesn't require a gym-rat physique, does it. We're talking about his politics not his body.
FDR, arguably the most powerful president in US history, was barely able to walk.
Yes, an article on that in the Times yesterday. They successfully hid it from the public for years. Doubt you could do that now.
Well the US media gave it a bloody good try with Biden.
i presume @kinabalu is joking, given the striking recent example of Biden and gaga-gate
Yes, it was a deliberate policy by the government after 2019 to turn on the migration taps, in fear of an economic downturn and chronic labour supply issues post-Brexit.
The Boriswave, and Tory collapse, can both mostly be traced back to Brexit. Truss too.
Are the same people currently touting Farage’s surprising nubility the same as those who once assured us that Boris was “all muscle”?
I think you'd be wrong there old chap, as it's me who is saying he was surprised how unflabby Farage was and it wasn't me who said anything about Boris being "all muscle"
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
I bet he’d take it with those man boobs and chins!
C'mon put your politics in a jar - he looks good for a man of 62.
Putting politics completely aside, I completely disagree. He was a handsome man with a square jaw in his thirties and forties from what I’ve seen, but looks old and flabby now. Reminds me of Richard Keys
If I look like that in 12 years time I’ll be horrified
Starmer looks nothing like Richard Keys - he has a mouth.
And you said Nigel Farage looks youthful so I'm not sure you're able to keep politics out of it (although I can accept that you're trying to).
I didn't say Farage looks youthful!
You did. I'll go and dig out the post when I have a minute.
If I said that, it shows that people will say anything to win an argument, because I don't think Farage looks youthful. I think I said he was trimmer than I had expected
I couldn't find it so I suppose I'll have to accept your version.
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
A quick glance at the video of him at a boxing club would instantly dispel that kind of insanity
The man is, physically, pathetically weak
Lucky he sticks to his principles, eh?
Another ridiculously jaundiced view. SDR is truly rife.
In any case muscular rhetoric doesn't require a gym-rat physique, does it. We're talking about his politics not his body.
FDR, arguably the most powerful president in US history, was barely able to walk.
Yes, an article on that in the Times yesterday. They successfully hid it from the public for years. Doubt you could do that now.
Well the US media gave it a bloody good try with Biden.
Are the same people currently touting Farage’s surprising nubility the same as those who once assured us that Boris was “all muscle”?
I think you'd be wrong there old chap, as it's me who is saying he was surprised how unflabby Farage was and it wasn't me who said anything about Boris being "all muscle"
Believe it was BartyBobbins who had a weird thing for Johnson’s body.
It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
Sugar is a single thing. Ultra-processed food is lots of different things lumped together.
I've become convinced this is poisoning us. I've seen kids born just six or seven years ago (so after May came to power) already be extremely fat. Everyone is eating shit and ordering terrible pizzas from Deliveroo.
I'm not sure what the right policy response is, but I'm definitely in the something must be done category now.
Luckily we have incredible new anti-obesity drugs
Mounjaro is a phenomenon and they are only getting better and cheaper. Soon they will come in pill form and cost a few quid
For the first time in forty years obesity is now falling in the USA (and quite fast). Americans are rich and can afford these drugs. We are quite rich - we can’t afford NOT to use these drugs
Every person we save from obesity saves the NHS £££££
But that's exactly why public services like the NHS are in trouble - always finding ways to treat rather than prevent issues.
It's a bit like claiming that prison is a great way to reduce crime - simply lock up the habitual criminals! But that's damned expensive and it would be better for everyone to get the intervention in much earlier (probably pre-school/pre-natal).
I don't think having 60%+ of the population, including young children, on prescription drugs is a place we want to end up. It's taxpayers absorbing the enormous negative externality of food producers putting loads of crap in their food.
Completely disagree
Obesity is a monstrous worldwide problem - trust me, I’ve seen it - and now we have miraculous drugs that fix it. eg Mounjaro taken over 70 weeks induces an average 20% loss of total body weight. That’s remarkable
At the same time it looks like these drugs do amazing things against cancer, Alzheimer’s, all kinds of addiction
Are these drugs dangerous and new? Well no, not really - they’ve been used by diabetics for yonks
The human race has lucked out at a crucial moment. These obesity drugs could be as game changing as antibiotics. We must use them
Yes of course it would be great if we could get everyone to slim down via yoga, Pilates and salads but let’s be real
5 years ago today I went out into the Channel, exposed the French Navy handovers, and predicted a huge wave of illegal migrants. Now we learn that terrorists are using this route, and our country faces serious threats. No one in the Tory or Labour parties believed me.
Yes, it was a deliberate policy by the government after 2019 to turn on the migration taps, in fear of an economic downturn and chronic labour supply issues post-Brexit.
The Boriswave, and Tory collapse, can both mostly be traced back to Brexit. Truss too.
Except Canada and Australia did the same thing at the same time. It's an Anglosphere problem, not a Brexit problem.
Fascinating article on how Bluesky is tailing off, and slowly self-destructing
TLDR: it's become a bubble chamber of leftoids, who are angry and intolerant of opposing opinions (esp but not always rightwing opinions). This makes it hostile to a lot of newcomers, and so the newbies stop coming. Without opposing opinions to tackle, the Blueskyers either turn on each other, or tediously and pointlessly agree with each other. And they become increasingly misinformed
The Polanski and Ramsay/Chowns campaigns offer a starkly different approach for the Greens, so while not attracting much attention, I wonder if it’s a leadership election that could be very consequential for the next general election.
I agree with you and I think this is pretty significant for the direction of UK politics. It deserves more coverage than it gets.
A battle between Corbynite left watermelon greens and the more NIMBY, rural, almost Lib Dem type of Greens.
I did post about it a few days ago but no one really wanted to look at it.
I support the LibDems and we probably do best out of a Polanski win.
Leaving aside policy differences, Polanski comes across to me as a chancer, someone whose top priority is himself, a politician in the mould of Johnson or Trump. I think Johnson and Trump are terrible people, but they did win elections. Maybe he can do wonders for the Greens.
I think as a Lib Dem a win for Ramsey/Chowns sees them parking their tanks on your lawn. I agree with your assessment. I also don’t think there’s anything in it for the greens to agree an electoral pact. Short term it may work but it simply says both parties are interchangeable and why vote green in that case.
Are the same people currently touting Farage’s surprising nubility the same as those who once assured us that Boris was “all muscle”?
I think you'd be wrong there old chap, as it's me who is saying he was surprised how unflabby Farage was and it wasn't me who said anything about Boris being "all muscle"
Perhaps we need @TSE to post his picture of Farage showing him as the peak of physical perfection ?
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
Ahahahahaha
I guarantee that if you did a word cloud on Starmer the term “muscular” would not appear. He is seen as a weak, pitiable figure, except when he wants to persecute white people
Look at his abysmal polling, which has recently got even worse
You're hopelessly biased. I think you'd admit that.
I am hopelessly biased. I cordially despise him. But the polls are not biased - and his polling is horrible and getting worse
And I'm suggesting that 4 years of day in day out muscular messaging between now and GE29 will lead to people viewing him as muscular. Otherwise, why do it? He's not stupid, you know.
“Muscular” is about as far away from an adjective I’d use to describe SKS.
Even if he tries it with his new found Tough Sir Keir twitter persona, try imagining him saying it in his voice - it just sounds forced.
Disagree actually. I think he does have an authentic strongman persona and I say this as someone who recoils from that sort of thing.
Thickset, suit, glasses – Sir Keir Starmer or a middle-aged Ronnie Kray?
Starmer's tough guy image is undermined by his relatively high-pitched voice. Is plastic surgery on vocal cords a thing?
But not fatally undermined. Eg Michael Corleone had a light soft voice.
Fascinating article on how Bluesky is tailing off, and slowly self-destructing
TLDR: it's become a bubble chamber of leftoids, who are angry and intolerant of opposing opinions (esp but not always rightwing opinions). This makes it hostile to a lot of newcomers, and so the newbies stop coming. Without opposing opinions to tackle, the Blueskyers either turn on each other, or tediously and pointlessly agree with each other. And they become increasingly misinformed
Fascinating article on how Bluesky is tailing off, and slowly self-destructing
TLDR: it's become a bubble chamber of leftoids, who are angry and intolerant of opposing opinions (esp but not always rightwing opinions). This makes it hostile to a lot of newcomers, and so the newbies stop coming. Without opposing opinions to tackle, the Blueskyers either turn on each other, or tediously and pointlessly agree with each other. And they become increasingly misinformed
If you work here illegally or employ people who do, we’re coming for you.
Illegal working raids are up 40%. And we won’t stop there.
No messing about there. Polls will confirm (or not) but a word that probably leaps to many people's minds when thinking about Keir Starmer is "muscular". He'd take that, I reckon, if it turns out to be the case.
Ahahahahaha
I guarantee that if you did a word cloud on Starmer the term “muscular” would not appear. He is seen as a weak, pitiable figure, except when he wants to persecute white people
Look at his abysmal polling, which has recently got even worse
You're hopelessly biased. I think you'd admit that.
I am hopelessly biased. I cordially despise him. But the polls are not biased - and his polling is horrible and getting worse
And I'm suggesting that 4 years of day in day out muscular messaging between now and GE29 will lead to people viewing him as muscular. Otherwise, why do it? He's not stupid, you know.
I expect mere minutes of muscular messaging once the doctors go on strike again
If you don't desist with the mindless Starmer snark I'll start flagging your posts. And I won't stop there.
I'm just playing along with your Muscles McStarmer comedy routine
Edit - and that was a serious point. He'll fold like a flaccid phallus when the doctors go on strike
I doubt there'll be a doctors strike. It's not in their interests.
Fascinating article on how Bluesky is tailing off, and slowly self-destructing
TLDR: it's become a bubble chamber of leftoids, who are angry and intolerant of opposing opinions (esp but not always rightwing opinions). This makes it hostile to a lot of newcomers, and so the newbies stop coming. Without opposing opinions to tackle, the Blueskyers either turn on each other, or tediously and pointlessly agree with each other. And they become increasingly misinformed
So basically like all social media channels, then. Especially X.
Except that X has 500-600m users and Bluesky has 33m - less than ten percent, and Bluesky's growth is stalling (with some evidence that engagement on Bluesky is in actual decline)
Anecdotally, I've also seen a few Bluesky refugees sheepishly returning to X
5 years ago today I went out into the Channel, exposed the French Navy handovers, and predicted a huge wave of illegal migrants. Now we learn that terrorists are using this route, and our country faces serious threats. No one in the Tory or Labour parties believed me.
Its seems like the crime reporter from GB News was correct, he got an exclusive scoop that the Iranian arrested contained those who arrived by "irregular" means via boat and were asylum seekers. Nobody else ran with the story and its got zero traction even now when it has been confirmed.
Are the same people currently touting Farage’s surprising nubility the same as those who once assured us that Boris was “all muscle”?
I think you'd be wrong there old chap, as it's me who is saying he was surprised how unflabby Farage was and it wasn't me who said anything about Boris being "all muscle"
Believe it was BartyBobbins who had a weird thing for Johnson’s body.
If one omitted the last word of that sentence it would have appeared most odd.
It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
We have done this before. The evidence on this is extremely debatable on the direct effects of sugar tax. Sticking a few pence on sugary drinks doesn't seem to have dissuaded teenage kids drinking lakes full of sugary energy drinks.
A bigger measure / impact was the government convinced the food industry to reduce sugar content in a wide range of food voluntarily. So consumers are consuming less sugar from their food without any idea or via the idea that taxation is nudging them away from full sugar coke to sugar free sparkling water.
Indeed. As I have argued before that to get better health outcomes in the general populace, a good way is to make the foods that we all consume better for us, rather than scolding people about what they eat - where the scolding is probably misguided anyway.
People need to be taught to cook at home.
I'm in my 40s and certainly don't know how to do it, unless it's chilli con carne, lasagne or curry which I learned by rote.
You do realise you can teach yourself?
I did, over a few years. And not in any boring way - it was fun. Cooking is fun. You try new recipes, you use your hands in a pleasurable way, it’s relaxing and convivial. And at the end, you can cook
It’s something that some people just don’t seem to get, even if they try. I’m not quite sure why ?
Yes it’s strange
Some people are just too stupid to cook. You do need a decent IQ to understand measurements and processes and new words
But lots of bright people like @Casino_Royale can’t cook. My dad was a clever man and sort-of-tried to learn to cook - and failed
Humanity is peculiar
Buy meat.
Buy seasoning
Put seasoning on meat.
Put meat in air fryer.
Turn on for time that suits that meat.
Halfway through turn it over.
Take out.
Eat.
What IQ is needed for those instructions? Not everything needs to be super complicated.
Similar instructions can work for veg and potatoes too.
Only joking. Good for you. It does sound like quite simple food but if you enjoy it and it keeps you healthy (and you say it does) then 👍
I do wish I could get an air fryer. But my kitchen simply doesn’t have room. If and when I emigrate to a condo in chiang mai it’ll be first on my list
An air fryer is just a tiny fan oven. I’ve never really understood the hype!
Is that all it is?? Ooh. Thanks. You’ve cured my FOMO
It's a powerful, tabletop, convection oven.
Cooks considerably faster than a traditional oven and does so at a fraction of the cost. Doesn't need preheating either so much quicker to operate with.
A meal that could take 40 minutes to cook in a conventional oven, including preheating, might only take 20 minutes in an air fryer.
Fascinating article on how Bluesky is tailing off, and slowly self-destructing
TLDR: it's become a bubble chamber of leftoids, who are angry and intolerant of opposing opinions (esp but not always rightwing opinions). This makes it hostile to a lot of newcomers, and so the newbies stop coming. Without opposing opinions to tackle, the Blueskyers either turn on each other, or tediously and pointlessly agree with each other. And they become increasingly misinformed
So basically like all social media channels, then. Especially X.
Except that X has 500-600m users and Bluesky has 33m - less than ten percent, and Bluesky's growth is stalling (with some evidence that engagement on Bluesky is in actual decline)
Anecdotally, I've also seen a few Bluesky refugees sheepishly returning to X
Musk has won this battle, I suspect
I think you’re right, in spite of what the pink haired, nose ringed, they/them, keffiyeh wearers say.
Anecdotal admittedly but a couple of actors I used to engage with on x who went to Bluesky have now returned to X.
Fascinating article on how Bluesky is tailing off, and slowly self-destructing
TLDR: it's become a bubble chamber of leftoids, who are angry and intolerant of opposing opinions (esp but not always rightwing opinions). This makes it hostile to a lot of newcomers, and so the newbies stop coming. Without opposing opinions to tackle, the Blueskyers either turn on each other, or tediously and pointlessly agree with each other. And they become increasingly misinformed
It is well down on all the daily core metrics over the course of this year.
I visit Bluesky occasionally
It's fun to read some of the old accounts that I miss. By this I mean weird and arcane stuff on archaeology, lexicology, medieval history, zoology - or literary criticism, movie trivia, travel gossip
But then Reddit offers all this in much more specific detail, and anything truly interesting soon reaches X
As a political social medium, Bluesky is a tragic disaster. Full of vitriolic lefties shouting into the void, or into each other's faces
The last para in that article captures it well:
"There is a vibe shift in our culture today. People are removing the pronouns from their bios. Corporations no longer feel compelled to genuflect to the radical left. The NFL removed the words “End Racism” from playing fields. Jeff Bezos is bringing free enterprise back to the Washington Post. No one making these moves fears the left-wing backlash anymore. I’m not saying this is all due to progressives moving to Bluesky. But it helped. On Bluesky, no one can hear them scream."
Sadly, this is all self-inflicted. The Johnson/Truss administrations simply destroyed the trust and confidence of their supporters.
Many of their problems predate that.
for example the increase in student fees crippled them among young graduates.
Something which was accentuated by unaffordable housing in southern England.
The Conservatives became reliant upon the support of the over 50s and C2s.
Demographics which Farage could be attractive to.
The Conservatives ceased to be aspirational. Especially for younger people.
If Cameron was serious that we were "all in it together" he should have announced the triple lock would move to a double lock by 2025 (in 15 years time from 2010) which would now be taking effect, and lower stamp duty and incentivised downsizing.
My parents have literally just rejected doing this due to cost, and losing c.£80k in so doing, so are now living in a house that's far too big for them.
What's that 80k calculation? Is that the difference made by Stamp Duty, or is it Inheritance Tax?
The Stamp Duty one would be met by the set of proposals around to replace Council Tax with a 0.5% house value tax, which also incorporate abolition of Stamp Duty.
I think I came up with the 0.5% figure. Treat with extreme caution. I think you'd want 0.6 to be safe.
Thanks for the reply.
I got it from the full set of proposals known as the Proportional Property Tax a couple of years ago, and the proposals have been around for a number of years. They use 0.48%.
The issue is it would crash the value of small houses in high demand area. That's not necessarily a bad thing on a macro scale, but it would mean the revenues would be lower than expected. £5k per annum on a small terrace in North London...
It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
We have done this before. The evidence on this is extremely debatable on the direct effects of sugar tax. Sticking a few pence on sugary drinks doesn't seem to have dissuaded teenage kids drinking lakes full of sugary energy drinks.
A bigger measure / impact was the government convinced the food industry to reduce sugar content in a wide range of food voluntarily. So consumers are consuming less sugar from their food without any idea or via the idea that taxation is nudging them away from full sugar coke to sugar free sparkling water.
Indeed. As I have argued before that to get better health outcomes in the general populace, a good way is to make the foods that we all consume better for us, rather than scolding people about what they eat - where the scolding is probably misguided anyway.
People need to be taught to cook at home.
I'm in my 40s and certainly don't know how to do it, unless it's chilli con carne, lasagne or curry which I learned by rote.
You do realise you can teach yourself?
I did, over a few years. And not in any boring way - it was fun. Cooking is fun. You try new recipes, you use your hands in a pleasurable way, it’s relaxing and convivial. And at the end, you can cook
It’s something that some people just don’t seem to get, even if they try. I’m not quite sure why ?
Yes it’s strange
Some people are just too stupid to cook. You do need a decent IQ to understand measurements and processes and new words
But lots of bright people like @Casino_Royale can’t cook. My dad was a clever man and sort-of-tried to learn to cook - and failed
Humanity is peculiar
Buy meat.
Buy seasoning
Put seasoning on meat.
Put meat in air fryer.
Turn on for time that suits that meat.
Halfway through turn it over.
Take out.
Eat.
What IQ is needed for those instructions? Not everything needs to be super complicated.
Similar instructions can work for veg and potatoes too.
Only joking. Good for you. It does sound like quite simple food but if you enjoy it and it keeps you healthy (and you say it does) then 👍
I do wish I could get an air fryer. But my kitchen simply doesn’t have room. If and when I emigrate to a condo in chiang mai it’ll be first on my list
An air fryer is just a tiny fan oven. I’ve never really understood the hype!
Is that all it is?? Ooh. Thanks. You’ve cured my FOMO
It's a powerful, tabletop, convection oven.
Cooks considerably faster than a traditional oven and does so at a fraction of the cost. Doesn't need preheating either so much quicker to operate with.
A meal that could take 40 minutes to cook in a conventional oven, including preheating, might only take 20 minutes in an air fryer.
Pays for itself in lower bills too.
I love mine, it was a Xmas gift a few years ago. We got rid of the microwave and just have it.
Fascinating article on how Bluesky is tailing off, and slowly self-destructing
TLDR: it's become a bubble chamber of leftoids, who are angry and intolerant of opposing opinions (esp but not always rightwing opinions). This makes it hostile to a lot of newcomers, and so the newbies stop coming. Without opposing opinions to tackle, the Blueskyers either turn on each other, or tediously and pointlessly agree with each other. And they become increasingly misinformed
I reckon if you put a dozen alpha males together for a month, by the end of it one will be the boss, there will be a few caporegimes, and the rest will be running errands, and the same with a dozen more sensitive chaps. This could be what is happening at BlueSky. We are just primates after all
That’s probably related to the turnout which is much higher . Urban areas are up much more than rural areas. The diaspora vote overall unusually favours Simion but commentators think Dan could narrow the gap .
Commentators seem to think Dan needs overall turnout to be at least 60% to have a chance .
They also think the first round overstated Simion as there was more enthusiasm with his voters then .
Only 66% of Brits think they could beat a cat in a fight? We may have a minority of over-confident fighters, but we also have a lot who are pretty underconfident.
I’ve always thought that 34% was my fellow cat owners.
Have you ever tried giving a cat a pill?
INSTRUCTIONS FOR GIVING YOUR CAT A PILL
1. Pick cat up and cradle it in the crook of your left arm as if holding a baby. Position right forefinger and thumb on either side of cat's mouth and gently apply pressure to cheeks while holding pill in right hand. As cat opens mouth, pop pill into mouth. Allow cat to close mouth and swallow.
2. Retrieve pill from floor and cat from behind sofa. Cradle cat in left arm and repeat process.
3. Retrieve cat from bedroom, and throw soggy pill away. Take new pill from foil wrap, cradle cat in left arm holding rear paws tightly with left hand. Force jaws open and push pill to back of mouth with right forefinger. Hold mouth shut for a count of 10.
4. Retrieve pill from goldfish bowl and cat from top of wardrobe. Call spouse from garden.
5. Kneel on floor with cat wedged firmly between knees, holding front and rear paws. Ignore low growls emitted by cat. Get spouse to hold cat's head firmly with one hand while forcing wooden ruler into mouth. Drop pill down ruler and rub cat's throat vigorously.
6. Retrieve cat from curtain rail, get another pill from foil wrap. Make note to buy new ruler and repair curtains. Carefully sweep shattered figurines from hearth and set to one side for gluing later.
7. Wrap cat in large towel and get spouse to lie on cat with its head just visible from below spouse's armpit. Put pill in end of drinking straw, force cat's mouth open with pencil and blow down drinking straw.
8. Check label to make sure pill not harmful to humans, drink glass of water to take taste away. Apply band-aid to spouse's forearm and remove blood from carpet with cold water and soap.
9. Retrieve cat from neighbor's shed. Get another pill. Place cat in cupboard and close door onto neck to leave head showing. Force mouth open with dessert spoon. Flick pill down throat with elastic band.
10. Fetch screwdriver from garage and put door back on hinges. Apply cold compress to cheek and check records for date of last tetanus shot. Throw T-shirt away and fetch new one from bedroom.
11. Ring fire brigade to retrieve cat from tree across the road. Apologize to neighbor who crashed into fence while swerving to avoid cat. Take last pill from foil wrap.
12. Tie the little bastard’s front paws to rear paws with garden twine and bind tightly to leg of dining table. Find heavy duty pruning gloves from shed. Force cat's mouth open with small spanner. Push pill into mouth followed by large piece of fillet steak. Hold head vertically and pour 1/2 pint of water down throat to wash pill down.
13. Get spouse to drive you to emergency room; sit quietly while doctor stitches fingers and forearm and removes pill remnants from right eye. Stop by furniture shop on way home to order new table.
14. Arrange for the RSPCA to collect the cat. Buy a goldfish.
HOW TO GIVE A DOG A PILL:
1. Wrap it in bacon.
What a palaver!
To give a dog a pill: a) wrap it in cheese. 60% of cases solved. b) throw the dog two treats to catch and make the third the pill. Cases solved now 80%. c) open the dog’s mouth wide, drop the treat into the back, close the mouth and tickle vigorously under the neck. This will solve the remaining 20%, except for those cases where carrying out the final step puts the owner’s fingers (or arm) at risk.
Sadly, this is all self-inflicted. The Johnson/Truss administrations simply destroyed the trust and confidence of their supporters.
Many of their problems predate that.
for example the increase in student fees crippled them among young graduates.
Something which was accentuated by unaffordable housing in southern England.
The Conservatives became reliant upon the support of the over 50s and C2s.
Demographics which Farage could be attractive to.
The Conservatives ceased to be aspirational. Especially for younger people.
If Cameron was serious that we were "all in it together" he should have announced the triple lock would move to a double lock by 2025 (in 15 years time from 2010) which would now be taking effect, and lower stamp duty and incentivised downsizing.
My parents have literally just rejected doing this due to cost, and losing c.£80k in so doing, so are now living in a house that's far too big for them.
What's that 80k calculation? Is that the difference made by Stamp Duty, or is it Inheritance Tax?
The Stamp Duty one would be met by the set of proposals around to replace Council Tax with a 0.5% house value tax, which also incorporate abolition of Stamp Duty.
I think I came up with the 0.5% figure. Treat with extreme caution. I think you'd want 0.6 to be safe.
Thanks for the reply.
I got it from the full set of proposals known as the Proportional Property Tax a couple of years ago, and the proposals have been around for a number of years. They use 0.48%.
The issue is it would crash the value of small houses in high demand area. That's not necessarily a bad thing on a macro scale, but it would mean the revenues would be lower than expected. £5k per annum on a small terrace in North London...
Good.
Whats the problem?
Struggling to understand what is egregious about £5k per annum on a house worth £1M and all things being equal growing in value in real terms at something like £10k to £20k per annum.
Sadly, this is all self-inflicted. The Johnson/Truss administrations simply destroyed the trust and confidence of their supporters.
Many of their problems predate that.
for example the increase in student fees crippled them among young graduates.
Something which was accentuated by unaffordable housing in southern England.
The Conservatives became reliant upon the support of the over 50s and C2s.
Demographics which Farage could be attractive to.
The Conservatives ceased to be aspirational. Especially for younger people.
If Cameron was serious that we were "all in it together" he should have announced the triple lock would move to a double lock by 2025 (in 15 years time from 2010) which would now be taking effect, and lower stamp duty and incentivised downsizing.
My parents have literally just rejected doing this due to cost, and losing c.£80k in so doing, so are now living in a house that's far too big for them.
What's that 80k calculation? Is that the difference made by Stamp Duty, or is it Inheritance Tax?
The Stamp Duty one would be met by the set of proposals around to replace Council Tax with a 0.5% house value tax, which also incorporate abolition of Stamp Duty.
I think I came up with the 0.5% figure. Treat with extreme caution. I think you'd want 0.6 to be safe.
Thanks for the reply.
I got it from the full set of proposals known as the Proportional Property Tax a couple of years ago, and the proposals have been around for a number of years. They use 0.48%.
The issue is it would crash the value of small houses in high demand area. That's not necessarily a bad thing on a macro scale, but it would mean the revenues would be lower than expected. £5k per annum on a small terrace in North London...
Good.
Whats the problem?
I made that clear in my post. Working out what revenues you would raise is difficult because you don't know to what extent a tax will depress house prices.
There is a house for sale in Edinburgh for £2.2 million. Will it still be worth that much with an £11k annual council tax bill? That's three times higher than it is now.
It came after the FDF waged a campaign to put pressure on the DHSC to rewrite its nutrition policy, lobbying officials to remove the push to minimally processed food in the guidance issued to retailers, according to documents and emails reviewed by the Guardian.
In response to a freedom of information request, the government released a cache of emails between the FDF and the DHSC.
Most of the correspondence was heavily redacted. The government cited section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, “which provides for the protection of personal information”, and section 35(1)(a), “which provides protection for the information that relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.
The emails, sent between October 2022 and April 2023, reveal how the FDF, which represents firms with a combined annual turnover of more than £112bn, lobbied the DHSC to drop the guidance pushing retailers to promote minimally processed food...
I'm no food expert and subsist on a perfectly balanced diet of fish (protein) and chips (fat and carbohydrates) every day, and an apple.
But I'm suspicious of food arguments that lump "ultra-processed food" into a single category. Over the decades, everything around food resembles one set of faddists arguing with another group of faddists. Or fattests.
Nor am I shocked that industry lobbyists lobby for industry-favourable outcomes. That's their mission statement.
OTOH measures which industry lobbyists moan about have been significant successes - the extra tax on high sugar, for example, which reduced sugar levels in drinks to just below the threshold. And which has shown to deliver health benefits.
We have done this before. The evidence on this is extremely debatable on the direct effects of sugar tax. Sticking a few pence on sugary drinks doesn't seem to have dissuaded teenage kids drinking lakes full of sugary energy drinks.
A bigger measure / impact was the government convinced the food industry to reduce sugar content in a wide range of food voluntarily. So consumers are consuming less sugar from their food without any idea or via the idea that taxation is nudging them away from full sugar coke to sugar free sparkling water.
Indeed. As I have argued before that to get better health outcomes in the general populace, a good way is to make the foods that we all consume better for us, rather than scolding people about what they eat - where the scolding is probably misguided anyway.
People need to be taught to cook at home.
I'm in my 40s and certainly don't know how to do it, unless it's chilli con carne, lasagne or curry which I learned by rote.
"I just let my Mum get on with it," Sunil said, putting his feet up on the coffee table.
Yes, but I prefer sex.
[Not with your mum]
Have any PB’ers actually met Sunil’s mum? (disclosure, I have)
Sadly, this is all self-inflicted. The Johnson/Truss administrations simply destroyed the trust and confidence of their supporters.
Many of their problems predate that.
for example the increase in student fees crippled them among young graduates.
Something which was accentuated by unaffordable housing in southern England.
The Conservatives became reliant upon the support of the over 50s and C2s.
Demographics which Farage could be attractive to.
The Conservatives ceased to be aspirational. Especially for younger people.
If Cameron was serious that we were "all in it together" he should have announced the triple lock would move to a double lock by 2025 (in 15 years time from 2010) which would now be taking effect, and lower stamp duty and incentivised downsizing.
My parents have literally just rejected doing this due to cost, and losing c.£80k in so doing, so are now living in a house that's far too big for them.
What's that 80k calculation? Is that the difference made by Stamp Duty, or is it Inheritance Tax?
The Stamp Duty one would be met by the set of proposals around to replace Council Tax with a 0.5% house value tax, which also incorporate abolition of Stamp Duty.
I think I came up with the 0.5% figure. Treat with extreme caution. I think you'd want 0.6 to be safe.
Thanks for the reply.
I got it from the full set of proposals known as the Proportional Property Tax a couple of years ago, and the proposals have been around for a number of years. They use 0.48%.
The issue is it would crash the value of small houses in high demand area. That's not necessarily a bad thing on a macro scale, but it would mean the revenues would be lower than expected. £5k per annum on a small terrace in North London...
Good.
Whats the problem?
Struggling to understand what is egregious about £5k per annum on a house worth £1M and all things being equal growing in value in real terms at something like £10k to £20k per annum.
I don't care about that. It's the difficulty of knowing how much you would raise with such a tax if you suddenly increase tax rates on them.
Are the same people currently touting Farage’s surprising nubility the same as those who once assured us that Boris was “all muscle”?
I think you'd be wrong there old chap, as it's me who is saying he was surprised how unflabby Farage was and it wasn't me who said anything about Boris being "all muscle"
Believe it was BartyBobbins who had a weird thing for Johnson’s body.
I never said that, at all, though it got portrayed that way.
Actually the conversation was that @kinabalu claimed that Boris was lying in saying he was 18.5 stone, as he'd be much bigger if he was 18.5 stone and that he'd look more like Mr Creosote if he was 18.5 stone.
I replied to say that I could well believe he was 18.5 stone, which if you're active doesn't need a physique like Mr Creosote.
If you're active but fat then your body will naturally have more muscle since even just standing up and walking at that weight is like doing so while carrying 8 stone of weights. And muscle is 3x denser than fat.
Which then got parodied as "it's all muscle" which is the opposite of what I was saying. I was saying yes he's fat and I believe he could be 18.5 stone.
What I never said at the time is that I had a comparable physique at the time. I was about 18 stone at the time at a similar height and my scales showed my lean muscle mass alone was more than my goal weight. With the fat on top.
From diet and exercise, no medicine, I've lost and kept off about 60 pounds now. Of which about 14 is muscle, and about 46 pounds is fat. The lost muscle means that's equivalent to 88 pounds of fat by volume. And the lost muscle is despite being far more physically fit now, able to run and walk much further and faster, but just not carrying around a 30kg backpack all day every day.
Fascinating article on how Bluesky is tailing off, and slowly self-destructing
TLDR: it's become a bubble chamber of leftoids, who are angry and intolerant of opposing opinions (esp but not always rightwing opinions). This makes it hostile to a lot of newcomers, and so the newbies stop coming. Without opposing opinions to tackle, the Blueskyers either turn on each other, or tediously and pointlessly agree with each other. And they become increasingly misinformed
It is well down on all the daily core metrics over the course of this year.
I visit Bluesky occasionally
It's fun to read some of the old accounts that I miss. By this I mean weird and arcane stuff on archaeology, lexicology, medieval history, zoology - or literary criticism, movie trivia, travel gossip
But then Reddit offers all this in much more specific detail, and anything truly interesting soon reaches X
As a political social medium, Bluesky is a tragic disaster. Full of vitriolic lefties shouting into the void, or into each other's faces
The last para in that article captures it well:
"There is a vibe shift in our culture today. People are removing the pronouns from their bios. Corporations no longer feel compelled to genuflect to the radical left. The NFL removed the words “End Racism” from playing fields. Jeff Bezos is bringing free enterprise back to the Washington Post. No one making these moves fears the left-wing backlash anymore. I’m not saying this is all due to progressives moving to Bluesky. But it helped. On Bluesky, no one can hear them scream."
I go there specifically for one person who follows the Russian economy. It's a shame if Bluesky's imploding, there are legitimate concerns about Musk's twitter and his agenda more broadly. Alternatives seem a good thing.
The Polanski and Ramsay/Chowns campaigns offer a starkly different approach for the Greens, so while not attracting much attention, I wonder if it’s a leadership election that could be very consequential for the next general election.
I agree with you and I think this is pretty significant for the direction of UK politics. It deserves more coverage than it gets.
A battle between Corbynite left watermelon greens and the more NIMBY, rural, almost Lib Dem type of Greens.
I did post about it a few days ago but no one really wanted to look at it.
I support the LibDems and we probably do best out of a Polanski win.
Leaving aside policy differences, Polanski comes across to me as a chancer, someone whose top priority is himself, a politician in the mould of Johnson or Trump. I think Johnson and Trump are terrible people, but they did win elections. Maybe he can do wonders for the Greens.
I think as a Lib Dem a win for Ramsey/Chowns sees them parking their tanks on your lawn. I agree with your assessment. I also don’t think there’s anything in it for the greens to agree an electoral pact. Short term it may work but it simply says both parties are interchangeable and why vote green in that case.
The oddity is that in policy terms, the two parties aren’t interchangeable, the Greens increasingly Corbynite since Labour has expelled so many of its leftists, yet in the electorate’s eyes they are, since both are seen as slightly more nice, less edgy, and more principled, alternatives to Labour.
Analysis of the electoral deal they did for the 2017 election suggested that neither party benefited to any significant extent, in terms of extra votes received in the seats where they backed each other. Yet it remains clear - as the forthcoming London Borough elections will surely show - that both are fishing in the same pond of former Labour voters disappointed that Starmer has repositioned his party toward Tory lite.
For me, having shown willing and offered my help to the local Green campaign, it was an eye opener as to quite how incompetent and behind the times the Green Party is, in terms of its campaigning operation.
Fascinating article on how Bluesky is tailing off, and slowly self-destructing
TLDR: it's become a bubble chamber of leftoids, who are angry and intolerant of opposing opinions (esp but not always rightwing opinions). This makes it hostile to a lot of newcomers, and so the newbies stop coming. Without opposing opinions to tackle, the Blueskyers either turn on each other, or tediously and pointlessly agree with each other. And they become increasingly misinformed
I reckon if you put a dozen alpha males together for a month, by the end of it one will be the boss, there will be a few caporegimes, and the rest will be running errands, and the same with a dozen more sensitive chaps. This could be what is happening at BlueSky. We are just primates after all
Definitely some of that. And also partly an unhappy evolution - for the Left - that increasingly they don't just dislike rightwing or opposing opinions, they will not tolerate them. To oppose Woke left values - which are of course self evidently true - is to be evil, wrong, malign, Nazi. This shall not do. So anyone that has such opinions gets chased off Bluesky, and the purity police will come for even minor infringements in really niche areas - they use Blocking lists, and basic and very violent abuse
What a shitshow
But as I say this is really bad for the Left. eg the Guardian has quit X with all its 600m users and now only preaches on Bluesky to 33m angry lefties and the odd lepidopterist. And if the Guardian strays an inch from the accepted orthodoxy of the day on, say, Israel or gender or ANYTHING, all it gets is screeds of hatred
How does this benefit the Guardian? It doesn't. Much better for them to be on X with vastly more readers and maybe the chance to persuade the middle ground
Then you get the weird phenomenon of wilful ignorance. Lefties who simply aren't aware of very basic facts because these facts are censored if at all awkward, on places like Bluesky
Comments
I was in a pub in Primrose Hill last night, in the lush evening sun
The whole street was like a Beautiful People Convention. Especially notable for astonishingly lovely women aged 20-26, but lots of handsome dudes as well - and nicely preserved oldsters
It’s a definite thing. About 2 years ago there was a horrible fashion for yoot with knives to fetch up on the Hill in the evening. They’ve nearly all disappeared and suddenly it’s rich and glamorous students all congregating. I approve
The populist answer, which feels like it gives a nice easy hit for a Councillor and looks like something is being done, is "whack 'em in and ignore the consequences for anybody who cannot walk and wiggle". People walking/wheeling along a path don't have a local vote usually.
In practice it is a mixture of local environment, character of area, more people using a path reduces ASB, enforcement. Which requires the other sort of barrier - cultural - to be addressed. We don't need much of a change, but it's awkward to achieve. A real answer is culture change.
We have laws now, but many factors which make enforcement on local authorities difficult.
I did an extended comment at midnight a couple of days about the various factors. I might try submitting a header.
In any case muscular rhetoric doesn't require a gym-rat physique, does it. We're talking about his politics not his body.
However, I don’t think this is about easy prosecutions. There’s been a step up in investigations, but there have been few successful prosecutions and several high-profile cases have been let off by the courts.
A battle between Corbynite left watermelon greens and the more NIMBY, rural, almost Lib Dem type of Greens.
I did post about it a few days ago but no one really wanted to look at it.
The Stamp Duty one would be met by the set of proposals around to replace Council Tax with a 0.5% house value tax, which also incorporate abolition of Stamp Duty.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/16/science/space/ed-smylie-dead.html
It's odd, though. 20 years ago there were definitely more tubby and badly dressed women. By and large, that problem has now started to ameliorate.
So, why have the blokes taken over?
And at the exact same time
*stares into existential abyss*
Later, PB
You and isam are either incapable of using your eyes properly (due to SDR) or you're taking the piss. Either way, it's not a productive conversation and needs to be brought to an end.
SKS looks younger and better than NF.
FACT.
I'd say it's pretty rife now.
For example, there is a group of 6 Greens on Darlington Borough Council, which was 0 in 2015, and 2 in 2019.
These are Harrowgate Hill, College, and Hummersknott wards of Darlington.
Are these the posh bits, or are we into more interesting change?
[Not with your mum]
On male diets I do somewhat agree that men have become completely unhealthy.
I wouldn't say either of them looked particularly good for their age, although Farage looks better now than he did a decade ago
You are right, Farage's lower teeth are bad, and they are prominent in caricatures of him, but he is in relatively good nick bodywise for a drinker, I was surprised when he was in Celebrity jungle that he wasn't really flabby, esp as he also has a a big double chin.
But there's no getting away from the fact that Starmer is a flabby porker, even if he was once a handsome man. I wouldn't say he looked good for 62, I assumed he was a bit older
I got it from the full set of proposals known as the Proportional Property Tax a couple of years ago, and the proposals have been around for a number of years. They use 0.48%.
https://fairershare.org.uk/proportional-property-tax/
I think a Keir - Ed fight would be close, but Miliband might edge it
Leaving aside policy differences, Polanski comes across to me as a chancer, someone whose top priority is himself, a politician in the mould of Johnson or Trump. I think Johnson and Trump are terrible people, but they did win elections. Maybe he can do wonders for the Greens.
It’s a small percentage, but it’s enough to make farmers lives hell. And then they become strong opponents of footpaths etc.
If we could come up with an advance on stiles, cattle grids etc. then you would get more people on your side.
Even if he tries it with his new found Tough Sir Keir twitter persona, try imagining him saying it in his voice - it just sounds forced.
You notice the contrast, if you've ever been to Madrid, or Granada. Most of the locals dress immaculately in the evening.
Also, very noticeable, in churches with substantial numbers of Africans in the congregation, is just how immaculately dressed they are.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13236341/Fretting-Rishi-Pictures-reveal-PMs-dark-hair-got-significantly-greyer-spell-British-politics.html
Muscular!
You enjoy your work for its own sake - in your seventies, still.
Those of us who work for a living, and will welcome not having to do so, channel our interests otherwise.
(And I must echo the heart congrats on your happy state.)
(* Least likely to go or be replaced.)
Puce face and flab indicates a few too many bevvies I think
Starmer's tough guy image is undermined by his relatively high-pitched voice. Is plastic surgery on vocal cords a thing?
Edit - and that was a serious point. He'll fold like a flaccid phallus when the doctors go on strike
The Boriswave, and Tory collapse, can both mostly be traced back to Brexit. Truss too.
"Trimmer than you expected" ... ok.
The good news is, on that front at least, there is currently no competition whatsoever.
https://x.com/pipterino/status/1923978326038733296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/1924054407219392951?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
TLDR: it's become a bubble chamber of leftoids, who are angry and intolerant of opposing opinions (esp but not always rightwing opinions). This makes it hostile to a lot of newcomers, and so the newbies stop coming. Without opposing opinions to tackle, the Blueskyers either turn on each other, or tediously and pointlessly agree with each other. And they become increasingly misinformed
https://www.commentary.org/articles/james-meigs/bluesky-progressives-social-media/
Rather more material than whether @isam “would” Nigel Farage.
Especially X.
Anecdotally, I've also seen a few Bluesky refugees sheepishly returning to X
Musk has won this battle, I suspect
https://polymarket.com/event/romania-presidential-election-winner?tid=1747576069194
Cooks considerably faster than a traditional oven and does so at a fraction of the cost. Doesn't need preheating either so much quicker to operate with.
A meal that could take 40 minutes to cook in a conventional oven, including preheating, might only take 20 minutes in an air fryer.
Pays for itself in lower bills too.
Anecdotal admittedly but a couple of actors I used to engage with on x who went to Bluesky have now returned to X.
I never went to Bluesky. It sounded awful.
It's fun to read some of the old accounts that I miss. By this I mean weird and arcane stuff on archaeology, lexicology, medieval history, zoology - or literary criticism, movie trivia, travel gossip
But then Reddit offers all this in much more specific detail, and anything truly interesting soon reaches X
As a political social medium, Bluesky is a tragic disaster. Full of vitriolic lefties shouting into the void, or into each other's faces
The last para in that article captures it well:
"There is a vibe shift in our culture today. People are removing the pronouns from their bios. Corporations no longer feel compelled to genuflect to the radical left. The NFL removed the words “End Racism” from playing fields. Jeff Bezos is bringing free enterprise back to the Washington Post. No one making these moves fears the left-wing backlash anymore. I’m not saying this is all due to progressives moving to Bluesky. But it helped. On Bluesky, no one can hear them scream."
Whats the problem?
It’s a shame because 95% of the interesting voices are gone, mostly into their own walled-garden substacks.
I never bothered with Bluesky.
On the plane back to New York I read the Economist and New Statesman which were both far better than I remembered them.
Commentators seem to think Dan needs overall turnout to be at least 60% to have a chance .
They also think the first round overstated Simion as there was more enthusiasm with his voters then .
To give a dog a pill: a) wrap it in cheese. 60% of cases solved. b) throw the dog two treats to catch and make the third the pill. Cases solved now 80%. c) open the dog’s mouth wide, drop the treat into the back, close the mouth and tickle vigorously under the neck. This will solve the remaining 20%, except for those cases where carrying out the final step puts the owner’s fingers (or arm) at risk.
There is a house for sale in Edinburgh for £2.2 million. Will it still be worth that much with an £11k annual council tax bill? That's three times higher than it is now.
In terms of the exit polls they don’t normally include the diaspora vote which could be crucial if things are close in Romania .
Actually the conversation was that @kinabalu claimed that Boris was lying in saying he was 18.5 stone, as he'd be much bigger if he was 18.5 stone and that he'd look more like Mr Creosote if he was 18.5 stone.
I replied to say that I could well believe he was 18.5 stone, which if you're active doesn't need a physique like Mr Creosote.
If you're active but fat then your body will naturally have more muscle since even just standing up and walking at that weight is like doing so while carrying 8 stone of weights. And muscle is 3x denser than fat.
Which then got parodied as "it's all muscle" which is the opposite of what I was saying. I was saying yes he's fat and I believe he could be 18.5 stone.
What I never said at the time is that I had a comparable physique at the time. I was about 18 stone at the time at a similar height and my scales showed my lean muscle mass alone was more than my goal weight. With the fat on top.
From diet and exercise, no medicine, I've lost and kept off about 60 pounds now. Of which about 14 is muscle, and about 46 pounds is fat. The lost muscle means that's equivalent to 88 pounds of fat by volume. And the lost muscle is despite being far more physically fit now, able to run and walk much further and faster, but just not carrying around a 30kg backpack all day every day.
Analysis of the electoral deal they did for the 2017 election suggested that neither party benefited to any significant extent, in terms of extra votes received in the seats where they backed each other. Yet it remains clear - as the forthcoming London Borough elections will surely show - that both are fishing in the same pond of former Labour voters disappointed that Starmer has repositioned his party toward Tory lite.
For me, having shown willing and offered my help to the local Green campaign, it was an eye opener as to quite how incompetent and behind the times the Green Party is, in terms of its campaigning operation.
What a shitshow
But as I say this is really bad for the Left. eg the Guardian has quit X with all its 600m users and now only preaches on Bluesky to 33m angry lefties and the odd lepidopterist. And if the Guardian strays an inch from the accepted orthodoxy of the day on, say, Israel or gender or ANYTHING, all it gets is screeds of hatred
How does this benefit the Guardian? It doesn't. Much better for them to be on X with vastly more readers and maybe the chance to persuade the middle ground
Then you get the weird phenomenon of wilful ignorance. Lefties who simply aren't aware of very basic facts because these facts are censored if at all awkward, on places like Bluesky