You can tell that times are grim for the left when commentisfree is reduced to peddling dreams of impending financial crashes to cheer up its readership:
We do look to be heading for some very choppy waters. I have big worries about equity markets in most places. I fear there is going to be real turmoil over an extended period. And I don't think that the UK is that well insulated form events elsewhere, at all. In fact, we could be very badly exposed.
Not that it is worth that much, but the IMF's latest assessment of British economic prospects just flashed onto my twitter feed:
"Britain’s economy is still solid in the face of global weakness, the International Monetary Fund said on Tuesday in an assessment that will please George Osborne ."
Hard to see how May can be a realistic runner to replace Cameron when she has failed spectacularly by her own measure as Home Sec, esp when immigration is the number one issue of concern for voters
Some ministers talk well (May), some don't but actually achieve things (IDS) - a few do both (Gove).
May v BoJo... May? May v Osbo... Osbo? May v Javid... ??
Yes, I think I agree on the first two (both personally and as a guess as to what the party would do). On May vs Javid, at present Javid is still a bit inexperienced and he needs to become more fluent in interviews and speeches, but there's a couple of years to go and I think that he might well be the eventual winner if that were the match-up.
"Ms Mustafa explained that she could not be guilty of sexism or racism against white men "because racism and sexism describe structures of privilege based on race and gender and therefore women of colour and minority genders cannot be racist or sexist, since we do not stand to benefit from such a system."
And ain't that the truth?
You know, I kind of get that the "#killallwhitemen' hashtag is humour, and I wouldn't charge someone for using it.
But that paragraph about 'structures of privilege' is just appalling, scary drivel.
That's the thing: it isn't a joke, she actually means it.
You can tell that times are grim for the left when commentisfree is reduced to peddling dreams of impending financial crashes to cheer up its readership:
Wouldn't falling commodity prices generally benefit the UK economy?
Falling commodity prices do benefit the UK.
From a straight economic perspective, a lower price of oil and other commodities increases GDP. (GDP = Consumption + Investment - Less Net Imports - a lower import bill therefore means higher GDP.)
The polls on EU membership seem all over the place. Is public opinion volatile or are some polls simply wrong? Right now it's hard to tell.
What we need is rolling polling.
We need nightly polling, usually released at 22.00. Hopefully this will lead to the much-missed comments of 'crossover', 'tick tock', and pictures of squirrels in amusing positions.
It had f'all to do with the result of the GE, but it gave us all something to talk about as posters examined the entrails of every single point movement and subsample for meaning that was not there..
I guess these are the brillient headlines we will see in the Nat onal tomorrow after this amazing deal
FEARS were mounting last night that ministers were preparing to hand a £350 million contract to supply water to Scotland’s schools, hospitals, prisons and Government offices to an English private water company.
Not just any private company - but ANGLIAN water - ENGLAND is derived from ANGLE - so it's the ENGLISH TOP HAT PINSTRIPE WESTMONSTER water company that will be stealing the profits, beating the workers etc.
It's come to a pretty pass when the SNP awards a massive utility contract to a privately-held English company at the expense of a Scottish public body.
This reminds me a little of an anecdote I vaguely recall from Philip Matyszak's Classical Compendium (which I do recommend).
There was a Roman oaf, let's call him Gaius, for argument's sake. He was so loathsome people used to pelt him wherever he went. He complained and got the magistrates to pass a law saying only soft fruit could be thrown at people. One day someone went to a magistrate and asked whether a pine cone was a fruit.
"It is if you intend to throw it at Gaius," the magistrate replied.
Mr. Royale, if that's the defence she deserves to lose.
I'm all in favour of broad boundaries, especially for comedy, but saying women can never be sexist and non-whites can never be racist is palpable nonsense.
I suspect it's a common belief amongst university diversity officers, and probably more broadly throughout the Corbynite Left too.
Bahar Mustafa is a tedious oaf of a person, and yet I'm not happy to see someone arrested over such a thing. Being axed from her job [because of its particular nature] would seem more fitting. It's important that freedom of speech is as broad as possible*, even when the messages sent are ones one personally dislikes.
*Freedom of speech but axed from her job might seem inconsistent, but a diversity officer tweeting about killing all white men is inappropriate.
I think it's reasonable to limit freedom of speech when it's a direct incitement to violent action. "White men are evil and deserve to die" should be legally acceptable. "Kill all white men" should not.
I doubt if it was meant literally. It's called "punching up" which roughly means that a member of an "oppressed" group is entitled to be as abusive as they like about an "oppressor" group. It doesn't mean she really wants to kill white men. She just wants to express her loathing for them.
It would be interesting to know if she's ever had (or has) a white British boyfriend.
Bahar Mustafa is a tedious oaf of a person, and yet I'm not happy to see someone arrested over such a thing. Being axed from her job [because of its particular nature] would seem more fitting. It's important that freedom of speech is as broad as possible*, even when the messages sent are ones one personally dislikes.
*Freedom of speech but axed from her job might seem inconsistent, but a diversity officer tweeting about killing all white men is inappropriate.
I think it's reasonable to limit freedom of speech when it's a direct incitement to violent action. "White men are evil and deserve to die" should be legally acceptable. "Kill all white men" should not.
On that basis the Elizabethans would have locked up Shakespeare for having an actor say "let's kill all the lawyers".
I think Mr Dancer has got the appropriate course of action spot on.
Well, no, because in that situation the person would clearly be acting.
Do you think it should be lawful for a white student to tweet "kill all black people"? What about if that student was a member of the KKK? What about if he didn't tweet it but shouted in on a public street? To a crowd of angry racists?
Has the "hanging Tory effigy" story been discussed here already, or something?
To me it is astonishing.
The hanging or burning of effigies has a long and illustrious history in Great Britain.
I believe there is even a national festival dedicated to just such things.
I agree. The line should be drawn at actual physical violence. I do however include spitting in that. Personally I am of the view that spitting at someone should be considered to be assault. It is a disgusting habit which, in the past, has been associated with the spread of disease. And I would hate to think what diseases some of the protesting crusties are harbouring.
Yes, physical violence and bodily fluids cross the line.
Egging, flouring, soaking, to me these are reasonably borderline activities. I'll faux outrage when the other side do it but laugh if it's my own side.
Burning or hanging effigies, absolutely fine. The Tory hypocrisy over this is stunning but not unexpected.
That seems fair. Burn me in effigy all your like. Mind you, throw stuff or spit on me - I'd lay out anyone who did that.
You can tell that times are grim for the left when commentisfree is reduced to peddling dreams of impending financial crashes to cheer up its readership:
We do look to be heading for some very choppy waters. I have big worries about equity markets in most places. I fear there is going to be real turmoil over an extended period. And I don't think that the UK is that well insulated form events elsewhere, at all. In fact, we could be very badly exposed.
Not that it is worth that much, but the IMF's latest assessment of British economic prospects just flashed onto my twitter feed:
"Britain’s economy is still solid in the face of global weakness, the International Monetary Fund said on Tuesday in an assessment that will please George Osborne ."
The world goes through long cycles when commodity exporters are on-top (the 1970s, 2000 to 2014), and long period when commodity importers are on-top (the 80s and 90s, and I suspect, now).
During the last decade and a half we have had to hand over more and more of our own economic output just to receive the same amount (or actually diminishing) quantities of raw materials such as oil, natural gas, coal, etc.
The cycle has now turned, and for the next who knows how long we will hand over smaller and smaller quantities of our economic output to get the same amounts of raw materials.
It is a mega shift in terms of trade and economics, and will support resource importers' economies in a much underappreciated way.
Laughable hypocrisy from the resident rent-a-quote loony.
Quite
it leaves the Scottish National party government open to charges of hypocrisy and opportunism.
Sturgeon, the first minister and SNP leader, had campaigned heavily against increasing privatisation of the public sector in England during the referendum campaign and the general election, particularly in the NHS. Now all Scottish hospitals will buy their water and waste water services from the privatised utility, as well as nearly 100 other public sector bodies, including all universities and colleges.
Haha, let's forget your quoting Severin Carrell which immediately undermines the entire thing, concentrate on how nothing is being privatised. A purchased service, which was always a purchased service is going to be a purchased service for the best possible price.
Result!.
He is not bright enough to see that, his loyalist hatred of Scotland blinds him to reality.
I quite liked Boris' speech but then I'm not a Tory. What was it people didn't like? He was perhaps a little short on detail or any true guiding philosophy but I can't help but feel the reason Tories don't like it is because he didn't sound tough enough on all the bad people or sufficiently stir their social darwinist juices.
Mr. Royale, if that's the defence she deserves to lose.
I'm all in favour of broad boundaries, especially for comedy, but saying women can never be sexist and non-whites can never be racist is palpable nonsense.
I suspect it's a common belief amongst university diversity officers, and probably more broadly throughout the Corbynite Left too.
It seems diversity offices are a strangely undiverse lot.
I guess these are the brillient headlines we will see in the Nat onal tomorrow after this amazing deal
FEARS were mounting last night that ministers were preparing to hand a £350 million contract to supply water to Scotland’s schools, hospitals, prisons and Government offices to an English private water company.
Not just any private company - but ANGLIAN water - ENGLAND is derived from ANGLE - so it's the ENGLISH TOP HAT PINSTRIPE WESTMONSTER water company that will be stealing the profits, beating the workers etc.
It's come to a pretty pass when the SNP awards a massive utility contract to a privately-held English company at the expense of a Scottish public body.
So much for the great Scottish business revival that was going to be unleashed by an independent Scotland..... Of course, lost Scottish jobs and bankrupt Scottish businesses are all fair game so long as the Scottish Govt. is getting value for money".... says Dair.
On that basis the Elizabethans would have locked up Shakespeare for having an actor say "let's kill all the lawyers".
Hard to get a jury to convict on that one, though.
It's probably one of Shakespeare's most popular lines.
Haven't seen the details, seems a weird one to prosecute and IIRC it wasn't aimed at anyone in particular. It may be however she has tweeted something mroe direct. The case continues...
You can tell that times are grim for the left when commentisfree is reduced to peddling dreams of impending financial crashes to cheer up its readership:
We do look to be heading for some very choppy waters. I have big worries about equity markets in most places. I fear there is going to be real turmoil over an extended period. And I don't think that the UK is that well insulated form events elsewhere, at all. In fact, we could be very badly exposed.
Not that it is worth that much, but the IMF's latest assessment of British economic prospects just flashed onto my twitter feed:
"Britain’s economy is still solid in the face of global weakness, the International Monetary Fund said on Tuesday in an assessment that will please George Osborne ."
I hope that's right, but I am not sure that it is. I sense trouble.
Mr. G, do please knock the 'Loyalist' nonsense on the head. Just as you politely requested the term 'Scotch' not be used, so I'd like the unwelcome use of 'Loyalist' to end.
I guess these are the brillient headlines we will see in the Nat onal tomorrow after this amazing deal
FEARS were mounting last night that ministers were preparing to hand a £350 million contract to supply water to Scotland’s schools, hospitals, prisons and Government offices to an English private water company.
Not just any private company - but ANGLIAN water - ENGLAND is derived from ANGLE - so it's the ENGLISH TOP HAT PINSTRIPE WESTMONSTER water company that will be stealing the profits, beating the workers etc.
It's come to a pretty pass when the SNP awards a massive utility contract to a privately-held English company at the expense of a Scottish public body.
So much for the great Scottish business revival that was going to be unleashed by an independent Scotland..... Of course, lost Scottish jobs and bankrupt Scottish businesses are all fair game so long as the Scottish Govt. is getting value for money".... says Dair.
LOL , worse than the other turkey , the public service continues as it did and the SNP save us £40M on top, win win yet again.
Bahar Mustafa is a tedious oaf of a person, and yet I'm not happy to see someone arrested over such a thing. Being axed from her job [because of its particular nature] would seem more fitting. It's important that freedom of speech is as broad as possible*, even when the messages sent are ones one personally dislikes.
*Freedom of speech but axed from her job might seem inconsistent, but a diversity officer tweeting about killing all white men is inappropriate.
I think it's reasonable to limit freedom of speech when it's a direct incitement to violent action. "White men are evil and deserve to die" should be legally acceptable. "Kill all white men" should not.
On that basis the Elizabethans would have locked up Shakespeare for having an actor say "let's kill all the lawyers".
I think Mr Dancer has got the appropriate course of action spot on.
Well, no, because in that situation the person would clearly be acting.
Do you think it should be lawful for a white student to tweet "kill all black people"? What about if that student was a member of the KKK? What about if he didn't tweet it but shouted in on a public street? To a crowd of angry racists?
I think it all depends on context. Words can mean different things in different contexts - "let him have it", for example.
Someone sending a tweet that reads "kill all white men" is inherently unlikely to be expecting to be taken literally. It is neither a practical course of action, nor is twitter a plausible means of putting such a course of action into practice. A member of the KKK shouting in a public street "kill all black people" may well have a very different aspiration as to what meaning will be placed on his words.
I place a very high value on freedom of speech. That means allowing people to say things that I find repellent. So be it.
I guess these are the brillient headlines we will see in the Nat onal tomorrow after this amazing deal
FEARS were mounting last night that ministers were preparing to hand a £350 million contract to supply water to Scotland’s schools, hospitals, prisons and Government offices to an English private water company.
Not just any private company - but ANGLIAN water - ENGLAND is derived from ANGLE - so it's the ENGLISH TOP HAT PINSTRIPE WESTMONSTER water company that will be stealing the profits, beating the workers etc.
I bet it's owned and run by TORIES too, ones who in the eyes of rabid Nats, filter the water through sheets and blankets stolen from poor old people and the cots of babies.
Anglo-saxons were basically German, were they not?
It's come to a pretty pass when the SNP awards a massive utility contract to a privately-held English company at the expense of a Scottish public body.
The SNP giving taxpayer money to profitable private companies is all the rage now
@ScottyNational: Advert: Did you make £6.24m profit in 2014 but would like another £150k? Apply now for a Scottish Government 'Special Acquaintances' grant.
You can tell that times are grim for the left when commentisfree is reduced to peddling dreams of impending financial crashes to cheer up its readership:
We do look to be heading for some very choppy waters. I have big worries about equity markets in most places. I fear there is going to be real turmoil over an extended period. And I don't think that the UK is that well insulated form events elsewhere, at all. In fact, we could be very badly exposed.
Not that it is worth that much, but the IMF's latest assessment of British economic prospects just flashed onto my twitter feed:
"Britain’s economy is still solid in the face of global weakness, the International Monetary Fund said on Tuesday in an assessment that will please George Osborne ."
I hope that's right, but I am not sure that it is. I sense trouble.
I've no idea what will happen but I'm amazed by the lack of media discussion of the huge current account deficit. Always been a sign of trouble in the past 40 years.
Mr. G, do please knock the 'Loyalist' nonsense on the head. Just as you politely requested the term 'Scotch' not be used, so I'd like the unwelcome use of 'Loyalist' to end.
The Lord Advocate has said police will "follow the evidence" in its investigation into property deals conducted by SNP MP Michelle Thomson's lawyer.
Ms Thomson is linked to 13 transactions Christopher Hales conducted in 2010-11 where properties were bought at knock-down prices.
The properties were purchased cheaply from clients looking for a quick sale and sold at a huge mark-up the same day where complicated "cashback" deals were used to artificially inflate property prices to secure bigger loans from lenders.
Bahar Mustafa is a tedious oaf of a person, and yet I'm not happy to see someone arrested over such a thing. Being axed from her job [because of its particular nature] would seem more fitting. It's important that freedom of speech is as broad as possible*, even when the messages sent are ones one personally dislikes.
*Freedom of speech but axed from her job might seem inconsistent, but a diversity officer tweeting about killing all white men is inappropriate.
I think it's reasonable to limit freedom of speech when it's a direct incitement to violent action. "White men are evil and deserve to die" should be legally acceptable. "Kill all white men" should not.
On that basis the Elizabethans would have locked up Shakespeare for having an actor say "let's kill all the lawyers".
I think Mr Dancer has got the appropriate course of action spot on.
Well, no, because in that situation the person would clearly be acting.
Do you think it should be lawful for a white student to tweet "kill all black people"? What about if that student was a member of the KKK? What about if he didn't tweet it but shouted in on a public street? To a crowd of angry racists?
Any sensible law - and indeed, any sensible jury - would take context into account.
It's come to a pretty pass when the SNP awards a massive utility contract to a privately-held English company at the expense of a Scottish public body.
The SNP giving taxpayer money to profitable private companies is all the rage now
@ScottyNational: Advert: Did you make £6.24m profit in 2014 but would like another £150k? Apply now for a Scottish Government 'Special Acquaintances' grant.
Extra froth with your frothing there, calm down or you will explode
Bahar Mustafa is a tedious oaf of a person, and yet I'm not happy to see someone arrested over such a thing. Being axed from her job [because of its particular nature] would seem more fitting. It's important that freedom of speech is as broad as possible*, even when the messages sent are ones one personally dislikes.
*Freedom of speech but axed from her job might seem inconsistent, but a diversity officer tweeting about killing all white men is inappropriate.
I think it's reasonable to limit freedom of speech when it's a direct incitement to violent action. "White men are evil and deserve to die" should be legally acceptable. "Kill all white men" should not.
On that basis the Elizabethans would have locked up Shakespeare for having an actor say "let's kill all the lawyers".
I think Mr Dancer has got the appropriate course of action spot on.
Well, no, because in that situation the person would clearly be acting.
Do you think it should be lawful for a white student to tweet "kill all black people"? What about if that student was a member of the KKK? What about if he didn't tweet it but shouted in on a public street? To a crowd of angry racists?
I think it all depends on context. Words can mean different things in different contexts - "let him have it", for example.
Someone sending a tweet that reads "kill all white men" is inherently unlikely to be expecting to be taken literally. It is neither a practical course of action, nor is twitter a plausible means of putting such a course of action into practice. A member of the KKK shouting in a public street "kill all black people" may well have a very different aspiration as to what meaning will be placed on his words.
I place a very high value on freedom of speech. That means allowing people to say things that I find repellent. So be it.
Quite agree - however distasteful what she says may have been - not being allowed to say it is far more dangerous for society as a whole.
Banging my head on the desk in response to her supposed 'defence' though. For Free Speech reasons I want her to win the case - but absolutely not with that defence!
Mr. Royale, if that's the defence she deserves to lose.
I'm all in favour of broad boundaries, especially for comedy, but saying women can never be sexist and non-whites can never be racist is palpable nonsense.
I suspect it's a common belief amongst university diversity officers, and probably more broadly throughout the Corbynite Left too.
It seems diversity offices are a strangely undiverse lot.
I was marketing officer at my students' union for a year, but not as a sabbatical. To be honest I didn't do very much other than attend council meetings and do the occasional poster. However, I was the only one to vote against a motion in favour of promoting multiculturalism in a meeting of twenty.
But everyone knew I was a Tory so I was sort of tolerated as no real threat.
Just back from my weekly visit to Manchester. I saw the abusive, foul-mouthed, great unwashed outside the conservative conference. What an appallying bunch they are.
I don't understand why the police have set it up like they have. The delegates must have felt like they were "walking the plan."
I'm not sure Fraser Nelson (The Spectator) appreciated being called a "child killer" and other unmentionable things.
I suspect that the police have set it up like it's been set up to achieve the result it's achieved
Bahar Mustafa is a tedious oaf of a person, and yet I'm not happy to see someone arrested over such a thing. Being axed from her job [because of its particular nature] would seem more fitting. It's important that freedom of speech is as broad as possible*, even when the messages sent are ones one personally dislikes.
*Freedom of speech but axed from her job might seem inconsistent, but a diversity officer tweeting about killing all white men is inappropriate.
I think it's reasonable to limit freedom of speech when it's a direct incitement to violent action. "White men are evil and deserve to die" should be legally acceptable. "Kill all white men" should not.
On that basis the Elizabethans would have locked up Shakespeare for having an actor say "let's kill all the lawyers".
I think Mr Dancer has got the appropriate course of action spot on.
Well, no, because in that situation the person would clearly be acting.
Do you think it should be lawful for a white student to tweet "kill all black people"? What about if that student was a member of the KKK? What about if he didn't tweet it but shouted in on a public street? To a crowd of angry racists?
I think it all depends on context. Words can mean different things in different contexts - "let him have it", for example.
Someone sending a tweet that reads "kill all white men" is inherently unlikely to be expecting to be taken literally. It is neither a practical course of action, nor is twitter a plausible means of putting such a course of action into practice. A member of the KKK shouting in a public street "kill all black people" may well have a very different aspiration as to what meaning will be placed on his words.
I place a very high value on freedom of speech. That means allowing people to say things that I find repellent. So be it.
I don't think someone sending a tweet that reads "kill all [insert race here] men" is inherently unlikely to be expecting to be taken literally. When you see crowds of people at the Conservative conference spitting at people they think deserve it because they're supposedly part of the white conservative patriarchy, or hanging mannequins of financiers as lynching victims from motorway bridges, it's clear there is a tendency towards violence.
I place a very high value on freedom of speech and I also believe that means allowing people to say things I find repellent. The question is whether that should include direct threats of violence.
Mr. Royale, if that's the defence she deserves to lose.
I'm all in favour of broad boundaries, especially for comedy, but saying women can never be sexist and non-whites can never be racist is palpable nonsense.
I suspect it's a common belief amongst university diversity officers
As I recall it's because such people argue racism is about power relations, and so since in this country it was whites oppressing non-whites (or the wrong whites), the historic power relations mean it is impossible to be racist in the other direction, merely unpleasant. Seems like nonsense to me.
Just back from my weekly visit to Manchester. I saw the abusive, foul-mouthed, great unwashed outside the conservative conference. What an appallying bunch they are.
I don't understand why the police have set it up like they have. The delegates must have felt like they were "walking the plan."
The kind of attitude the screaming Eagles talks of is why UKIP couldn't just stand aside and let the Tories have the votes they got as Richard Nabavi likes to suggest they should have. Cameron as PM holds massive sway over the referendum result, simply because many conservatives will blindly do whatever he recommends...I would like to see odds on him recommending to leave from people suggesting he may do so....
1) Conservatives won't blindly follow Cameron on this.
2) Cameron will recommend staying In. There is not a snowflake's chance in hell of him recommending Out.
What it comes down to is that, both for Cameron and for a very large proportion of Conservative voters, membership of the EU is seen as an economic necessity. There's lots about it that they don't like, but on balance the idea of leaving doesn't seem a serious option. In any case leaving wouldn't necessarily free the country from the things about the EU which people don't like, so why take the economic risk?
But what is the economic risk? We are net contributors.
I don't see Leave or Remain making more than a marginal economic difference either way.
For me, the reasons for leaving are political.
I think the economic claims of both "In" and "Out" are massively overstated. Britain will not lose 3 million jobs if we leave the EU. Nor, if we leave, will Britain sign a Free Trade Agreement with China that allows British firms to sell free of tariffs to the Chinese.
In fact, our terms of trade would change very little in the event of "Out". We would still (almost certainly) sign-up to TTIP. We would almost certainly sign a deal with the EU that would be very similar to those which the Swiss and the Norwegians have (and therefore we would still be net contributors, albeit to a more modest level. And more importantly, we'd get to choose whether we had farm subsidies, and if so, how much).
The most likely negative consequences of an "Out" vote would be in the 3-4 year period when it wasn't clear what our ongoing relationship with the EU was going to be. During this period, I would expect foreign investment flows into the UK would be limited by political uncertainty. But not doing something because there would be a period of uncertainty is a silly reason.
But what about Scotland demanding a new Indy Ref in we leave the EU?
That is what as known as a win-win.
Would we install electrified razor wire along the border?
Had a day off and so on a whim went to see The Martian, which I hadn't been planning to see but heard was good.
F---ing excellent movie, best I've seen in years. Tense but funny, beautiful, heartwarming and emotional as hell.
Sequel to Interstellar - Matt Damon marooned by himself on a far-flung planet!
Haven't gotten around to see Interstellar yet - I was rather put out by the pompous crowd of 'you just don't get it' defenders to some of its critics. Wouldn't be a problem for The Martian, I assure you - the sort of simple tale done perfectly, and hitting home emotionally very well as a result.
You can tell that times are grim for the left when commentisfree is reduced to peddling dreams of impending financial crashes to cheer up its readership:
We do look to be heading for some very choppy waters. I have big worries about equity markets in most places. I fear there is going to be real turmoil over an extended period. And I don't think that the UK is that well insulated form events elsewhere, at all. In fact, we could be very badly exposed.
Not that it is worth that much, but the IMF's latest assessment of British economic prospects just flashed onto my twitter feed:
"Britain’s economy is still solid in the face of global weakness, the International Monetary Fund said on Tuesday in an assessment that will please George Osborne ."
I hope that's right, but I am not sure that it is. I sense trouble.
I've no idea what will happen but I'm amazed by the lack of media discussion of the huge current account deficit. Always been a sign of trouble in the past 40 years.
It is worth remembering that the Current Account balances across the world have to add up to zero. (I.e. one country's imports are another country's exports.)
If you look at 2012, the big current account surplus countries were:
Germany 240,862 China 215,392 Saudi Arabia 164,764 Netherlands 89,546 Kuwait 78,708 Russian 71,282 Switzerland 66,135 Norway 63,557 Qatar 62,000 Japan 60,117 Korea, Rep. 50,835 Iraq 29,541 Nigeria 20,353 Venezuela, RB 11,016 Italy -9,231 Mexico -15,877 Spain -16,295 France -41,720 Turkey -48,535 Brazil -54,246 Canada -59,942 Australia -68,008 India -91,471 United Kingdom -97,822 United States -449,669
Now you'll notice that most (not Germany or China) of the big current account surplus countries are resource exporters. As the price of oil, gas, coal, steel, copper, etc falls, those countries will go from being current account surpluses to deficits.
And because everything has to balance, that means that ours, and India's and the US's current account deficits will decline.
''Quite agree - however distasteful what she says may have been - not being allowed to say it is far more dangerous for society as a whole.''
I don't think that's true. Any person tweeting 'kill all black men' is going to be prosecuted immediately, regardless of standing or context.
What is dangerous is the prevailing feeling in this country that the law is being applied along racial lines. That if you are a muslim taxi driver, you can live to a different set of laws to a white British taxi driver.
Bahar Mustafa is a tedious oaf of a person, and yet I'm not happy to see someone arrested over such a thing. Being axed from her job [because of its particular nature] would seem more fitting. It's important that freedom of speech is as broad as possible*, even when the messages sent are ones one personally dislikes.
*Freedom of speech but axed from her job might seem inconsistent, but a diversity officer tweeting about killing all white men is inappropriate.
I think it's reasonable to limit freedom of speech when it's a direct incitement to violent action. "White men are evil and deserve to die" should be legally acceptable. "Kill all white men" should not.
On that basis the Elizabethans would have locked up Shakespeare for having an actor say "let's kill all the lawyers".
I think Mr Dancer has got the appropriate course of action spot on.
Well, no, because in that situation the person would clearly be acting.
Do you think it should be lawful for a white student to tweet "kill all black people"? What about if that student was a member of the KKK? What about if he didn't tweet it but shouted in on a public street? To a crowd of angry racists?
I think it all depends on context. Words can mean different things in different contexts - "let him have it", for example.
Someone sending a tweet that reads "kill all white men" is inherently unlikely to be expecting to be taken literally. It is neither a practical course of action, nor is twitter a plausible means of putting such a course of action into practice. A member of the KKK shouting in a public street "kill all black people" may well have a very different aspiration as to what meaning will be placed on his words.
I place a very high value on freedom of speech. That means allowing people to say things that I find repellent. So be it.
Quite agree - however distasteful what she says may have been - not being allowed to say it is far more dangerous for society as a whole.
Banging my head on the desk in response to her supposed 'defence' though. For Free Speech reasons I want her to win the case - but absolutely not with that defence!
There do seem to be some in the law enforcement business who believe that freedom of speech should only have a broad remit in reference to Andrew Mitchell.
Bahar Mustafa is a tedious oaf of a person, and yet I'm not happy to see someone arrested over such a thing. Being axed from her job [because of its particular nature] would seem more fitting. It's important that freedom of speech is as broad as possible*, even when the messages sent are ones one personally dislikes.
*Freedom of speech but axed from her job might seem inconsistent, but a diversity officer tweeting about killing all white men is inappropriate.
I think it's reasonable to limit freedom of speech when it's a direct incitement to violent action. "White men are evil and deserve to die" should be legally acceptable. "Kill all white men" should not.
On that basis the Elizabethans would have locked up Shakespeare for having an actor say "let's kill all the lawyers".
I think Mr Dancer has got the appropriate course of action spot on.
Well, no, because in that situation the person would clearly be acting.
Do you think it should be lawful for a white student to tweet "kill all black people"? What about if that student was a member of the KKK? What about if he didn't tweet it but shouted in on a public street? To a crowd of angry racists?
I think it all depends on context. Words can mean different things in different contexts - "let him have it", for example.
Someone sending a tweet that reads "kill all white men" is inherently unlikely to be expecting to be taken literally. It is neither a practical course of action, nor is twitter a plausible means of putting such a course of action into practice. A member of the KKK shouting in a public street "kill all black people" may well have a very different aspiration as to what meaning will be placed on his words.
I place a very high value on freedom of speech. That means allowing people to say things that I find repellent. So be it.
I don't think someone sending a tweet that reads "kill all [insert race here] men" is inherently unlikely to be expecting to be taken literally. When you see crowds of people at the Conservative conference spitting at people they think deserve it because they're supposedly part of the white conservative patriarchy, or hanging mannequins of financiers as lynching victims from motorway bridges, it's clear there is a tendency towards violence.
I place a very high value on freedom of speech and I also believe that means allowing people to say things I find repellent. The question is whether that should include direct threats of violence.
I mean, it wasn't a direct threat of violence. IIRC it was a hashtag. It wasn't even directed at someone as I recall.
Assuming the charge relates to those tweets of course.
Mr. Taffys, agree entirely that consistency is important. I'd argue we should broaden free speech as much as possible, and would really like a First Amendment equivalent.
You can tell that times are grim for the left when commentisfree is reduced to peddling dreams of impending financial crashes to cheer up its readership:
We do look to be heading for some very choppy waters. I have big worries about equity markets in most places. I fear there is going to be real turmoil over an extended period. And I don't think that the UK is that well insulated form events elsewhere, at all. In fact, we could be very badly exposed.
Not that it is worth that much, but the IMF's latest assessment of British economic prospects just flashed onto my twitter feed:
"Britain’s economy is still solid in the face of global weakness, the International Monetary Fund said on Tuesday in an assessment that will please George Osborne ."
I hope that's right, but I am not sure that it is. I sense trouble.
I've no idea what will happen but I'm amazed by the lack of media discussion of the huge current account deficit. Always been a sign of trouble in the past 40 years.
It is worth remembering that the Current Account balances across the world have to add up to zero. (I.e. one country's imports are another country's exports.)
If you look at 2012, the big current account surplus countries were:
Germany 240,862 China 215,392 Saudi Arabia 164,764 Netherlands 89,546 Kuwait 78,708 Russian 71,282 Switzerland 66,135 Norway 63,557 Qatar 62,000 Japan 60,117 Korea, Rep. 50,835 Iraq 29,541 Nigeria 20,353 Venezuela, RB 11,016 Italy -9,231 Mexico -15,877 Spain -16,295 France -41,720 Turkey -48,535 Brazil -54,246 Canada -59,942 Australia -68,008 India -91,471 United Kingdom -97,822 United States -449,669
Now you'll notice that most (not Germany or China) of the big current account surplus countries are resource exporters. As the price of oil, gas, coal, steel, copper, etc falls, those countries will go from being current account surpluses to deficits.
And because everything has to balance, that means that ours, and India's and the US's current account deficits will decline.
So Australia and Canada are in the brown stuff then ?
Mr. kle4, you're too charitable. It's blatant bullshit. It's also hypocritical and bigoted.
"Black people can't be racist!"
"Women can't be sexist!"
The above lines are unwitting parody, not the product of any process that resembles thinking.
It's a linguistic trick, but what it amounts to is, my racism is less bad than your racism; and whilst context is key (antifrank where were you last time?!), that could hardly prevent the tweet from being repellant.
So Australia and Canada are in the brown stuff then ?
Big deficit and resource exporters ?
Yes.
[EDIT to add] The reason they have big current account deficits are two-fold. Firstly, they are still in the middle of commodity investment booms. Gross Capital Formation is elevated in both countries, and in both countries they are running up foreign currency debt to acquire assets that will further depress the prices of raw materials. (The big LNG projects in Australia are an example of this.) In addition, both countries have had consumer booms.
Mr. Taffys, agree entirely that consistency is important. I'd argue we should broaden free speech as much as possible, and would really like a First Amendment equivalent.
I agree, although we would have to live with some pretty unpleasant stuff from the likes of Britain First and Anjem Choudhray.
A first amendment would also torpedo the ridiculous notion that people have some sort of human right 'not to be offended'.
I guess these are the brillient headlines we will see in the Nat onal tomorrow after this amazing deal
FEARS were mounting last night that ministers were preparing to hand a £350 million contract to supply water to Scotland’s schools, hospitals, prisons and Government offices to an English private water company.
Not just any private company - but ANGLIAN water - ENGLAND is derived from ANGLE - so it's the ENGLISH TOP HAT PINSTRIPE WESTMONSTER water company that will be stealing the profits, beating the workers etc.
It's come to a pretty pass when the SNP awards a massive utility contract to a privately-held English company at the expense of a Scottish public body.
So much for the great Scottish business revival that was going to be unleashed by an independent Scotland..... Of course, lost Scottish jobs and bankrupt Scottish businesses are all fair game so long as the Scottish Govt. is getting value for money".... says Dair.
LOL , worse than the other turkey , the public service continues as it did and the SNP save us £40M on top, win win yet again.
Every other day The Malcoholic whines about UK firms being sold to foreigners, and now he's celebrating the loss of business from Scotland to England.
I guess these are the brillient headlines we will see in the Nat onal tomorrow after this amazing deal
FEARS were mounting last night that ministers were preparing to hand a £350 million contract to supply water to Scotland’s schools, hospitals, prisons and Government offices to an English private water company.
Not just any private company - but ANGLIAN water - ENGLAND is derived from ANGLE - so it's the ENGLISH TOP HAT PINSTRIPE WESTMONSTER water company that will be stealing the profits, beating the workers etc.
It's come to a pretty pass when the SNP awards a massive utility contract to a privately-held English company at the expense of a Scottish public body.
So much for the great Scottish business revival that was going to be unleashed by an independent Scotland..... Of course, lost Scottish jobs and bankrupt Scottish businesses are all fair game so long as the Scottish Govt. is getting value for money".... says Dair.
LOL , worse than the other turkey , the public service continues as it did and the SNP save us £40M on top, win win yet again.
Yep, Scottish Water will be dancing around The Bridge HQ tonight, happy that they dodged a bullet in getting that £350 million contract....
I hear Robert Mugabe was very annoyed that Scotland voted No, because until the Scots do get independence, Zimbabwe will continue to be held up as the supreme example of an economically fecked-up country.
You can tell that times are grim for the left when commentisfree is reduced to peddling dreams of impending financial crashes to cheer up its readership:
We do look to be heading for some very choppy waters. I have big worries about equity markets in most places. I fear there is going to be real turmoil over an extended period. And I don't think that the UK is that well insulated form events elsewhere, at all. In fact, we could be very badly exposed.
Equity markets have mostly gone nowhere over 5 years and I don't see that changing much any time soon. I agree that there will be volatility but investment conservatism should see anyone safe without getting rich - viva dividends. I don't think the Grauniad is a good source for any financial matters (or much else). Don't you get a copy signed by Comrade Owen Jones with your benefit cheque?
Mr. Taffys, agree entirely that consistency is important. I'd argue we should broaden free speech as much as possible, and would really like a First Amendment equivalent.
I agree, although we would have to live with some pretty unpleasant stuff from the likes of Britain First and Anjem Choudhray.
A first amendment would also torpedo the ridiculous notion that people have some sort of human right 'not to be offended'.
Thing is, we have never had "free speech" in this country. When was it that sedition dropped off the statute book? Our ridiculous libel laws?
Personally, I would be in favour of a first amendment equivalent but I think I am in a minority. It would mean that a UK equivalent of NAMBLA would be allowed. The yanks had a revolution to get there.
Would we install electrified razor wire along the border?
Tricky. Electricity could hurt animals so I wouldn't be in favour of it. A huge fortified zone, possibly with landmines (with pressure settings such that deer, badgers, dogs etc wouldn't set them off), would probably be a good idea. I am thinking something on the lines of the Korean DMZ but more so. A few declared crossing points, fully staffed with customs officials 24/7, and some watch towers on the old NI model should do the trick. We would also probably need to do some thinking about requirements to be met before an entry visa could be granted, possibly a £100,000 cash bond might be a good idea (I suppose to stop the whinging we could make it 90% refundable on exit).
Had a day off and so on a whim went to see The Martian, which I hadn't been planning to see but heard was good.
F---ing excellent movie, best I've seen in years. Tense but funny, beautiful, heartwarming and emotional as hell.
Sequel to Interstellar - Matt Damon marooned by himself on a far-flung planet!
Someone the other day posted up an estimate of how much the US has had to spend rescuing Matt Damon - Saving Private Ryan, Interstellar and now The Martian. Is he really worth it ?
rcs - I take the point that if this is commodity lead then the dynamic is a little different. However we have been relying on massive borrowing from abroad and an abysmal savings rate to maintain demand. People will have very little to fall back on if things turn sour. Gordon Brown gets a lot of grief for his 'no more boom and bust' comments. But at the heart of it he had a point about the British economy. It has tended to be volatile with sharp periods of growth and then major contractions. Nothing I've seen in recent years suggests that we have changed or that next time it'll be different.
You can tell that times are grim for the left when commentisfree is reduced to peddling dreams of impending financial crashes to cheer up its readership:
We do look to be heading for some very choppy waters. I have big worries about equity markets in most places. I fear there is going to be real turmoil over an extended period. And I don't think that the UK is that well insulated form events elsewhere, at all. In fact, we could be very badly exposed.
Equity markets have mostly gone nowhere over 5 years and I don't see that changing much any time soon. I agree that there will be volatility but investment conservatism should see anyone safe without getting rich - viva dividends. I don't think the Grauniad is a good source for any financial matters (or much else). Don't you get a copy signed by Comrade Owen Jones with your benefit cheque?
Larry Elliott is always worth reading.
I don't know what equity markets you have been looking at over the last five years, but the ones I have invested in have done very well. Now, though, I think it is time to take a break and to get a lot more watchful.
I guess these are the brillient headlines we will see in the Nat onal tomorrow after this amazing deal
FEARS were mounting last night that ministers were preparing to hand a £350 million contract to supply water to Scotland’s schools, hospitals, prisons and Government offices to an English private water company.
Not just any private company - but ANGLIAN water - ENGLAND is derived from ANGLE - so it's the ENGLISH TOP HAT PINSTRIPE WESTMONSTER water company that will be stealing the profits, beating the workers etc.
It's come to a pretty pass when the SNP awards a massive utility contract to a privately-held English company at the expense of a Scottish public body.
So much for the great Scottish business revival that was going to be unleashed by an independent Scotland..... Of course, lost Scottish jobs and bankrupt Scottish businesses are all fair game so long as the Scottish Govt. is getting value for money".... says Dair.
LOL , worse than the other turkey , the public service continues as it did and the SNP save us £40M on top, win win yet again.
So you support privatizing the NHS in the same way?
Had a day off and so on a whim went to see The Martian, which I hadn't been planning to see but heard was good.
F---ing excellent movie, best I've seen in years. Tense but funny, beautiful, heartwarming and emotional as hell.
Sequel to Interstellar - Matt Damon marooned by himself on a far-flung planet!
Someone the other day posted up an estimate of how much the US has had to spend rescuing Matt Damon - Saving Private Ryan, Interstellar and now The Martian. Is he really worth it ?
:-)
Have you not watched Good Will Hunting? He's a tortured genius who will discover the answer to life the universe and everything. (And so clearly worth it)
Had a day off and so on a whim went to see The Martian, which I hadn't been planning to see but heard was good.
F---ing excellent movie, best I've seen in years. Tense but funny, beautiful, heartwarming and emotional as hell.
Sequel to Interstellar - Matt Damon marooned by himself on a far-flung planet!
Someone the other day posted up an estimate of how much the US has had to spend rescuing Matt Damon - Saving Private Ryan, Interstellar and now The Martian. Is he really worth it ?
:-)
LOL, well at least he seemed to have survived his fall into the river in New York at the end of Bourne Ultimatum
Had a day off and so on a whim went to see The Martian, which I hadn't been planning to see but heard was good.
F---ing excellent movie, best I've seen in years. Tense but funny, beautiful, heartwarming and emotional as hell.
Sequel to Interstellar - Matt Damon marooned by himself on a far-flung planet!
Someone the other day posted up an estimate of how much the US has had to spend rescuing Matt Damon - Saving Private Ryan, Interstellar and now The Martian. Is he really worth it ?
:-)
Have you not watched Good Will Hunting? He's a tortured genius who will discover the answer to life the universe and everything. (And so clearly worth it)
Yes, but he later goes rogue and ruins the CIA's most expensive program.
I think Ben Riley-Smith needs to read his copy. And possibly understand that the reference was to UKIP, not Labour!
“I don’t just mean a few people in our own party but obviously all those other people who’s name we’re not going to mention” – an apparent referendum [sic!!] to Labour.
"Ms Mustafa explained that she could not be guilty of sexism or racism against white men "because racism and sexism describe structures of privilege based on race and gender and therefore women of colour and minority genders cannot be racist or sexist, since we do not stand to benefit from such a system."
And ain't that the truth?
You know, I kind of get that the "#killallwhitemen' hashtag is humour, and I wouldn't charge someone for using it.
But that paragraph about 'structures of privilege' is just appalling, scary drivel.
That's the thing: it isn't a joke, she actually means it.
She's a "student diversity officer". JC will have to black up if he wants to recruit her. I suppose he could always get DA to help.
Had a day off and so on a whim went to see The Martian, which I hadn't been planning to see but heard was good.
F---ing excellent movie, best I've seen in years. Tense but funny, beautiful, heartwarming and emotional as hell.
Sequel to Interstellar - Matt Damon marooned by himself on a far-flung planet!
Haven't gotten around to see Interstellar yet - I was rather put out by the pompous crowd of 'you just don't get it' defenders to some of its critics. Wouldn't be a problem for The Martian, I assure you - the sort of simple tale done perfectly, and hitting home emotionally very well as a result.
I liked Interstellar, but much preferred Nolan's Inception.
"Former Sheffield United footballer Ched Evans is to have an appeal against his rape conviction heard after a miscarriages of justice watchdog received information that raises a “real possibility” that the judgment against him could be quashed."
You can tell that times are grim for the left when commentisfree is reduced to peddling dreams of impending financial crashes to cheer up its readership:
We do look to be heading for some very choppy waters. I have big worries about equity markets in most places. I fear there is going to be real turmoil over an extended period. And I don't think that the UK is that well insulated form events elsewhere, at all. In fact, we could be very badly exposed.
Equity markets have mostly gone nowhere over 5 years and I don't see that changing much any time soon. I agree that there will be volatility but investment conservatism should see anyone safe without getting rich - viva dividends. I don't think the Grauniad is a good source for any financial matters (or much else). Don't you get a copy signed by Comrade Owen Jones with your benefit cheque?
Larry Elliott is always worth reading.
I don't know what equity markets you have been looking at over the last five years, but the ones I have invested in have done very well. Now, though, I think it is time to take a break and to get a lot more watchful.
If you went deep into the BRICs in the last 12 months you'll be a basket case. Otherwise it's been a great run.
rcs - I take the point that if this is commodity lead then the dynamic is a little different. However we have been relying on massive borrowing from abroad and an abysmal savings rate to maintain demand. People will have very little to fall back on if things turn sour. Gordon Brown gets a lot of grief for his 'no more boom and bust' comments. But at the heart of it he had a point about the British economy. It has tended to be volatile with sharp periods of growth and then major contractions. Nothing I've seen in recent years suggests that we have changed or that next time it'll be different.
You raise an interesting point: throughout the world, current accounts deficits and surpluses don't correlate well with export levels (R^2 is like 0.2), but do with savings rates (r^2 of 0.75). Clearly if you want to sustainably improve the UK current account, you need to raise the savings rate.
But I'm relatively sanguine. Gross Capital Formation is well below replacement levels. Our current account deficit is going to fall. Households in the UK have substantially delevered, and while we've been less austere than those in the continent, our government debt to GDP should start falling by the end of next year. There is no evidence that the UK economy is hitting capacity buffers.
Furthermore, we are substantlally insulated against slowdowns in emerging markets. Take China, exports as a percent of GDP are well below the levels of our peers:
Japan 3.7% Germany 2.5% Netherlands 1.3% Sweden 1.2% France 0.8% USA 0.8% Italy 0.7% UK 0.6% Spain 0.4%
In the short-term, therefore, a slowdown in China affects Japan or Germany far, far more than it affects us.
Bahar Mustafa is a tedious oaf of a person, and yet I'm not happy to see someone arrested over such a thing. Being axed from her job [because of its particular nature] would seem more fitting. It's important that freedom of speech is as broad as possible*, even when the messages sent are ones one personally dislikes.
*Freedom of speech but axed from her job might seem inconsistent, but a diversity officer tweeting about killing all white men is inappropriate.
I think it's reasonable to limit freedom of speech when it's a direct incitement to violent action. "White men are evil and deserve to die" should be legally acceptable. "Kill all white men" should not.
On that basis the Elizabethans would have locked up Shakespeare for having an actor say "let's kill all the lawyers".
I think Mr Dancer has got the appropriate course of action spot on.
Well, no, because in that situation the person would clearly be acting.
Do you think it should be lawful for a white student to tweet "kill all black people"? What about if that student was a member of the KKK? What about if he didn't tweet it but shouted in on a public street? To a crowd of angry racists?
I think it all depends on context. Words can mean different things in different contexts - "let him have it", for example.
Someone sending a tweet that reads "kill all white men" is inherently unlikely to be expecting to be taken literally. It is neither a practical course of action, nor is twitter a plausible means of putting such a course of action into practice. A member of the KKK shouting in a public street "kill all black people" may well have a very different aspiration as to what meaning will be placed on his words.
I place a very high value on freedom of speech. That means allowing people to say things that I find repellent. So be it.
Isn't comment deserving of freedom of speech too? I don't suppose our diversity officer would see it like that.
Comments
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bacaf44e-6c02-11e5-8171-ba1968cf791a.html#axzz3nnePbaTl
"Britain’s economy is still solid in the face of global weakness, the International Monetary Fund said on Tuesday in an assessment that will please George Osborne ."
From a straight economic perspective, a lower price of oil and other commodities increases GDP. (GDP = Consumption + Investment - Less Net Imports - a lower import bill therefore means higher GDP.)
It had f'all to do with the result of the GE, but it gave us all something to talk about as posters examined the entrails of every single point movement and subsample for meaning that was not there..
It's come to a pretty pass when the SNP awards a massive utility contract to a privately-held English company at the expense of a Scottish public body.
This reminds me a little of an anecdote I vaguely recall from Philip Matyszak's Classical Compendium (which I do recommend).
There was a Roman oaf, let's call him Gaius, for argument's sake. He was so loathsome people used to pelt him wherever he went. He complained and got the magistrates to pass a law saying only soft fruit could be thrown at people. One day someone went to a magistrate and asked whether a pine cone was a fruit.
"It is if you intend to throw it at Gaius," the magistrate replied.
Do you think it should be lawful for a white student to tweet "kill all black people"? What about if that student was a member of the KKK? What about if he didn't tweet it but shouted in on a public street? To a crowd of angry racists?
During the last decade and a half we have had to hand over more and more of our own economic output just to receive the same amount (or actually diminishing) quantities of raw materials such as oil, natural gas, coal, etc.
The cycle has now turned, and for the next who knows how long we will hand over smaller and smaller quantities of our economic output to get the same amounts of raw materials.
It is a mega shift in terms of trade and economics, and will support resource importers' economies in a much underappreciated way.
Result!.
He is not bright enough to see that, his loyalist hatred of Scotland blinds him to reality.
So much for the great Scottish business revival that was going to be unleashed by an independent Scotland..... Of course, lost Scottish jobs and bankrupt Scottish businesses are all fair game so long as the Scottish Govt. is getting value for money".... says Dair.
LOL , worse than the other turkey , the public service continues as it did and the SNP save us £40M on top, win win yet again.
Someone sending a tweet that reads "kill all white men" is inherently unlikely to be expecting to be taken literally. It is neither a practical course of action, nor is twitter a plausible means of putting such a course of action into practice. A member of the KKK shouting in a public street "kill all black people" may well have a very different aspiration as to what meaning will be placed on his words.
I place a very high value on freedom of speech. That means allowing people to say things that I find repellent. So be it.
IIRC, we spent at least twenty minutes or so on here wondering whether or not it was a spoof.
Anglo-saxons were basically German, were they not?
The Zoomers love it.
@heraldscotland: No committee recall for Fiona Hyslop over T in the Park funding http://t.co/xibt5sXiyi http://t.co/RW3ETy4y9f
@ScottyNational: Advert: Did you make £6.24m profit in 2014 but would like another £150k? Apply now for a Scottish Government 'Special Acquaintances' grant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_referendum_on_United_Kingdom_membership_of_the_European_Union
We all know Yvette lost.
Not sure why she has to remind everyone with her own #notleadership tag though...
https://twitter.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/651411910592700417
Banging my head on the desk in response to her supposed 'defence' though. For Free Speech reasons I want her to win the case - but absolutely not with that defence!
But everyone knew I was a Tory so I was sort of tolerated as no real threat.
She has managed to sound like the worst kind of little Englander whilst letting in loads of migrants at the same time.
Leader? No thanks.
F---ing excellent movie, best I've seen in years. Tense but funny, beautiful, heartwarming and emotional as hell.
I place a very high value on freedom of speech and I also believe that means allowing people to say things I find repellent. The question is whether that should include direct threats of violence.
"Black people can't be racist!"
"Women can't be sexist!"
The above lines are unwitting parody, not the product of any process that resembles thinking.
If you look at 2012, the big current account surplus countries were: Now you'll notice that most (not Germany or China) of the big current account surplus countries are resource exporters. As the price of oil, gas, coal, steel, copper, etc falls, those countries will go from being current account surpluses to deficits.
And because everything has to balance, that means that ours, and India's and the US's current account deficits will decline.
I don't think that's true. Any person tweeting 'kill all black men' is going to be prosecuted immediately, regardless of standing or context.
What is dangerous is the prevailing feeling in this country that the law is being applied along racial lines. That if you are a muslim taxi driver, you can live to a different set of laws to a white British taxi driver.
Assuming the charge relates to those tweets of course.
Big deficit and resource exporters ?
[EDIT to add]
The reason they have big current account deficits are two-fold. Firstly, they are still in the middle of commodity investment booms. Gross Capital Formation is elevated in both countries, and in both countries they are running up foreign currency debt to acquire assets that will further depress the prices of raw materials. (The big LNG projects in Australia are an example of this.) In addition, both countries have had consumer booms.
I agree, although we would have to live with some pretty unpleasant stuff from the likes of Britain First and Anjem Choudhray.
A first amendment would also torpedo the ridiculous notion that people have some sort of human right 'not to be offended'.
Every other day The Malcoholic whines about UK firms being sold to foreigners, and now he's celebrating the loss of business from Scotland to England.
Must be something in the water.
Yep, Scottish Water will be dancing around The Bridge HQ tonight, happy that they dodged a bullet in getting that £350 million contract....
I hear Robert Mugabe was very annoyed that Scotland voted No, because until the Scots do get independence, Zimbabwe will continue to be held up as the supreme example of an economically fecked-up country.
Personally, I would be in favour of a first amendment equivalent but I think I am in a minority. It would mean that a UK equivalent of NAMBLA would be allowed. The yanks had a revolution to get there.
[Edit to add] Like the PIE, I guess
:-)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/11913339/Cabinet-minister-tells-Eurosceptics-Get-a-life.html
I don't know what equity markets you have been looking at over the last five years, but the ones I have invested in have done very well. Now, though, I think it is time to take a break and to get a lot more watchful.
So you support privatizing the NHS in the same way?
Everyone's different.
“I don’t just mean a few people in our own party but obviously all those other people who’s name we’re not going to mention” – an apparent referendum [sic!!] to Labour.
EDIT - yet to see Martian!
http://athousandflowers.net/2013/09/01/weekly-wanker-017-wings-over-scotland/
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/oct/05/ched-evans-conviction-referred-to-court-of-appeal
But I'm relatively sanguine. Gross Capital Formation is well below replacement levels. Our current account deficit is going to fall. Households in the UK have substantially delevered, and while we've been less austere than those in the continent, our government debt to GDP should start falling by the end of next year. There is no evidence that the UK economy is hitting capacity buffers.
Furthermore, we are substantlally insulated against slowdowns in emerging markets. Take China, exports as a percent of GDP are well below the levels of our peers: In the short-term, therefore, a slowdown in China affects Japan or Germany far, far more than it affects us.