Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
The jobs situation (high numbers of employed) is a lot better than the left claimed it would be because productivity is so poor (relative to the USA, France Germany etc.)
Low productivity is not the route to a higher standard of living.
However, electors may well vote for less unemployment in the short term at the expense of higher productivity and wealth in the long term. So we could be in a downward economic spiral. We have to bring back Thatcherism if we want to advance the economy in the long term. Discuss.
Actually, on voting intention Alan Clark mentions in his diaries on 22nd November 1990 a Mori poll that showed John Major had drawn level with Michael Heseltine on voting intention if either were leading the Tory Party and in one case the Tories actually did slightly better under Major than Heseltine, so once Thatcher went the Tories did follow the polling and John Major did become PM!
Snip
I could see Hammond in such a role. Most of the others are too divisive.
Hammond is the ultimate new-Major.
I don't want to become like HYUFD, but I've been tipping Hammond for about a year.
Once Osborne is knocked out of the MPs ballot, his support would swing behind Hammond as the continuity-of-sense candidate.
Met him last year - seemed a thoroughly decent chap, works well on the doorstep. Would be good on a soapbox, too. Not that it looks like 2020 will be anything like as tricky as '92.
If Osborne fell under a bus then Hammond would be the Major candidate to Boris' Heseltine agreed. Hammond also went to a comprehensive then Oxford (where he got a 1st) and had a successful career in business, that may contrast favourably with Osborne having gone to St Paul's then Oxford (where he got a 2.1) then becoming a SPAD
Good points - it could be that Osborne's bus is losing the MPs ballot. Remember Tory MP's know seem to be more in touch with public opinion than their Labour colleagues at the mo.
I do take issue with your criticising Osborne based on his degree classification, though. The best people got an Attila in Modern History.
Major did not go to university. Was Reagan some academic genius? Yet he led the free world very successfully for 8 years. Such arguments are facile. As is the regular canard where people moan about PPE degrees and never having a proper job. What is important is the clarity with which people see the world and their ability to set our course within it. It's pointless talking about Osborne Hammond and May and Boris etc, since the issue will only arise in 4 years time, October 2019. That's a long long way off, but even so its surprising to see people have learned nothing from the last 5 years of Tory led govt. Corbyn by any metric is dim and is reliant on labour members remaining even dimmer than he is.
Neither Major nor Reagan were SPADs, Major worked in banking, Reagan was a Hollywood actor then governor of California
I know. What's the point that is different from the one I was making?
When I go to the cinema I do not expect to see any other fantasy than the one I have paid for.. If I want to hear a prayer then I will go to a church..Keep the religious nutjobs..of all religions..out of the cinemas..
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
Yes that is correct. Only the USA is found in the top 10 left of countries visited by UK residents. The other 9 are in Europe. I imagine a lot of it is due to cost. Many people like the idea of travelling to Canada, USA, Australia, etc., however, the cost of flights make travelling to Europe more appealing.
I enjoy watching Polly on the TV; the fretful face and the gormless opinions.
But I doubt we need to bomb Syria as I suspect Hollande and Putin will have that covered. Waving a big dick around is what ISIS do, and that's what attracts many to them. So giving them a good hiding will dissuade a few waverers.
They want Western boots there for obvious reasons but being obliterated by drones just leaves them frustrated, especially if we tell them that drones are controlled by females. Colour hem pink and call the missiles by female names and see how they like it.
.... We spend the fifth highest amount globally on the military...
I do get cross when people measure military capability by inputs. We may be the fifth highest spender (though I think that is open to debate, particularly after Osborne's recent accounting tricks), but we do not have the fifth largest or most capable forces. Japan for example spends, on paper, a bit less than us but maintains armed forces both larger and more capable than our own.
Soon we will have four large dick carriers and nothing else. We will attack terrorist with trident missiles. Watch out Bradford, Birmingham, London !
Four carriers, which ones are they?
For people not able to work out what he meant , TWO large dick carriers, FOUR large dick submarines , and little else
So "Soon we will have four large dick carriers and nothing else." meant 2 carriers?
No he meant four. The large dicks are the Trident missiles and the four large dick carriers are the four submarines that carry them.
As if in the last 12 months the need for a nuclear deterrence hasn't been reinforced by Russia invading a nation and annexing a part of it that unilaterally gave up its own nuclear deterrence.
I can understand the case for retaining nuclear weapons for our own security. What I cannot abide,however, is the hypocrisy of those who argue that these terrible weapons are essential for our defence but must be denied to other countries beyond the small clique of countries that currently possess them - ie 'Do as we say not as do'. Every country on earth is entitled to make the case advanced by those telling us that the UK has to continue with its nuclear deterrent - including Iran.
When I go to the cinema I do not expect to see any other fantasy than the one I have paid for.. If I want to hear a prayer then I will go to a church..Keep the religious nutjobs..of all religions..out of the cinemas..
That's all a bit fanciful and frankly reeks of the personality cult that is sustaining Corbyn. We could eliminate the 13 years of Blair and Brown and replace them with any conservative leader and be able to say that we would not have had to start from here.
Actually, on voting intention Alan Clark mentions in his diaries on 22nd November 1990 a Mori poll that showed John Major had drawn level with Michael Heseltine on voting intention if either were leading the Tory Party and in one case the Tories actually did slightly better under Major than Heseltine, so once Thatcher went the Tories did follow the polling and John Major did become PM!
Snip
I could see Hammond in such a role. Most of the others are too divisive.
Hammond is the ultimate new-Major.
I don't want to become like HYUFD, but I've been tipping Hammond for about a year.
Once Osborne is knocked out of the MPs ballot, his support would swing behind Hammond as the continuity-of-sense candidate.
Met him last year - seemed a thoroughly decent chap, works well on the doorstep. Would be good on a soapbox, too. Not that it looks like 2020 will be anything like as tricky as '92.
If Osborne fell under a bus then Hammond would be the Major candidate to Boris' Heseltine agreed. Hammond also went to a comprehensive then Oxford (where he got a 1st) and had a successful career in business, that may contrast favourably with Osborne having gone to St Paul's then Oxford (where he got a 2.1) then becoming a SPAD
Good points - it could be that Osborne's bus is losing the MPs ballot. Remember Tory MP's know seem to be more in touch with public opinion than their Labour colleagues at the mo.
I do take issue with your criticising Osborne based on his degree classification, though. The best people got an Attila in Modern History.
Major did not go to university. Was Reagan some academic genius? Yet he led the free world very successfully for 8 years. Such arguments are facile. As is the regular canard where people moan about PPE degrees and never having a proper job. What is important is the clarity with which people see the world and their ability to set our course within it. It's pointless talking about Osborne Hammond and May and Boris etc, since the issue will only arise in 4 years time, October 2019. That's a long long way off, but even so its surprising to see people have learned nothing from the last 5 years of Tory led govt. Corbyn by any metric is dim and is reliant on labour members remaining even dimmer than he is.
Neither Major nor Reagan were SPADs, Major worked in banking, Reagan was a Hollywood actor then governor of California
I know. What's the point that is different from the one I was making?
You were only looking at the academic side, Osborne was also a SPAD
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
1. "serious electoral difficulties .." - Oldham is up for grabs. 2. "having an ear for when people have doubts .." - PLP slanging match. 3. "nuances .." - Defence policy shambles. 4. "speaking for myself .." - BroxtoweTories4NickP unconvinced. 5. "entirely happy with Corbyn's stated policies .." - We're absolutely f*cked. 6. "lack of personal aggression." - Send for enforcer Tom Watson. 7. "plunging into the Syrian war .." - See number 3
.... We spend the fifth highest amount globally on the military...
I do get cross when people measure military capability by inputs. We may be the fifth highest spender (though I think that is open to debate, particularly after Osborne's recent accounting tricks), but we do not have the fifth largest or most capable forces. Japan for example spends, on paper, a bit less than us but maintains armed forces both larger and more capable than our own.
That's a very big are IMO. If the Japanese armed forces are so much bigger and more capable which can't be seen by inputs let's see it by outputs. In which conflicts and arenas across the globe have they demonstrated this superiority?
We are active on outputs as well as inputs. Inputs is an easy metric to measure. If you are to base it on outputs I'd put our military fourth (ahead of Saudi).
They are sensible and don't get involved in empire building any more. Can you advise any conflict or arena we have shown any superiority since WWII, and don't use Falklands as a good example.
Afghanistan, Iraq, Kenya, Sierra Leone, Kosovo ...
I am trying not to laugh out loud.
Join the club. It's how I feel about your rantings too.
Philip , it is a free country, debate is stimulating , hearing others opinions and views broadens your horizons.
The problem with the Belgium lockdown is that the only reason to remove it is that the terrorists who are thought to be preparing to attack are captured.
If the lockdown is lifted and then there is an attack the politicians will have nowhere to hide.
As usual you have to thoink through an exit strategy.
If I may make one obvious observation: we could not expect significant immigration from any of those countries.
If we thought there were 100,000 low skilled workers likely to come every year as a result, our view would change pretty quickly.
But you're right, it's one of those asymmetric things: immigration from those countries could in fact be far more problematic than immigration from eastern Europe, before anyone thought there was a problem with it.
The problem with the Belgium lockdown is that the only reason to remove it is that the terrorists who are thought to be preparing to attack are captured.
If the lockdown is lifted and then there is an attack the politicians will have nowhere to hide.
As usual you have to thoink through an exit strategy.
From what I remember of Brussels the lockdown is a public service.
JJ, I agree with your last part , but just cannot see how it will be achieved with the first suggestion , that way only leads to more trouble and no gains. You only need look at France and see the results , it leads to more trouble. Much better if they focused on fixing problems in their home countries.
We've already got trouble: we'd get it whether or not we bomb ISIS. Just look at the foiled VJ Day plot here in the UK, or the young Jihadist jailed for plotting to blow up bombs in Australia.
We're the enemy to them, because we're America's / Israel's / the west's friends. But those are just excuses: the real reasons are tied into the conflict within Islam, and a resentment of the west's success. A success that Islam has generally not seen for a couple of centuries.
Some Jihadists even want to create a British Islamic State.
Even if we utterly withdrew from the ME and let the whole region go to the dogs (which would cause many other problems), they'd still come after us. They'd probably even see such a withdrawal as a reason to attack.
But it cannot be done by bombing alone. But bombing can help reduce some risks, even as it increasing other risks.
@Nigel_Farage: For those who followed my racing tip yesterday, Exit Europe sadly injured during the race. Wishing them all the best on a full recovery.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
Yes that is correct. Only the USA is found in the top 10 left of countries visited by UK residents. The other 9 are in Europe. I imagine a lot of it is due to cost. Many people like the idea of travelling to Canada, USA, Australia, etc., however, the cost of flights make travelling to Europe more appealing.
Indeed, I think stats show only about 40% of Britons have ever travelled outside the EU and most of those to the US. If people go to Australia they are more often going there to live not just to visit. We are not that different in that sense from Americans in the sense that only a minority of Americans have been outside the US, or certainly beyond Canada or Mexico, the EU being the geographical equivalent
In the eight years or so that I have been reading this site I have seen many posts that have made me shudder to a halt and think, "What is he/she on to come out with that tosh?" However, seldom if ever has my ghast been quite so flabbered as when I read that contribution.
There are few things that I am certain of in this uncertain world but one of them is that France is not, never has been, and will never be a close ally of England. They always have been, are and will always be an enemy - only the methods used to fight each other change. We may reach a temporary accommodation from time to time, usually when the Frogs are in the merde and want us to help bail them out (but they have no hesitation in stepping aside and leaving us to face the music alone when it suits them).
No, Mr. Dancer, though it is after your period, history teaches us that in Europe England only has one long term ally (Portugal) and one other who, in recent years at least, has not plotted our ruin and downfall (the Netherlands).
.... We spend the fifth highest amount globally on the military...
I do get cross when people measure military capability by inputs. We may be the fifth highest spender (though I think that is open to debate, particularly after Osborne's recent accounting tricks), but we do not have the fifth largest or most capable forces. Japan for example spends, on paper, a bit less than us but maintains armed forces both larger and more capable than our own.
That's a very big are IMO. If the Japanese armed forces are so much bigger and more capable which can't be seen by inputs let's see it by outputs. In which conflicts and arenas across the globe have they demonstrated this superiority?
We are active on outputs as well as inputs. Inputs is an easy metric to measure. If you are to base it on outputs I'd put our military fourth (ahead of Saudi).
They are sensible and don't get involved in empire building any more. Can you advise any conflict or arena we have shown any superiority since WWII, and don't use Falklands as a good example.
Sierra Leone.
Arguably we were TOO successful in Sierra Leone, as it encouraged Blair to believe he could do the same in the Middle East. Oops.
IIRC ... The commander who exceeded his authority in Sierra Leone went on to become one of Blair's favourite generals and a convenient source of one of Ashcroft's anti Cameron smears.
If I may make one obvious observation: we could not expect significant immigration from any of those countries.
Also, they would not want free movement with us.
I don't know, exactly. I guess their objections might be (1) immigrants to the UK could then get a free pass to go on to Canada and (2) the logistical problem of handling "free movement" between two specific countries halfway around the globe, i.e. third party nationals sneaking in as a result, but by and large I do not think Canadians or Australians would have a problem with Britons.
One of Corbyn's challenges, of course, is that he has never really had to do politics. He has never sought or needed to persuade people to change their opinions as he has only ever conversed with those who already share similar beliefs to his own. Thus, he has never had to think about how to frame an argument or to win anyone over to his point of view. As a backbench MP in a rock solid Labour constituency that is not a problem, as Labour leader it clearly is: he not only has to carry the party's MPs, but also reach out to a country in which most people are not Labour voters. It's clear he is not able to do it - he does not have the tools as a debater and he does not have the inclination.
Actually, on voting intention Alan Clark mentions in his diaries on 22nd November 1990 a Mori poll that showed John Major had drawn level with Michael Heseltine on voting intention if either were leading the Tory Party and in one case the Tories actually did slightly better under Major than Heseltine, so once Thatcher went the Tories did follow the polling and John Major did become PM!
.
Met him last year - seemed a thoroughly decent chap, works well on the doorstep. Would be good on a soapbox, too. Not that it looks like 2020 will be anything like as tricky as '92.
The smart move by Hammond would be to say he wants Osborne to stay as Chancellor should Hammond become PM. It would be popular with the membership to go with Continuity Credibility on the economy.
If he continues to fail in his own (deferred) goal of eliminating the deficit, even if people don't mind the actual economic state then his competence will surely have taken a big hit and continuity may not be as credible.
The fundamental problem the Left has is that it loves to say Osborne has failed. But they have no coherent response when you ask "How?" If it is a failure to eliminate the deficit, it is only in terms of Osborne's timelines. There is no acceptance by the Left that the deficit needed to come down at that rate any way. So if you point out that "this failure must be to your liking then?" they look at their shoes. And Osborne's "failure" needs to be set against the background of near full employment. If you want to see a really epic economic failure, look at those on the Left who confidently predicted his stewardship of the economy would lead to five million unemployed.
The Left has very little ammunition to fire at Osborne. And such small calibre stuff as they have ain't going to penetrate the hundreds of feet of reinforced steel and concrete he sleeps easily beneath.
An unemployment level of 2 million is a long way from 'near full employment'. We are nowhere near the low unemployment levels of the 1950s and 1960s - indeed if the data was still being provided on the same basis of 50 years ago I suspect the headline figure would be nearer 3 million than 2 million. As to any critique from the Left , I am a little surprised that that Osborne has not been attacked more vigorously for reducing taxes at all during a period of supposedly unavoidable Austerity - including the increase in Personal Allowances forced on him by the LibDems whilst in Coalition. If the public finances really have been in such a dire state the last thing he should have been doing is reducing taxation - Personal Allowances should have remained frozen at 2010 levels.
Mr. Surbiton, how can we provoke Daesh when Islamist terrorism pre-dates the Iraq War, and Daesh is already attacking us?
The risk of angering some people who already want to murder us ought not be a factor when considering action.
When did Daesh attack us ? I think you are confusing with AQ. But to you, they look the same anyway. Even Assad looks the same. Only wears an expensive Saville Row suit.
Coming where you come from, some Godforsakenshire, where even Daesh wouldn't be bothered to go into the sticks, it is the Londoners who will have to take it in the Underground and the buses. You lot will condemn their action with your words in blogs knowing full well you will be 100% safe.
I would like to see the geographical distribution of that poll. I bet 80% in Godforsakenshires want to bomb the hell out of Syria, not knowing what happens afterwards. Just vent their anger !
Of course, knowing they will be completely safe ! Brave people.
The 'Godforsakenshire' where MD comes from is the Morley & Outwood constituency.
I don't suppose you've ever connected your bigotry to why Labour lost this year.
Except didn't Londonstan start under Thatcher? For instance Omar Bakri Muhammad moved to the UK in 1986.
According to Omar Nasiri
The mid- to late 1990s were the years when Britain's capital earned the sobriquet of "Londonistan," a title provided by French officials infuriated at the growing presence of Islamist radicals in London and the failure of British authorities to do anything about it. [...] Raids in France and Belgium had produced phone and fax numbers linked to the United Kingdom, and names of suspects were passed on. Some French officials believe that if more had been done by Britain at the time, the network behind the summer of 1995 bombings might have been broken up and the attacks prevented.[7]
The bombings and attempted bombings, mostly in Paris, in summer and autumn of 1995 by Armed Islamic Group (GIA), killed eight and injured more than 100.[8] The French observed that a number of Muslim radicals from London had connections to these bombings.[8] Around that year, in 1995, the French intelligence had coined the term "Londonistan" for the city of London.[8]
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Mistake. Oz is nicer than America. It's like the innocent, smiley, sunnier version of America, without the guns and race stuff, and with better food and wine (these days). Also a notably higher standard of living than America (whatever the GDP per capita stats say). It really is the lucky country. Main problem is the distance, size, and the fact it is quite boring outside the big cities, but as I get older I reckon I could handle that.
ideally I'd live in the northern beaches an hour from Sydney, best of all worlds. Very very tempting. If i ever move out of London.
New Zealand for me every time. There are proper seasons there and it is far, far away. I'd love to spend the days sitting under the peach tree in my Mum's garden, reading and sipping the odd beer; some bike riding in the morning; fish for dinner; and not a care in the world. I'd take the US over Oz. It's a much more interesting country and far more varied.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
I've been to Australis six or seven times in the last few years, in part to see my Aussie daughter. I've been all over tha country, too, from Kimberley to Perth, from Alice to Queensland, from Sydney to Melbourne to Darwin.
What constantly strikes me is how British it is, still. It really does feel like a lot of pommies-in-the-sun. It's the most British foreign country I have ever visited - even more British than, say, Ireland.
Mr. Surbiton, how can we provoke Daesh when Islamist terrorism pre-dates the Iraq War, and Daesh is already attacking us?
The risk of angering some people who already want to murder us ought not be a factor when considering action.
When did Daesh attack us ? I think you are confusing with AQ. But to you, they look the same anyway. Even Assad looks the same. Only wears an expensive Saville Row suit.
(snip)
Just because they have not been successful, does not mean they have not tried.
There were warnings of a plot against VJ day this year, and a 15-year old boy from Blackburn has been jailed for planning to attack an Australian VJ parade.
There may well have been others. Or not. But the point is that just because they've not succeeded does not mean they have not, and are not, planning and attempting.
The security services - including the one some in Labour want to disband - are helping prevent them. We may generally only hear of their failures.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Mistake. Oz is nicer than America. It's like the innocent, smiley, sunnier version of America, without the guns and race stuff, and with better food and wine (these days). Also a notably higher standard of living than America (whatever the GDP per capita stats say). It really is the lucky country. Main problem is the distance, size, and the fact it is quite boring outside the big cities, but as I get older I reckon I could handle that.
ideally I'd live in the northern beaches an hour from Sydney, best of all worlds. Very very tempting. If i ever move out of London.
My observation is that Australia is quite a racist country. You do not have to look too far to see lots of incidents. It's hardly treated its Aboriginals very well and has its fair share of problems with Asian immigrants.
Canada has a massive immigrant population and has a regular yearly large immigrant influx.
You travel the world widely and so above most people you should be able to speak about all the wide movements of people that what is termed 'globalism' has brought. This is not going to go away and needs thinking about sensibly. We now have mass communication ease of communication ease of travel and across wide distances and that's before we see people get into dinghies to cross the China sea and where ever. The opportunities that are available in prosperous countries are easy to see and easier than ever to travel to.
It's got to be in our interest to spread and sustain democracy wherever we can because that is the first step to creating the wealth and happiness that will stop these mass movements.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Mistake. Oz is nicer than America. It's like the innocent, smiley, sunnier version of America, without the guns and race stuff, and with better food and wine (these days). Also a notably higher standard of living than America (whatever the GDP per capita stats say). It really is the lucky country. Main problem is the distance, size, and the fact it is quite boring outside the big cities, but as I get older I reckon I could handle that.
ideally I'd live in the northern beaches an hour from Sydney, best of all worlds. Very very tempting. If i ever move out of London.
I knew from the age of 15 when I first came here that this is where I wanted to be. It's my home. It's where I belong. I am comfortable here. At this point it's where I'm from.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
I've been to Australis six or seven times in the last few years, in part to see my Aussie daughter. I've been all over tha country, too, from Kimberley to Perth, from Alice to Queensland, from Sydney to Melbourne to Darwin.
What constantly strikes me is how British it is, still. It really does feel like a lot of pommies-in-the-sun. It's the most British foreign country I have ever visited - even more British than, say, Ireland.
An ex of mine was Australian, and her father was English, having grown up in East London after the war. He'd moved to Australia as a teenager, and had never been back to blighty. He hated the UK: it was a dreary place with nothing to recommend it.
Except he worshipped West Ham, loved fish and chips, and the pub he went to was a reproduction east-end pub, serving British beers. He preferred marmite over vegimite, and would wolf down 'genuine' Walkers crisps (which I'm not sure were going when he was a kid).
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
No, Mr. Dancer, though it is after your period, history teaches us that in Europe England only has one long term ally (Portugal) and one other who, in recent years at least, has not plotted our ruin and downfall (the Netherlands).
Actually by tradition the Netherlands have been more hostile to us than the French. They were our enemies throughout Tudor times and for a large chunk of Stewart times as well, most famously when they sailed up the Thames to burn most of the Royal Navy and capture the flagship, the Royal Charles. Ben Jonson first found fame as a successful soldier in the Low Countries in the 1580s.
Hence so many perjorative terms associated with Holland - double Dutch, Dutch auction etc.
I do note you said recently but to be fair we haven't been to war with France since 1814 or close to it since 1823.
"... An unemployment level of 2 million is a long way from 'near full employment'. We are nowhere near the low unemployment levels of the 1950s and 1960s..."
In the days when the sainted Clement Attlee was PM an unemployment rate of 5% was regarded as full employment (there is always churn and that is healthy). The numbers don't matter as the size of the workforce is much larger now but what do the percentages say?
I would suggest that the social problems of unemployment are with the number of NEETS and the long term unemployed. With both of those I think the current government has made some, if not sufficient, progress
One of Corbyn's challenges, of course, is that he has never really had to do politics. He has never sought or needed to persuade people to change their opinions as he has only ever conversed with those who already share similar beliefs to his own. Thus, he has never had to think about how to frame an argument or to win anyone over to his point of view. As a backbench MP in a rock solid Labour constituency that is not a problem, as Labour leader it clearly is: he not only has to carry the party's MPs, but also reach out to a country in which most people are not Labour voters. It's clear he is not able to do it - he does not have the tools as a debater and he does not have the inclination.
Yes, although the same is true of his opponents in the last leadership election, which may explain why they lost. The SpAdification of politics has made this even more common. In America, we can see the same phenomenon at the start of every primary contest; even Hillary was shockingly bad at the start of her run against Obama.
No, Mr. Dancer, though it is after your period, history teaches us that in Europe England only has one long term ally (Portugal) and one other who, in recent years at least, has not plotted our ruin and downfall (the Netherlands).
Actually by tradition the Netherlands have been more hostile to us than the French. They were our enemies throughout Tudor times and for a large chunk of Stewart times as well, most famously when they sailed up the Thames to burn most of the Royal Navy and capture the flagship, the Royal Charles. Ben Jonson first found fame as a successful soldier in the Low Countries in the 1580s.
Hence so many perjorative terms associated with Holland - double Dutch, Dutch auction etc.
I do note you said recently but to be fair we haven't been to war with France since 1814 or close to it since 1823.
Doc, the Dutch haven't been trying to do us down since the back end of the seventeenth century. The French have been at it for a thousand years. We may not have been actually at war with them since Napoleonic times but, as I said, the means of fighting each other have changed not the enmity.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
@Nigel_Farage: For those who followed my racing tip yesterday, Exit Europe sadly injured during the race. Wishing them all the best on a full recovery.
Exit Europe previously won the 17:40 at Kempton Park. The horse is a winner, just not all the time. It is also owned by a Kipper.
"... An unemployment level of 2 million is a long way from 'near full employment'. We are nowhere near the low unemployment levels of the 1950s and 1960s..."
In the days when the sainted Clement Attlee was PM an unemployment rate of 5% was regarded as full employment (there is always churn and that is healthy). The numbers don't matter as the size of the workforce is much larger now but what do the percentages say?
I would suggest that the social problems of unemployment are with the number of NEETS and the long term unemployed. With both of those I think the current government has made some, if not sufficient, progress
I am not aware that Attlee ever suggested that 5% was full employment - I do recall Harold Wilson circa 1966 saying that 2% was not too bad. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s an unemployment level of 500,000 was seen as unacceptably high - 200,000 to 300,000 was viewed as the norm. There was an almighty row in Parliament in 1972 when the figures reached 1 million for the first time since World War 2 - Dennis Skinner came close to assaulting Ted Heath at the Dispatch Box.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Mistake. Oz is nicer than America. It's like the innocent, smiley, sunnier version of America, without the guns and race stuff, and with better food and wine (these days). Also a notably higher standard of living than America (whatever the GDP per capita stats say). It really is the lucky country. Main problem is the distance, size, and the fact it is quite boring outside the big cities, but as I get older I reckon I could handle that.
ideally I'd live in the northern beaches an hour from Sydney, best of all worlds. Very very tempting. If i ever move out of London.
Mr MarqueeMark ...re personal allowances. I think it was a good thing to raise them, but to a significant amount this was paid for by squeezing allowances for the higher paid (IIRC). The libdems are always very careful not to take credit for all that. Osborn however did stop the petrol tax escalator and given the now low price of oil I wonder if that will take a hit in forthcoming budgets? Speculation has it that oil has further to fall and that will mean further losses of oil revenues and of vat on fuel sales.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
I've been to Australis six or seven times in the last few years, in part to see my Aussie daughter. I've been all over tha country, too, from Kimberley to Perth, from Alice to Queensland, from Sydney to Melbourne to Darwin.
What constantly strikes me is how British it is, still. It really does feel like a lot of pommies-in-the-sun. It's the most British foreign country I have ever visited - even more British than, say, Ireland.
Which is why Australia will still likely be number 1 emigrant destination for some time to come
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
I've been to Australis six or seven times in the last few years, in part to see my Aussie daughter. I've been all over tha country, too, from Kimberley to Perth, from Alice to Queensland, from Sydney to Melbourne to Darwin.
What constantly strikes me is how British it is, still. It really does feel like a lot of pommies-in-the-sun. It's the most British foreign country I have ever visited - even more British than, say, Ireland.
Which is why Australia will still likely be number 1 emigrant destination for some time to come
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
Yeah, we looked into opening an office there for work. But it was a nightmare to do and hugely expensive. So my American dream died.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Mistake. Oz is nicer than America. It's like the innocent, smiley, sunnier version of America, without the guns and race stuff, and with better food and wine (these days). Also a notably higher standard of living than America (whatever the GDP per capita stats say). It really is the lucky country. Main problem is the distance, size, and the fact it is quite boring outside the big cities, but as I get older I reckon I could handle that.
ideally I'd live in the northern beaches an hour from Sydney, best of all worlds. Very very tempting. If i ever move out of London.
I knew from the age of 15 when I first came here that this is where I wanted to be. It's my home. It's where I belong. I am comfortable here. At this point it's where I'm from.
Oz is a nice place though.
And fair enough. The USA is a grand and fascinating country, I really like going there.
As a travel writer, though, I have seen more of the world than most, and in some detail, and it strikes me that Australia offers the best quality of life (a fact confirmed by endless OECD rankings etc, and they don't even factor in things like brilliant wine, Tasman lamb, Bermagui oysters, and rather nice weather)
Of course it ain't paradise. And the best bits are horribly expensive.
On that note, I better do some work. G'day.
You've seen a lot more of the world than I have - I'm quite envious.
I have lived and worked in Canada, the US, Canary Islands, France, Holland, Denmark, Sweden among others. But the US is home. We went back to the UK to put my daughter through the same school I went to. Eventually even she wanted to come home, so we did.
It is an unfortunate thing to feel alienated from the country you were born and grew up in. Everywhere there looks so familiar and holds many memories yet feels so different.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
I've been to Australis six or seven times in the last few years, in part to see my Aussie daughter. I've been all over tha country, too, from Kimberley to Perth, from Alice to Queensland, from Sydney to Melbourne to Darwin.
What constantly strikes me is how British it is, still. It really does feel like a lot of pommies-in-the-sun. It's the most British foreign country I have ever visited - even more British than, say, Ireland.
Which is why Australia will still likely be number 1 emigrant destination for some time to come
Australians are Brits trying to be Americans.
Yes that is true, perhaps New Zealanders are Australians trying to be Brits?
I guess it's all a matter of degree - I spent 18yrs as a Geordie and the next 30yrs as a Sussex bod.
Only my nostalgia keeps me as a Geordie - the times I've been back [fingers of one hand] have felt weird. I don't go back now because I don't want to spoil the memories I have.
You've seen a lot more of the world than I have - I'm quite envious.
I have lived and worked in Canada, the US, Canary Islands, France, Holland, Denmark, Sweden among others. But the US is home. We went back to the UK to put my daughter through the same school I went to. Eventually even she wanted to come home, so we did.
It is an unfortunate thing to feel alienated from the country you were born and grew up in. Everywhere there looks so familiar and holds many memories yet feels so different.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Mistake. Oz is nicer than America. It's like the innocent, smiley, sunnier version of America, without the guns and race stuff, and with better food and wine (these days). Also a notably higher standard of living than America (whatever the GDP per capita stats say). It really is the lucky country. Main problem is the distance, size, and the fact it is quite boring outside the big cities, but as I get older I reckon I could handle that.
ideally I'd live in the northern beaches an hour from Sydney, best of all worlds. Very very tempting. If i ever move out of London.
Is that up to date? I read that the crash in commodity prices risks turning Australia into the new Greece. People should be careful what they wish for when it comes to Australian immigration. Don't forget, Australia is one big open cast mine, surrounded by man eating sharks. It is also moving steadily northwards, in a very short while (OK in geological terms) it will hit Malaysia and then all immigrant bets will be off.
BTW, it was only when Australia broke away from Antarctica that the south pole grew icy and snow covered. The circum polar current thus formed cut it off from the warmer waters further north and trapped it in an ever colder climate. So an icy Antarctic is not an inevitable given.
"... An unemployment level of 2 million is a long way from 'near full employment'. We are nowhere near the low unemployment levels of the 1950s and 1960s..."
In the days when the sainted Clement Attlee was PM an unemployment rate of 5% was regarded as full employment (there is always churn and that is healthy). The numbers don't matter as the size of the workforce is much larger now but what do the percentages say?
I would suggest that the social problems of unemployment are with the number of NEETS and the long term unemployed. With both of those I think the current government has made some, if not sufficient, progress
We have an unemployment rate of 5.3%, and a much smaller economic inactivity rate - which I can say with confidence, because of the much greater workforce participation of women than fifty years ago.
Job security isn't what it was, and output is shared across more people. But honestly I think Blair was right to argue, as many in the Conservatives would agree, that someone who goes to work during the week, even if their pay must be topped up by the state, is still better off than someone who stays at home.
It used to be that somehow such a person was by definition being exploited, or humiliated, or dehumanised; but now I think we can see that the people most ostracised, most failed, are those who have no job and no prospects.
Ha! I'm in the middle of a PBS docu on Geronimo. As a teenager, I was told so often that I looked like a Red Indian when tanned that I took to wearing chamois leather dresses and feathers in my hair...
Perhaps I should take that up again? Not. If I'm reincarnated as Rachel Welch - I definitely will.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
The Deep South is very different. It's an acquired taste. Most brits should start in the northeast and work outwards from there. There is a quaint civility here. It's nice for my wife and I to be called Sir and Ma'am.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
The South is certainly very differently
Grits. Uuuggghhh.
Grits are awful - though my daughter loves them with butter or cheese. Shrimp and grits is awesome.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
The Deep South is very different. It's an acquired taste. Most brits should start in the northeast and work outwards from there. There is a quaint civility here. It's nice for my wife and I to be called Sir and Ma'am.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
@SeanT - I agree about the US. When I am over there they do seem to be obsessive about their place in the world and how everything is falling to pieces. American optimism has died. It's not a country that looks forward any more, it looks back. And that is ridiculous in my book, because what I see when I visit is a place that continues to lead the world in so many areas and which still has an extraordinary capacity to innovate and create.
Australia, by contrast, is not like that. Its economy is hugely dependent on commodities and its corporate innovation culture, its inventiveness, is almost non-existent - certainly in comparison to most other developed countries. That is going to cause the Aussies real problems further down the line. They have been riding the crest of a wave, but have not done enough with the luck they have enjoyed. It maybe that they are too optimistic, in a very British way: assuming that everything will turn out OK, when actually you have to work hard to ensure that it does.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Mistake. Oz is nicer than America. It's like the innocent, smiley, sunnier version of America, without the guns and race stuff, and with better food and wine (these days). Also a notably higher standard of living than America (whatever the GDP per capita stats say). It really is the lucky country. Main problem is the distance, size, and the fact it is quite boring outside the big cities, but as I get older I reckon I could handle that.
ideally I'd live in the northern beaches an hour from Sydney, best of all worlds. Very very tempting. If i ever move out of London.
Is that up to date? I read that the crash in commodity prices risks turning Australia into the new Greece. People should be careful what they wish for when it comes to Australian immigration. Don't forget, Australia is one big open cast mine, surrounded by man eating sharks. It is also moving steadily northwards, in a very short while (OK in geological terms) it will hit Malaysia and then all immigrant bets will be off.
BTW, it was only when Australia broke away from Antarctica that the south pole grew icy and snow covered. The circum polar current thus formed cut it off from the warmer waters further north and trapped it in an ever colder climate. So an icy Antarctic is not an inevitable given.
They are the latest figures, the mining boom is over (no longer are students flocking to mining towns in their holidays to make large sums working in bars) but the Australian economy still has plenty of strength elsewhere
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
The Deep South is very different. It's an acquired taste. Most brits should start in the northeast and work outwards from there. There is a quaint civility here. It's nice for my wife and I to be called Sir and Ma'am.
Several years ago I went to the spot where Geronimo surrendered. I had to leave my car and walk for over 30 minutes in 100 degree plus sun to a remote place where there was a whitewashed rock. That's it. There is a memorial in a more accessible place.
You're getting me excited with the image of chamois dresses and feathers in your hair
Ha! I'm in the middle of a PBS docu on Geronimo. As a teenager, I was told so often that I looked like a Red Indian when tanned that I took to wearing chamois leather dresses and feathers in my hair...
Perhaps I should take that up again? Not. If I'm reincarnated as Rachel Welch - I definitely will.
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
The Deep South is very different. It's an acquired taste. Most brits should start in the northeast and work outwards from there. There is a quaint civility here. It's nice for my wife and I to be called Sir and Ma'am.
Several years ago I went to the spot where Geronimo surrendered. I had to leave my car and walk for over 30 minutes in 100 degree plus sun to a remote place where there was a whitewashed rock. That's it. There is a memorial in a more accessible place.
You're getting me excited with the image of chamois dresses and feathers in your hair
Ha! I'm in the middle of a PBS docu on Geronimo. As a teenager, I was told so often that I looked like a Red Indian when tanned that I took to wearing chamois leather dresses and feathers in my hair...
Perhaps I should take that up again? Not. If I'm reincarnated as Rachel Welch - I definitely will.
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
The Deep South is very different. It's an acquired taste. Most brits should start in the northeast and work outwards from there. There is a quaint civility here. It's nice for my wife and I to be called Sir and Ma'am.
If you are really interested in how some different areas of the US developed
Several years ago I went to the spot where Geronimo surrendered. I had to leave my car and walk for over 30 minutes in 100 degree plus sun to a remote place where there was a whitewashed rock. That's it. There is a memorial in a more accessible place.
You're getting me excited with the image of chamois dresses and feathers in your hair
Ha! I'm in the middle of a PBS docu on Geronimo. As a teenager, I was told so often that I looked like a Red Indian when tanned that I took to wearing chamois leather dresses and feathers in my hair...
Perhaps I should take that up again? Not. If I'm reincarnated as Rachel Welch - I definitely will.
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
.... We spend the fifth highest amount globally on the military...
I do get cross when people measure military capability by inputs. We may be the fifth highest spender (though I think that is open to debate, particularly after Osborne's recent accounting tricks), but we do not have the fifth largest or most capable forces. Japan for example spends, on paper, a bit less than us but maintains armed forces both larger and more capable than our own.
Soon we will have four large dick carriers and nothing else. We will attack terrorist with trident missiles. Watch out Bradford, Birmingham, London !
Four carriers, which ones are they?
For people not able to work out what he meant , TWO large dick carriers, FOUR large dick submarines , and little else
So "Soon we will have four large dick carriers and nothing else." meant 2 carriers?
No he meant four. The large dicks are the Trident missiles and the four large dick carriers are the four submarines that carry them.
As if in the last 12 months the need for a nuclear deterrence hasn't been reinforced by Russia invading a nation and annexing a part of it that unilaterally gave up its own nuclear deterrence.
I can understand the case for retaining nuclear weapons for our own security. What I cannot abide,however, is the hypocrisy of those who argue that these terrible weapons are essential for our defence but must be denied to other countries beyond the small clique of countries that currently possess them - ie 'Do as we say not as do'. Every country on earth is entitled to make the case advanced by those telling us that the UK has to continue with its nuclear deterrent - including Iran.
Why?
Do as we say and not as we do is a perfectly acceptable realpolitik way to act in the world. It is the sole responsibility of our government to do what is best for us, not others, just as it is the Iranian governments job to look after Iranians.
The UK having nuclear weapons is good for UK defence. Iran NOT having nuclear weapons is good for UK defence.
Therefore the ambition of our government should logically be to both maintain our deterrent while preventing the spread to other nations. Iran can make its own case and we can, should and do make the case for preventing them.
Screw any absurd notions of fairness or consistency. They have no role to play in real world international relations.
I like the southwest a lot. From the painted desert to Phoenix - love it all. My favorite is probably Arizona. I spent a happy couple of days around Tombstone, locating the Clanton ranch etc. Boot Hill is worth a visit.
I like to visit the Lowell Observatory. In the evenings you can look through the Clark telescope.
Then there's the Saguaro national park.
But my home state of Georgia has plenty to see too!
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
The Deep South is very different. It's an acquired taste. Most brits should start in the northeast and work outwards from there. There is a quaint civility here. It's nice for my wife and I to be called Sir and Ma'am.
We have been here many times and made a mess of it , forgive me being cynical of self aggrandising politicians who need a ratings boost. ISIS are not a country , they are an ideology , and even flattening Raqqa will make no difference, you may kill a few and make thousands more hate the west. You right wing warmongers have no intelligent ideas other than using your large dicks which you think make you powerful. The penny may drop some day and in 10 years some Philip Thompson may say , "look how stupid those rightwing nutjobs were in the past , they thought dropping tons of bombs and killing civilians would finish off ISIS what a bunch of Richard Heads. "
You are simply and categorically wrong. ISIS is a de facto country now. We need to change that. As for the notion some more may hate us, tell someone who cares. We did not start this fight, 9/11 happened before Afghanistan or Iraq. But the fight is upon us and part of the answer is to fight back.
Destroying ISIS's de facto control over its areas will not eliminate it's ideology. I'm not saying it will. It will weaken it though and an enemy weakened is a good thing. Putting your head in the sand won't eliminate it either so just keep carping from the sidelines if you will.
Canyonlands/Islands In The Sky remains the most breathtaking thing I've ever seen.
I was up there after wandering about and met a park ranger - I was just gobsmacked at the beauty and he agreed it was much better than the Grand Canyon. I have to agree - kept a photo of it as my wallpaper for years.
I like the southwest a lot. From the painted desert to Phoenix - love it all. My favorite is probably Arizona. I spent a happy couple of days around Tombstone, locating the Clanton ranch etc. Boot Hill is worth a visit.
I like to visit the Lowell Observatory. In the evenings you can look through the Clark telescope.
Then there's the Saguaro national park.
But my home state of Georgia has plenty to see too!
Don't forget Canada. The US is not really like the UK in many ways.
Indeed, certainly outside New York and New England. Canada was the 6th most popular destination
I first went to the US in 1992 and I have never felt more foreign in a place. Because of films and TV it all looked so familiar, yet the way people behaved and the way things worked were totally alien. A lot of them could not understand me even though I understood them perfectly. It was a complete culture shock. It was Charleston, South Carolina. It may as well have been the Moon.
The Deep South is very different. It's an acquired taste. Most brits should start in the northeast and work outwards from there. There is a quaint civility here. It's nice for my wife and I to be called Sir and Ma'am.
Yes there's always the Grand Canyon plus Bryce and Zion, and many others. There is so much to see all over this country. I've been lucky enough to see most of it over the years.
Not far from where I live is the Amicalola Falls. It has a 729 foot waterfall, the largest east of the Mississippi. I take Heidi there occasionally, so I can get canine assist climbing all those steps.
Canyonlands/Islands In The Sky remains the most breathtaking thing I've ever seen.
I was up there after wandering about and met a park ranger - I was just gobsmacked at the beauty and he agreed it was much better than the Grand Canyon. I have to agree - kept a photo of it as my wallpaper for years.
I like the southwest a lot. From the painted desert to Phoenix - love it all. My favorite is probably Arizona. I spent a happy couple of days around Tombstone, locating the Clanton ranch etc. Boot Hill is worth a visit.
I like to visit the Lowell Observatory. In the evenings you can look through the Clark telescope.
Then there's the Saguaro national park.
But my home state of Georgia has plenty to see too!
Don't you think also that where many people have an interest in travelling to? Businesses as opposed to individuals might think differently.
Moving to maybe, not travelling too, well over 50% of those who travel abroad for holidays travel to EU nations, though Australia is the biggest destination for UK emigrants
I'm a tad surprised by the Australian stat. I remember in the early 70s Australia was desperate to get brits to go there. They had a scheme where you paid 40 pounds and the Oz government would pay the rest of your fare. They had housing assistance and job schemes. I went for the interview and was approved, but really I wanted to go to the US so I didn't sign up.
.
ideally I'd live in the northern beaches an hour from Sydney, best of all worlds. Very very tempting. If i ever move out of London.
Is tarctica that the south pole grew icy and snow covered. The circum polar current thus formed cut it off from the warmer waters further north and trapped it in an ever colder climate. So an icy Antarctic is not an inevitable given.
They are the latest figures, the mining boom is over (no longer are students flocking to mining towns in their holidays to make large sums working in bars) but the Australian economy still has plenty of strength elsewhere
Indeed. Australian GDP growth is expected to average 2-4% for the next few years, hardly disaster. Most of Europe would beg for this, America would be perfectly happy.
The last Aussie recession was in 1991!
And here's a very telling chart, Aussie GDP growth versus US growth since 2001.
Yes there's always the Grand Canyon plus Bryce and Zion, and many others. There is so much to see all over this country. I've been lucky enough to see most of it over the years.
Not far from where I live is the Amicalola Falls. It has a 729 foot waterfall, the largest east of the Mississippi. I take Heidi there occasionally, so I can get canine assist climbing all those steps.
Canyonlands/Islands In The Sky remains the most breathtaking thing I've ever seen.
I was up there after wandering about and met a park ranger - I was just gobsmacked at the beauty and he agreed it was much better than the Grand Canyon. I have to agree - kept a photo of it as my wallpaper for years.
I like the southwest a lot. From the painted desert to Phoenix - love it all. My favorite is probably Arizona. I spent a happy couple of days around Tombstone, locating the Clanton ranch etc. Boot Hill is worth a visit.
I like to visit the Lowell Observatory. In the evenings you can look through the Clark telescope.
Then there's the Saguaro national park.
But my home state of Georgia has plenty to see too!
Comments
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/
Low productivity is not the route to a higher standard of living.
However, electors may well vote for less unemployment in the short term at the expense of higher productivity and wealth in the long term. So we could be in a downward economic spiral. We have to bring back Thatcherism if we want to advance the economy in the long term. Discuss.
But I doubt we need to bomb Syria as I suspect Hollande and Putin will have that covered. Waving a big dick around is what ISIS do, and that's what attracts many to them. So giving them a good hiding will dissuade a few waverers.
They want Western boots there for obvious reasons but being obliterated by drones just leaves them frustrated, especially if we tell them that drones are controlled by females. Colour hem pink and call the missiles by female names and see how they like it.
Generally we don't mind workers with those accents.
The Saudis may be double-dealing bastards, but they were our bastards at one time. A bit like Saddam.
Translation - A Nick Palmer speciality.
1. "serious electoral difficulties .." - Oldham is up for grabs.
2. "having an ear for when people have doubts .." - PLP slanging match.
3. "nuances .." - Defence policy shambles.
4. "speaking for myself .." - BroxtoweTories4NickP unconvinced.
5. "entirely happy with Corbyn's stated policies .." - We're absolutely f*cked.
6. "lack of personal aggression." - Send for enforcer Tom Watson.
7. "plunging into the Syrian war .." - See number 3
It's called 'positive politics'
If the lockdown is lifted and then there is an attack the politicians will have nowhere to hide.
As usual you have to thoink through an exit strategy.
But would you be offended by the Lord's prayer in an advert? I suspect not, you're too old to need a safe space.
But you're right, it's one of those asymmetric things: immigration from those countries could in fact be far more problematic than immigration from eastern Europe, before anyone thought there was a problem with it.
We're the enemy to them, because we're America's / Israel's / the west's friends. But those are just excuses: the real reasons are tied into the conflict within Islam, and a resentment of the west's success. A success that Islam has generally not seen for a couple of centuries.
Some Jihadists even want to create a British Islamic State.
Even if we utterly withdrew from the ME and let the whole region go to the dogs (which would cause many other problems), they'd still come after us. They'd probably even see such a withdrawal as a reason to attack.
But it cannot be done by bombing alone. But bombing can help reduce some risks, even as it increasing other risks.
@Nigel_Farage: For those who followed my racing tip yesterday, Exit Europe sadly injured during the race. Wishing them all the best on a full recovery.
"... France is a close ally ..."
In the eight years or so that I have been reading this site I have seen many posts that have made me shudder to a halt and think, "What is he/she on to come out with that tosh?" However, seldom if ever has my ghast been quite so flabbered as when I read that contribution.
There are few things that I am certain of in this uncertain world but one of them is that France is not, never has been, and will never be a close ally of England. They always have been, are and will always be an enemy - only the methods used to fight each other change. We may reach a temporary accommodation from time to time, usually when the Frogs are in the merde and want us to help bail them out (but they have no hesitation in stepping aside and leaving us to face the music alone when it suits them).
No, Mr. Dancer, though it is after your period, history teaches us that in Europe England only has one long term ally (Portugal) and one other who, in recent years at least, has not plotted our ruin and downfall (the Netherlands).
I don't suppose you've ever connected your bigotry to why Labour lost this year.
Except didn't Londonstan start under Thatcher? For instance Omar Bakri Muhammad moved to the UK in 1986. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Londonistan_(term)
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/holidays/article-3033680/The-destinations-Britons-emigrating-revealed-Spain-number-three.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/3tq9fb/observations_from_campaigning_in_oldham/
There were warnings of a plot against VJ day this year, and a 15-year old boy from Blackburn has been jailed for planning to attack an Australian VJ parade.
There may well have been others. Or not. But the point is that just because they've not succeeded does not mean they have not, and are not, planning and attempting.
The security services - including the one some in Labour want to disband - are helping prevent them. We may generally only hear of their failures.
Canada has a massive immigrant population and has a regular yearly large immigrant influx.
You travel the world widely and so above most people you should be able to speak about all the wide movements of people that what is termed 'globalism' has brought. This is not going to go away and needs thinking about sensibly. We now have mass communication ease of communication ease of travel and across wide distances and that's before we see people get into dinghies to cross the China sea and where ever. The opportunities that are available in prosperous countries are easy to see and easier than ever to travel to.
It's got to be in our interest to spread and sustain democracy wherever we can because that is the first step to creating the wealth and happiness that will stop these mass movements.
Oz is a nice place though.
Except he worshipped West Ham, loved fish and chips, and the pub he went to was a reproduction east-end pub, serving British beers. He preferred marmite over vegimite, and would wolf down 'genuine' Walkers crisps (which I'm not sure were going when he was a kid).
Hence so many perjorative terms associated with Holland - double Dutch, Dutch auction etc.
I do note you said recently but to be fair we haven't been to war with France since 1814 or close to it since 1823.
"... An unemployment level of 2 million is a long way from 'near full employment'. We are nowhere near the low unemployment levels of the 1950s and 1960s..."
In the days when the sainted Clement Attlee was PM an unemployment rate of 5% was regarded as full employment (there is always churn and that is healthy). The numbers don't matter as the size of the workforce is much larger now but what do the percentages say?
I would suggest that the social problems of unemployment are with the number of NEETS and the long term unemployed. With both of those I think the current government has made some, if not sufficient, progress
Yes, I think you make valid points. I greatly admire MrsT, but we should not get carried away with fanciful musings.
https://t.co/1p26TL45Ei
http://order-order.com/2015/11/09/exit-europe-now-favourite-with-bookies/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita
Osborn however did stop the petrol tax escalator and given the now low price of oil I wonder if that will take a hit in forthcoming budgets? Speculation has it that oil has further to fall and that will mean further losses of oil revenues and of vat on fuel sales.
I have lived and worked in Canada, the US, Canary Islands, France, Holland, Denmark, Sweden among others. But the US is home. We went back to the UK to put my daughter through the same school I went to. Eventually even she wanted to come home, so we did.
It is an unfortunate thing to feel alienated from the country you were born and grew up in. Everywhere there looks so familiar and holds many memories yet feels so different.
Only my nostalgia keeps me as a Geordie - the times I've been back [fingers of one hand] have felt weird. I don't go back now because I don't want to spoil the memories I have.
Don't forget, Australia is one big open cast mine, surrounded by man eating sharks.
It is also moving steadily northwards, in a very short while (OK in geological terms) it will hit Malaysia and then all immigrant bets will be off.
BTW, it was only when Australia broke away from Antarctica that the south pole grew icy and snow covered. The circum polar current thus formed cut it off from the warmer waters further north and trapped it in an ever colder climate. So an icy Antarctic is not an inevitable given.
Job security isn't what it was, and output is shared across more people. But honestly I think Blair was right to argue, as many in the Conservatives would agree, that someone who goes to work during the week, even if their pay must be topped up by the state, is still better off than someone who stays at home.
It used to be that somehow such a person was by definition being exploited, or humiliated, or dehumanised; but now I think we can see that the people most ostracised, most failed, are those who have no job and no prospects.
Perhaps I should take that up again? Not. If I'm reincarnated as Rachel Welch - I definitely will.
Australia, by contrast, is not like that. Its economy is hugely dependent on commodities and its corporate innovation culture, its inventiveness, is almost non-existent - certainly in comparison to most other developed countries. That is going to cause the Aussies real problems further down the line. They have been riding the crest of a wave, but have not done enough with the luck they have enjoyed. It maybe that they are too optimistic, in a very British way: assuming that everything will turn out OK, when actually you have to work hard to ensure that it does.
Never been to New England et al. Is it worth a special trip? Avoided Florida as I'm bug bait.
You're getting me excited with the image of chamois dresses and feathers in your hair
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195069056?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o07_s00
By the way that was shot in Tenerife, where I used to live.
Do as we say and not as we do is a perfectly acceptable realpolitik way to act in the world. It is the sole responsibility of our government to do what is best for us, not others, just as it is the Iranian governments job to look after Iranians.
The UK having nuclear weapons is good for UK defence.
Iran NOT having nuclear weapons is good for UK defence.
Therefore the ambition of our government should logically be to both maintain our deterrent while preventing the spread to other nations. Iran can make its own case and we can, should and do make the case for preventing them.
Screw any absurd notions of fairness or consistency. They have no role to play in real world international relations.
No morning deliveries for you then.
I like to visit the Lowell Observatory. In the evenings you can look through the Clark telescope.
Then there's the Saguaro national park.
But my home state of Georgia has plenty to see too!
Destroying ISIS's de facto control over its areas will not eliminate it's ideology. I'm not saying it will. It will weaken it though and an enemy weakened is a good thing. Putting your head in the sand won't eliminate it either so just keep carping from the sidelines if you will.
I was up there after wandering about and met a park ranger - I was just gobsmacked at the beauty and he agreed it was much better than the Grand Canyon. I have to agree - kept a photo of it as my wallpaper for years.
None of the images online do it justice http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/groverlook.png
Could be worse I suppose.
Not far from where I live is the Amicalola Falls. It has a 729 foot waterfall, the largest east of the Mississippi. I take Heidi there occasionally, so I can get canine assist climbing all those steps.