Also, he seems to think that Apple make their own phones, which they don't. They farm out manufacturing of the phones and components to a whole bunch of companies, just like every company out there. The most recent product I know the details about is the PS4, about 5% of global PS4s out there were assembled by EMCS (Sony's manufacturing company) and that was basically the first run because they didn't want the design and specifications to leak by farming it out to Hon Hai. Out of the 340 separate components that make up the PS4, only about 20 are sourced from one of Sony's own subsidiaries, the rest are purchased from other companies.
Apple is nothing more than a research and design group with a massive sales and marketing department. It's a great business model as other companies take on the risk of manufacturing.
Also, he seems to think that Apple make their own phones, which they don't. They farm out manufacturing of the phones and components to a whole bunch of companies, just like every company out there. The most recent product I know the details about is the PS4, about 5% of global PS4s out there were assembled by EMCS (Sony's manufacturing company) and that was basically the first run because they didn't want the design and specifications to leak by farming it out to Hon Hai. Out of the 340 separate components that make up the PS4, only about 20 are sourced from one of Sony's own subsidiaries, the rest are purchased from other companies.
Apple is nothing more than a research and design group with a massive sales and marketing department. It's a great business model as other companies take on the risk of manufacturing.
Very true. Foxconn, I think, does almost all Apple's manufacturing.
But the whole thing is ridiculous. Donald Trump - whose companies all manufacture in China - has no intention of keeping his campaign promises.
If he is elected, he will - I suspect - turn out to be a socially liberal centrist.
And there will be a lot of very disappointed people.
Also, he seems to think that Apple make their own phones, which they don't. They farm out manufacturing of the phones and components to a whole bunch of companies, just like every company out there. The most recent product I know the details about is the PS4, about 5% of global PS4s out there were assembled by EMCS (Sony's manufacturing company) and that was basically the first run because they didn't want the design and specifications to leak by farming it out to Hon Hai. Out of the 340 separate components that make up the PS4, only about 20 are sourced from one of Sony's own subsidiaries, the rest are purchased from other companies.
Apple is nothing more than a research and design group with a massive sales and marketing department. It's a great business model as other companies take on the risk of manufacturing.
Very true. Foxconn, I think, does almost all Apple's manufacturing.
But the whole thing is ridiculous. Donald Trump - who's companies all manufacture in China - has no intention of keeping his campaign promises.
If he is elected, he will - I suspect - turn out to be a socially liberal centrist.
And there will be a lot of very disappointed people.
The company that hardly anybody in the street has heard of, but who employ well over a million people.
Also, he seems to think that Apple make their own phones, which they don't. They farm out manufacturing of the phones and components to a whole bunch of companies, just like every company out there. The most recent product I know the details about is the PS4, about 5% of global PS4s out there were assembled by EMCS (Sony's manufacturing company) and that was basically the first run because they didn't want the design and specifications to leak by farming it out to Hon Hai. Out of the 340 separate components that make up the PS4, only about 20 are sourced from one of Sony's own subsidiaries, the rest are purchased from other companies.
Apple is nothing more than a research and design group with a massive sales and marketing department. It's a great business model as other companies take on the risk of manufacturing.
Very true. Foxconn, I think, does almost all Apple's manufacturing.
But the whole thing is ridiculous. Donald Trump - who's companies all manufacture in China - has no intention of keeping his campaign promises.
If he is elected, he will - I suspect - turn out to be a socially liberal centrist.
And there will be a lot of very disappointed people.
I think he will be economically quite centrist but socially slightly more conservative than the US has had in recent years.
I'm still of the opinion that anyone is better than Obama. Trump could yet prove my hypothesis wrong, but I'm not convinced.
Also, he seems to think that Apple make their own phones, which they don't. They farm out manufacturing of the phones and components to a whole bunch of companies, just like every company out there. The most recent product I know the details about is the PS4, about 5% of global PS4s out there were assembled by EMCS (Sony's manufacturing company) and that was basically the first run because they didn't want the design and specifications to leak by farming it out to Hon Hai. Out of the 340 separate components that make up the PS4, only about 20 are sourced from one of Sony's own subsidiaries, the rest are purchased from other companies.
Apple is nothing more than a research and design group with a massive sales and marketing department. It's a great business model as other companies take on the risk of manufacturing.
It's a religion with a small R&D wing.
Ah! Not only is it hate Trump and Palin day on PB it is also hate one of the most successful American enterprises ever, which has given pleasure and joy the billions of people world wide.
I was referring to the debate around the number of economically disadvantaged youngsters who attend university. And Scottish students are surely leaving with less debt than their English counterparts, no?
Correct, despite Scottish degrees being a year longer than England (4 years rather than 3) the average English debt is 10 grand higher than for Scottish students over the life of the degree.
Scotland hating Carlotta was just using the usual Tory lies to denigrate Scotland. These insecure exiles seem to hold grudges against the country of their birth for some reason. They try desperately to impress their chums and try to feel they have succeeded in life.
You're just fine with declining social mobility in Scotland - we get it - it's a small price to pay to avoid criticism of the SNP.
Some of us are not.
Except the proportion of poorest students attending university has increased under the SNP.
At the slowest rate of ANY country in the UK.
Why do you think Scotland is falling further and further behind?
'Something is pretty wrong with any of our society, our educational establishments, our teaching profession, or our anti-extremist measures if the police are called to the house of a 10-yr old who looks to have made a(n easily verifiable) spelling mistake'
These are the same police who always say they have no time or resources to investigate burglaries, of course. Again, it's all about box-ticking, a*se-covering and easy targets.
Also, he seems to think that Apple make their own phones, which they don't. They farm out manufacturing of the phones and components to a whole bunch of companies, just like every company out there. The most recent product I know the details about is the PS4, about 5% of global PS4s out there were assembled by EMCS (Sony's manufacturing company) and that was basically the first run because they didn't want the design and specifications to leak by farming it out to Hon Hai. Out of the 340 separate components that make up the PS4, only about 20 are sourced from one of Sony's own subsidiaries, the rest are purchased from other companies.
Apple is nothing more than a research and design group with a massive sales and marketing department. It's a great business model as other companies take on the risk of manufacturing.
It's a religion with a small R&D wing.
Ah! Not only is it hate Trump and Palin day on PB it is also hate one of the most successful American enterprises ever, which has given pleasure and joy the billions of people world wide.
Do you have special robes? A picture of His Jobness on your bedroom wall? To make sure you're 'holding it right'?
Also, he seems to think that Apple make their own phones, which they don't. They farm out manufacturing of the phones and components to a whole bunch of companies, just like every company out there. The most recent product I know the details about is the PS4, about 5% of global PS4s out there were assembled by EMCS (Sony's manufacturing company) and that was basically the first run because they didn't want the design and specifications to leak by farming it out to Hon Hai. Out of the 340 separate components that make up the PS4, only about 20 are sourced from one of Sony's own subsidiaries, the rest are purchased from other companies.
Apple is nothing more than a research and design group with a massive sales and marketing department. It's a great business model as other companies take on the risk of manufacturing.
Very true. Foxconn, I think, does almost all Apple's manufacturing.
But the whole thing is ridiculous. Donald Trump - whose companies all manufacture in China - has no intention of keeping his campaign promises.
If he is elected, he will - I suspect - turn out to be a socially liberal centrist.
And there will be a lot of very disappointed people.
Foxconn do the assembly. Sony does the camera and lens, Samsung and TSMC do the processors, Samsung does the RAM, Toshiba does the flash and integrated circuitry, Qualcomm do the modems via TSMC, JDC and Sharp do the screen+digitizer units. Their new fangled "force touch" is a Japan Display innovation which they sold to Huawei first but it is poorly integrated on Android.
That's the basis of the iPhone. Apple design just one part of that, the processor. Everything else is other companies and then they proved the software, which for the user is more important than hardware.
Also, he seems to think that Apple make their own phones, which they don't. They farm out manufacturing of the phones and components to a whole bunch of companies, just like every company out there. The most recent product I know the details about is the PS4, about 5% of global PS4s out there were assembled by EMCS (Sony's manufacturing company) and that was basically the first run because they didn't want the design and specifications to leak by farming it out to Hon Hai. Out of the 340 separate components that make up the PS4, only about 20 are sourced from one of Sony's own subsidiaries, the rest are purchased from other companies.
Apple is nothing more than a research and design group with a massive sales and marketing department. It's a great business model as other companies take on the risk of manufacturing.
Very true. Foxconn, I think, does almost all Apple's manufacturing.
But the whole thing is ridiculous. Donald Trump - who's companies all manufacture in China - has no intention of keeping his campaign promises.
If he is elected, he will - I suspect - turn out to be a socially liberal centrist.
And there will be a lot of very disappointed people.
I think he will be economically quite centrist but socially slightly more conservative than the US has had in recent years.
I'm still of the opinion that anyone is better than Obama. Trump could yet prove my hypothesis wrong, but I'm not convinced.
Also, he seems to think that Apple make their own phones, which they don't. They farm out manufacturing of the phones and components to a whole bunch of companies, just like every company out there. The most recent product I know the details about is the PS4, about 5% of global PS4s out there were assembled by EMCS (Sony's manufacturing company) and that was basically the first run because they didn't want the design and specifications to leak by farming it out to Hon Hai. Out of the 340 separate components that make up the PS4, only about 20 are sourced from one of Sony's own subsidiaries, the rest are purchased from other companies.
Apple is nothing more than a research and design group with a massive sales and marketing department. It's a great business model as other companies take on the risk of manufacturing.
Very true. Foxconn, I think, does almost all Apple's manufacturing.
But the whole thing is ridiculous. Donald Trump - whose companies all manufacture in China - has no intention of keeping his campaign promises.
If he is elected, he will - I suspect - turn out to be a socially liberal centrist.
And there will be a lot of very disappointed people.
I wonder how that would play out. As you say, if elected, Trump will not do or even try to do the most eye-catching things he's promised. Will that be held against him or will it not matter? Will the Democrats have fun by trying to insert an item for Mexican wall receipts into the budget?
If he is able just to shrug that stuff off, does it establish a baseline for future campaigns: promise anything, the less credible the better, to get attention. It won't matter if you win.
Mr. Divvie, what are your intentions regarding the EU referendum?
Still keeping my powder dry-ish. Nothing impresses much from either side, and as long as there's not a date for the referendum it all seems rather abstract.
Also, he seems to think that Apple make their own phones, which they don't. They farm out manufacturing of the phones and components to a whole bunch of companies, just like every company out there. The most recent product I know the details about is the PS4, about 5% of global PS4s out there were assembled by EMCS (Sony's manufacturing company) and that was basically the first run because they didn't want the design and specifications to leak by farming it out to Hon Hai. Out of the 340 separate components that make up the PS4, only about 20 are sourced from one of Sony's own subsidiaries, the rest are purchased from other companies.
Apple is nothing more than a research and design group with a massive sales and marketing department. It's a great business model as other companies take on the risk of manufacturing.
Very true. Foxconn, I think, does almost all Apple's manufacturing.
But the whole thing is ridiculous. Donald Trump - whose companies all manufacture in China - has no intention of keeping his campaign promises.
If he is elected, he will - I suspect - turn out to be a socially liberal centrist.
And there will be a lot of very disappointed people.
Foxconn do the assembly. Sony does the camera and lens, Samsung and TSMC do the processors, Samsung does the RAM, Toshiba does the flash and integrated circuitry, Qualcomm do the modems via TSMC, JDC and Sharp do the screen+digitizer units. Their new fangled "force touch" is a Japan Display innovation which they sold to Huawei first but it is poorly integrated on Android.
That's the basis of the iPhone. Apple design just one part of that, the processor. Everything else is other companies and then they proved the software, which for the user is more important than hardware.
Whilst often similar verbal jousts have been held here (and I'm a pretty firm Leave voter), I do suspect that's more in tune with most people in the country.
Buried on the FT website. The EU proposes to do away with the law that refugees must claim asylum where they land. So in future they can be waved through to the north, i.e. the UK. As we are party to this refugee agreement, we'd have to accept them: 100,000s more migrants. Maybe millions
This alone could win the vote for LEAVE if it is the case.
Also, he seems to think that Apple make their own phones, which they don't. They farm out manufacturing of the phones and components to a whole bunch of companies, just like every company out there. The most recent product I know the details about is the PS4, about 5% of global PS4s out there were assembled by EMCS (Sony's manufacturing company) and that was basically the first run because they didn't want the design and specifications to leak by farming it out to Hon Hai. Out of the 340 separate components that make up the PS4, only about 20 are sourced from one of Sony's own subsidiaries, the rest are purchased from other companies.
Apple is nothing more than a research and design group with a massive sales and marketing department. It's a great business model as other companies take on the risk of manufacturing.
It's a religion with a small R&D wing.
Ah! Not only is it hate Trump and Palin day on PB it is also hate one of the most successful American enterprises ever, which has given pleasure and joy the billions of people world wide.
Do you have special robes? A picture of His Jobness on your bedroom wall? To make sure you're 'holding it right'?
Ha ha! No, but I do remember when in 1985 I bought my first Macintosh Plus that I was laughed at by my work colleagues for buying an expensive toy and for deserting the Microsoft OS (DOS). I loved that Mac Plus, look where Apple is today and look where Microsoft lingers.
Dragged upwards, screaming, on rUK's coat-tails....
What's remarkable, is that on the BBC website, this mornings employment figures seem to be relegated to the third or fourth item on the business page. In the past they have been front page headlines. .
Buried on the FT website. The EU proposes to do away with the law that refugees must claim asylum where they land. So in future they can be waved through to the north, i.e. the UK. As we are party to this refugee agreement, we'd have to accept them: 100,000s more migrants. Maybe millions
This alone could win the vote for LEAVE if it is the case.
Solid fall in youth unemployment as well. I think the higher living wage is also going to help this once it kicks in. Companies will be willing to take a chance on younger employees given the gap in wages is going to be so high.
Dragged upwards, screaming, on rUK's coat-tails....
What's remarkable, is that on the BBC website, this mornings employment figures seem to be relegated to the third or fourth item on the business page. In the past they have been front page headlines. .
Actually sounds eminently sensible to me. Teachers have a duty of care and are obliged to report it.
One of those situations where everyone’s got some element of right on their side. And where everyone’s got something wrong.
We also know little of the circumstances. Did the teacher have other reasons to suspect, or was this a one off? Etc etc.
Yes perhaps the teacher was alerted by the ticking from the ten year olds anorak. God only knows what would have happened if he failed his times tables, the teacher would have called the riot police.
Still, before long some bright spark will say the teacher was a ukip voter who assumed all Muslim boys are being groomed to blow us all up.
Come on hand wringers - which way do you want it?
The only person wringing his hands about this is you. I don't think anyone else is troubled.
The Guardian reported it, why do you think they did?
They need page views?
Imo it's not worth getting stressed about this type of story. They are always couched in terms that will wind people up, omitting any facts or circumstances that would make the supposedly mad behaviour reasonable. What's going on is that the Guardian is monetising readers' outrage.
They're not very good at "monetising" then. The Guardian lost £550m under its last editor Alan Rusbridger, £70m n 2015. It's heading for bankruptcy.
It's one reasin why they hate the profitable Daily Mail so much
Actually sounds eminently sensible to me. Teachers have a duty of care and are obliged to report it.
One of those situations where everyone’s got some element of right on their side. And where everyone’s got something wrong.
We also know little of the circumstances. Did the teacher have other reasons to suspect, or was this a one off? Etc etc.
Yes perhaps the teacher was alerted by the ticking from the ten year olds anorak. God only knows what would have happened if he failed his times tables, the teacher would have called the riot police.
Still, before long some bright spark will say the teacher was a ukip voter who assumed all Muslim boys are being groomed to blow us all up.
Come on hand wringers - which way do you want it?
The only person wringing his hands about this is you. I don't think anyone else is troubled.
The Guardian reported it, why do you think they did?
They need page views?
Imo it's not worth getting stressed about this type of story. They are always couched in terms that will wind people up, omitting any facts or circumstances that would make the supposedly mad behaviour reasonable. What's going on is that the Guardian is monetising readers' outrage.
They're not very good at "monetising" then. The Guardian lost £550m under its last editor Alan Rusbridger, £70m n 2015. It's heading for bankruptcy.
It's one reasin why they hate the profitable Daily Mail so much
Buried on the FT website. The EU proposes to do away with the law that refugees must claim asylum where they land. So in future they can be waved through to the north, i.e. the UK. As we are party to this refugee agreement, we'd have to accept them: 100,000s more migrants. Maybe millions
This alone could win the vote for LEAVE if it is the case.
Even if that doesn't happen or the story is not quite as advertised, it's still an example of how dangerous the migration issue is for Remain. The question of how to ease pressure on southern EU countries will be at the forefront all this year and next, and there is no answer that won't be extremely unpopular here.
Dragged upwards, screaming, on rUK's coat-tails....
What's remarkable, is that on the BBC website, this mornings employment figures seem to be relegated to the third or fourth item on the business page. In the past they have been front page headlines. .
Good news is no news.
Yes, that and there being no General Election for another 4 years.
Also nice to see Economic Inactivity at its lowest rate since 1990 and unemployment at its lowest since 2005. Looks like we are fully past the unemployment effects of the Great Recession.
On topic, 5/1 is absurd odds for Palin as VP nominee. Why would he? What does she bring (well, we know that - we saw it eight years ago and she's not got better since)?
Palin has delivered all Trump needs of her. I wouldn't be surprised if it's the last time we see them together unless he's planning on doing a rally in Alaska (not really necessary). She hits a certain section of the Republican base. If you're going to win, you need the votes and you get them the best way you can. However, I'm quite sure he'll have learned from the McCain and George HW Bush examples that you need a VP who's not a liability. You might still get it wrong but you won't pick someone who's already known to be a liability.
As an aside, what was Trump doing wearing an overcoat inside? It looks strange.
Actually sounds eminently sensible to me. Teachers have a duty of care and are obliged to report it.
One of those situations where everyone’s got some element of right on their side. And where everyone’s got something wrong.
We also know little of the circumstances. Did the teacher have other reasons to suspect, or was this a one off? Etc etc.
Yes perhaps the teacher was alerted by the ticking from the ten year olds anorak. God only knows what would have happened if he failed his times tables, the teacher would have called the riot police.
Still, before long some bright spark will say the teacher was a ukip voter who assumed all Muslim boys are being groomed to blow us all up.
Come on hand wringers - which way do you want it?
The only person wringing his hands about this is you. I don't think anyone else is troubled.
The Guardian reported it, why do you think they did?
They need page views?
Imo it's not worth getting stressed about this type of story. They are always couched in terms that will wind people up, omitting any facts or circumstances that would make the supposedly mad behaviour reasonable. What's going on is that the Guardian is monetising readers' outrage.
They're not very good at "monetising" then. The Guardian lost £550m under its last editor Alan Rusbridger, £70m in 2015 alone. It's heading for bankruptcy.
It's one reason why they hate the profitable Daily Mail so much
Always helps if you make sure you set yourself up to be as tax efficient on the one thing you made money on as well ;-)
Good falls in the underemployment index as well, 1.25m people say they do part time work because they can't find full time work down 0.21m from a peak of 1.46m two years ago. That's not bad at all.
Actually sounds eminently sensible to me. Teachers have a duty of care and are obliged to report it.
One of those situations where everyone’s got some element of right on their side. And where everyone’s got something wrong.
We also know little of the circumstances. Did the teacher have other reasons to suspect, or was this a one off? Etc etc.
Yes perhaps the teacher was alerted by the ticking from the ten year olds anorak. God only knows what would have happened if he failed his times tables, the teacher would have called the riot police.
Still, before long some bright spark will say the teacher was a ukip voter who assumed all Muslim boys are being groomed to blow us all up.
Come on hand wringers - which way do you want it?
The only person wringing his hands about this is you. I don't think anyone else is troubled.
The Guardian reported it, why do you think they did?
They need page views?
Imo it's not worth getting stressed about this type of story. They are always couched in terms that will wind people up, omitting any facts or circumstances that would make the supposedly mad behaviour reasonable. What's going on is that the Guardian is monetising readers' outrage.
They're not very good at "monetising" then. The Guardian lost £550m under its last editor Alan Rusbridger, £70m n 2015. It's heading for bankruptcy.
It's one reasin why they hate the profitable Daily Mail so much
True. The Mail is the master.
(Actually, the Guardian is pretty good at turning news into "I can't believe what they're just done!" outrage for its demographic. But it doesn't seem able to make money from it.)
Actually sounds eminently sensible to me. Teachers have a duty of care and are obliged to report it.
One of those situations where everyone’s got some element of right on their side. And where everyone’s got something wrong.
We also know little of the circumstances. Did the teacher have other reasons to suspect, or was this a one off? Etc etc.
Yes perhaps the teacher was alerted by the ticking from the ten year olds anorak. God only knows what would have happened if he failed his times tables, the teacher would have called the riot police.
Still, before long some bright spark will say the teacher was a ukip voter who assumed all Muslim boys are being groomed to blow us all up.
Come on hand wringers - which way do you want it?
The only person wringing his hands about this is you. I don't think anyone else is troubled.
The Guardian reported it, why do you think they did?
They need page views?
Imo it's not worth getting stressed about this type of story. They are always couched in terms that will wind people up, omitting any facts or circumstances that would make the supposedly mad behaviour reasonable. What's going on is that the Guardian is monetising readers' outrage.
They're not very good at "monetising" then. The Guardian lost £550m under its last editor Alan Rusbridger, £70m n 2015. It's heading for bankruptcy.
It's one reasin why they hate the profitable Daily Mail so much
They also avoided tax through a complex series of Cayman Island-incorporated companies. Together with a hedge fund of all things. But being The Guardian it is of course entirely justified.
Buried on the FT website. The EU proposes to do away with the law that refugees must claim asylum where they land. So in future they can be waved through to the north, i.e. the UK. As we are party to this refugee agreement, we'd have to accept them: 100,000s more migrants. Maybe millions
This alone could win the vote for LEAVE if it is the case.
Even if that doesn't happen or the story is not quite as advertised, it's still an example of how dangerous the migration issue is for Remain. The question of how to ease pressure on southern EU countries will be at the forefront all this year and next, and there is no answer that won't be extremely unpopular here.
What I can't work out from the story is whether this can be forced on us through QMV. It's very opaque. We've an opt out from Schengen, but we are party to the Dublin agreement (what the EU wants to change).
If it can be forced on us, and they try to do it before the vote, then LEAVE will win.
Yes. Then again, Cameron will point that out (and point to the current state of the polls).
I think the opacity you refer to is a problem in itself, for Remain.
Actually sounds eminently sensible to me. Teachers have a duty of care and are obliged to report it.
One of those situations where everyone’s got some element of right on their side. And where everyone’s got something wrong.
We also know little of the circumstances. Did the teacher have other reasons to suspect, or was this a one off? Etc etc.
Yes perhaps the teacher was alerted by the ticking from the ten year olds anorak. God only knows what would have happened if he failed his times tables, the teacher would have called the riot police.
Still, before long some bright spark will say the teacher was a ukip voter who assumed all Muslim boys are being groomed to blow us all up.
Come on hand wringers - which way do you want it?
The only person wringing his hands about this is you. I don't think anyone else is troubled.
The Guardian reported it, why do you think they did?
They need page views?
Imo it's not worth getting stressed about this type of story. They are always couched in terms that will wind people up, omitting any facts or circumstances that would make the supposedly mad behaviour reasonable. What's going on is that the Guardian is monetising readers' outrage.
They're not very good at "monetising" then. The Guardian lost £550m under its last editor Alan Rusbridger, £70m in 2015 alone. It's heading for bankruptcy.
It's one reason why they hate the profitable Daily Mail so much
Interesting to note that News Corp made $83m EBITDA from selling newspapers last quarter and privately I've heard that the Times is close to break even because of the early introduction of the paywall and the huge drive to sign up subscribers.
Police were called to King’s College London last night after ‘Action Palestine’ activists allegedly assaulted members of the Israel Society, throwing chairs and smashing windows.
Dragged upwards, screaming, on rUK's coat-tails....
What's remarkable, is that on the BBC website, this mornings employment figures seem to be relegated to the third or fourth item on the business page. In the past they have been front page headlines. .
Good news is no news.
Yes, that and there being no General Election for another 4 years.
Also nice to see Economic Inactivity at its lowest rate since 1990 and unemployment at its lowest since 2005. Looks like we are fully past the unemployment effects of the Great Recession.
You will of course excuse me for breaking up this cosy PB consensus. World markets are again plunging this morning. The FTSE is down 2.5% and Dow futures are down over 300 points. It won't be long before the dole queues are lengthening again.
Social services were involved too. Im not sure who to direct my anger at, the police, teachers or social services.
I'll settle for the ridiculous environment successive governments have created by treating citizens as objects for their amusement.
If they hadn't followed up and there had been a subsequent attack I'm sure you would have been unstinting in your criticism of the government.
I suspect the press if over-egging it: all the police would have done would have been popped over for a chat to the parents and figured out that it wasn't an issue.
As for the teacher highlighting a potential concern for a child at risk, and the police linking up with social services...isn't that kind of exactly what we *want* our public services to do? Otherwise you can end up with Baby P type scenarios where no one talks to the other agencies
From a spelling mistake to comparisons with Baby P, welcome to the Nanny State. My god if only Orwell was here now.
It's not a comparison with Baby P.
I don't know if you have managed people in the past, but in big organisations sometimes it is better not to give people discretion, especially at the 'fact finding' stage. This is particularly the case where you have to get separate agencies to co-operate.
Oh, the Guardian will never go bankrupt now, they are divesting their third share in Top Right which will earn them enough money to offset their annual losses with earnings from interest and dividends. GMG is going to become an investment fund which does news on the side.
Buried on the FT website. The EU proposes to do away with the law that refugees must claim asylum where they land. So in future they can be waved through to the north, i.e. the UK. As we are party to this refugee agreement, we'd have to accept them: 100,000s more migrants. Maybe millions
This alone could win the vote for LEAVE if it is the case.
I mentioned that earlier on this thread. It seems as if rules can be changed when they inconvenience some countries but if we want changes then nothing can be done. The contrast - if properly used by the Leave campaign (a big if, mind) - could be helpful to them.
Actually sounds eminently sensible to me. Teachers have a duty of care and are obliged to report it.
One of those situations where everyone’s got some element of right on their side. And where everyone’s got something wrong.
We also know little of the circumstances. Did the teacher have other reasons to suspect, or was this a one off? Etc etc.
Yes perhaps the teacher was alerted by the ticking from the ten year olds anorak. God only knows what would have happened if he failed his times tables, the teacher would have called the riot police.
Still, before long some bright spark will say the teacher was a ukip voter who assumed all Muslim boys are being groomed to blow us all up.
Come on hand wringers - which way do you want it?
The only person wringing his hands about this is you. I don't think anyone else is troubled.
The Guardian reported it, why do you think they did?
They need page views?
Imo it's not worth getting stressed about this type of story. They are always couched in terms that will wind people up, omitting any facts or circumstances that would make the supposedly mad behaviour reasonable. What's going on is that the Guardian is monetising readers' outrage.
They're not very good at "monetising" then. The Guardian lost £550m under its last editor Alan Rusbridger, £70m n 2015. It's heading for bankruptcy.
It's one reasin why they hate the profitable Daily Mail so much
True. The Mail is the master.
(Actually, the Guardian is pretty good at turning news into "I can't believe what they're just done!" outrage for its demographic. But it doesn't seem able to make money from it.)
Is that because it's not possible, because it is possible but it doesn't have the skills to, or because it sees 'making money' as a grubby and demeaning exercise?
My guess would be a mixture of the second and third options.
Stonewall explain in their report how they judge gay friendliness among employers.
There are many workplaces where gay men and lesbians are not made particularly welcome, whatever the formal policies of the organisation. It can vary within organisations. One point I have often made internally is that the experience of a very senior partner in London is likely to be very different from someone working in the post room in Leeds. When policies are set by the former they are unlikely to appreciate the practical problems of the latter.
Sounds a bit Leedsist to me Alastair. I really don't see how being gay is either a help or a hindrance in any job.
Stonewall explain in their report how they judge gay friendliness among employers.
There are many workplaces where gay men and lesbians are not made particularly welcome, whatever the formal policies of the organisation. It can vary within organisations. One point I have often made internally is that the experience of a very senior partner in London is likely to be very different from someone working in the post room in Leeds. When policies are set by the former they are unlikely to appreciate the practical problems of the latter.
Sounds a bit Leedsist to me Alastair. I really don't see how being gay is either a help or a hindrance in any job.
Dirty Leeds.
It helps having workers who are comfortable in their own skins in the workplace. Interestingly, younger members of staff (gay and straight) tell us that they strongly value working for a firm that recognises that.
Yes - we have had the same reaction where I work. We've recently had a Diversity Week which covered a range of topics and the response to the individual events and the strong support for them from the CEO has been very good. Employee surveys consistently show that this, the volunteering that is done and similar engagement with employees and the community around us is one of the positives of working here. All of these are factors which go into the decision to join an employer and, more importantly, to keep on working there.
I'll be honest and say I doubt very much if I'd feel comfortable working at a place that organised a Diversity Week.
Including the freedom of individuals to live where they wish on the planet?
Now even you don't want that, unless you're happy to have people stay indefinitely at your place.
You see this is where liberalism trips itself up, it always applies to other people.
No, I don't want it, but I also don't affect to be a libertarian.
If the freedom of the individual is paramount then by what right does the state (or anyone else) seek to stop someone living here, provided they obey the laws?
Are not you simply calling for a small state except where it suits you otherwise, where you want a massive one.
Milton Friedman answered that one. You can't have both open borders, and a welfare state.
Stonewall explain in their report how they judge gay friendliness among employers.
There are many workplaces where gay men and lesbians are not made particularly welcome, whatever the formal policies of the organisation. It can vary within organisations. One point I have often made internally is that the experience of a very senior partner in London is likely to be very different from someone working in the post room in Leeds. When policies are set by the former they are unlikely to appreciate the practical problems of the latter.
Sounds a bit Leedsist to me Alastair. I really don't see how being gay is either a help or a hindrance in any job.
Stonewall explain in their report how they judge gay friendliness among employers.
There are many workplaces where gay men and lesbians are not made particularly welcome, whatever the formal policies of the organisation. It can vary within organisations. One point I have often made internally is that the experience of a very senior partner in London is likely to be very different from someone working in the post room in Leeds. When policies are set by the former they are unlikely to appreciate the practical problems of the latter.
Sounds a bit Leedsist to me Alastair. I really don't see how being gay is either a help or a hindrance in any job.
Dirty Leeds.
It helps having workers who are comfortable in their own skins in the workplace. Interestingly, younger members of staff (gay and straight) tell us that they strongly value working for a firm that recognises that.
Yes - we have had the same reaction where I work. We've recently had a Diversity Week which covered a range of topics and the response to the individual events and the strong support for them from the CEO has been very good. Employee surveys consistently show that this, the volunteering that is done and similar engagement with employees and the community around us is one of the positives of working here. All of these are factors which go into the decision to join an employer and, more importantly, to keep on working there.
I'll be honest and say I doubt very much if I'd feel comfortable working at a place that organised a Diversity Week.
Yes what was the comedy show which featured one, where they had a meeting to celebrate diversity and it went something like..."all homosexuals in that corner...all jews in that corner...all asians in that corner..."
Mr. T, the bureaucrats are clever enough to sit on something like that until a few moments after the polls close, I would've thought.
It's already being discussed though.
The legal niceties (could we be forced to accept? No - is my current understanding. Would we able to deport to first country of arrival? No - and that's the issue. Once arrived here - by whatever means, we would be stuck) are less important to my mind than the bigger issue about what it says about the EU's attitude to us vs other members.
When EU rules don't suit some countries, they get changed or ignored. But when we want changes we're told that nothing can be done. Everything is unchangeable. Otherwise the sky would fall in.
Sod it, no: either we're a full member - and we pay a huge amount to the organisation - and our wishes are at least as important as other countries and more so than those who contribute little or nothing - or we're not. But not this: "you must follow all the rules and pay handsomely for doing so and lectured if you don't even as others ignore rules and court judgments and do what they hell what they want".
Is that because it's not possible, because it is possible but it doesn't have the skills to, or because it sees 'making money' as a grubby and demeaning exercise?
My guess would be a mixture of the second and third options.
It's also because they've gone out of their way to condemn those who chose to charge for news online they have attracted the kind of reader which is disgusted by the idea of paying for online news. This has two effects, the first is that they don't get premium advertising rates and the second is that their audience is much more likely to be using ad-blockers.
Including the freedom of individuals to live where they wish on the planet?
Now even you don't want that, unless you're happy to have people stay indefinitely at your place.
You see this is where liberalism trips itself up, it always applies to other people.
No, I don't want it, but I also don't affect to be a libertarian.
If the freedom of the individual is paramount then by what right does the state (or anyone else) seek to stop someone living here, provided they obey the laws?
Are not you simply calling for a small state except where it suits you otherwise, where you want a massive one.
Milton Friedman answered that one. You can't have both open borders, and a welfare state.
Right. I think that a libertarian position is to have open borders and no welfare state.
Oh, the Guardian will never go bankrupt now, they are divesting their third share in Top Right which will earn them enough money to offset their annual losses with earnings from interest and dividends. GMG is going to become an investment fund which does news on the side.
I've heard differently - that there is real panic at GMG.
The panic is leading to the sale of their TRG stake. After that I can't see how they will lose money. Even if they invest their eventual £1.2bn in easy dividend shares they will offset all the losses GNM makes and have money left over. Maybe it is what David says, they see making money as grubby and don't want to go down the investment fund route.
It's also because they've gone out of their way to condemn those who chose to charge for news online they have attracted the kind of reader which is disgusted by the idea of paying for online news.
That in itself is a very odd phenomenon. Saying that you don't want to pay because you don't think a product is worth anything is one thing, getting self-righteous about is something else.
But you get it with consumer software too. "This app should be free" etc.
Including the freedom of individuals to live where they wish on the planet?
Now even you don't want that, unless you're happy to have people stay indefinitely at your place.
You see this is where liberalism trips itself up, it always applies to other people.
No, I don't want it, but I also don't affect to be a libertarian.
If the freedom of the individual is paramount then by what right does the state (or anyone else) seek to stop someone living here, provided they obey the laws?
Are not you simply calling for a small state except where it suits you otherwise, where you want a massive one.
You see this is where your argument falls down, I'm very happy for people to come here and provide for themselves under the laws laid down, it is wrong on every level that taxpayers here are coerced by government to provide for visitors.
Buried on the FT website. The EU proposes to do away with the law that refugees must claim asylum where they land. So in future they can be waved through to the north, i.e. the UK. As we are party to this refugee agreement, we'd have to accept them: 100,000s more migrants. Maybe millions
This alone could win the vote for LEAVE if it is the case.
Even if that doesn't happen or the story is not quite as advertised, it's still an example of how dangerous the migration issue is for Remain. The question of how to ease pressure on southern EU countries will be at the forefront all this year and next, and there is no answer that won't be extremely unpopular here.
What I can't work out from the story is whether this can be forced on us through QMV. It's very opaque. We've an opt out from Schengen, but we are party to the Dublin agreement (what the EU wants to change).
If it can be forced on us, and they try to do it before the vote, then LEAVE will win.
"EU proposes to do away with the law that refugees must claim asylum where they land" I heard it on the radio about 630am and thought yippee this must improve Leave's chances.
Social services were involved too. Im not sure who to direct my anger at, the police, teachers or social services.
I'll settle for the ridiculous environment successive governments have created by treating citizens as objects for their amusement.
If they hadn't followed up and there had been a subsequent attack I'm sure you would have been unstinting in your criticism of the government.
I suspect the press if over-egging it: all the police would have done would have been popped over for a chat to the parents and figured out that it wasn't an issue.
As for the teacher highlighting a potential concern for a child at risk, and the police linking up with social services...isn't that kind of exactly what we *want* our public services to do? Otherwise you can end up with Baby P type scenarios where no one talks to the other agencies
From a spelling mistake to comparisons with Baby P, welcome to the Nanny State. My god if only Orwell was here now.
It's not a comparison with Baby P.
I don't know if you have managed people in the past, but in big organisations sometimes it is better not to give people discretion, especially at the 'fact finding' stage. This is particularly the case where you have to get separate agencies to co-operate.
I manage and employ people now. I want them to do their jobs not project their prejudices onto others.
There's a very good finish coming up in the cricket. India need 42 from 37 balls, 4 wickets remaining.
Tipping Australia's way I think. Amazing collapse by India.
Yep. 8 down now, need 38 from 25.
Did anyone get on the other side of that 1/25?
The Indian middle order?
Quite. Sad that we immediately think like that too.
Betfair have £25,700,000 bet on this match . 1.12 Aus now.
Edit: Nine down. 1/33 Aus.
47.2 Marsh to Yadav, 1 run, Richardson drops a sitter. 47.1 Marsh to Yadav, no run, full and wide outside off, another slog. Another miss 46.6 Faulkner to Yadav, 1 run, finally he gets bat on it, but all he will do is get one. Things just not happening for India. Slogged to deep midwicket 46.5 Faulkner to Yadav, no run, full on off, driven back to the bowler Vivek : "This is called catastrophic breakdown of Indian Batting Lineup..." 46.4 Faulkner to Yadav, no run, length outside off, Yadav is beaten 46.3 Faulkner to Yadav, no run, this is not clever slogging from Yadav. Doesn't keep his shape, or his eyes on the ball. Just goes after an almighty swing. Missed 46.2 Faulkner to Yadav, no run, length delivery on leg, Yadav is hustled for pace and is struck on the pad high up
Lol.
Yadav is channeling the combined powers of Davydenko, Cronje, Lance Armstrong and Sepp Blatter there.
Including the freedom of individuals to live where they wish on the planet?
Now even you don't want that, unless you're happy to have people stay indefinitely at your place.
You see this is where liberalism trips itself up, it always applies to other people.
No, I don't want it, but I also don't affect to be a libertarian.
If the freedom of the individual is paramount then by what right does the state (or anyone else) seek to stop someone living here, provided they obey the laws?
Are not you simply calling for a small state except where it suits you otherwise, where you want a massive one.
Milton Friedman answered that one. You can't have both open borders, and a welfare state.
Right. I think that a libertarian position is to have open borders and no welfare state.
Apologies I missed that, if you read my post of 11.08 that is exactly my point.
Including the freedom of individuals to live where they wish on the planet?
Now even you don't want that, unless you're happy to have people stay indefinitely at your place.
You see this is where liberalism trips itself up, it always applies to other people.
No, I don't want it, but I also don't affect to be a libertarian.
If the freedom of the individual is paramount then by what right does the state (or anyone else) seek to stop someone living here, provided they obey the laws?
Are not you simply calling for a small state except where it suits you otherwise, where you want a massive one.
You see this is where your argument falls down, I'm very happy for people to come here and provide for themselves under the laws laid down, it is wrong on every level that taxpayers here are coerced by government to provide for visitors.
Surely the libertarian stance is to oppose both welfare and immigration controls, both of which are emanations of a non-minimal state?
Btw, I'm not advocating this, just passing the time of day.
@britainelects · 35s36 seconds ago 2015 General Election campaign expenditure by party: CON: £15.6m LAB: £12.1m LDEM: £3.5m UKIP: £2.9m SNP: £1.5m GRN: £1.1m
Conservatives operating a two power standard, it seems.
That's not the huge gap between Lab and Con that was being talked up by the red team. SNP spend (per capita in Scotland) almost identical to the Tories' in UK
@britainelects · 35s36 seconds ago 2015 General Election campaign expenditure by party: CON: £15.6m LAB: £12.1m LDEM: £3.5m UKIP: £2.9m SNP: £1.5m GRN: £1.1m
Conservatives operating a two power standard, it seems.
Very good. That's not an enormous mismatch though, and certainly not of an order of magnitude implied by Labour. An effective return from the SNP but how on earth did the Greens spend more than GBP1m?
On topic: the dynamic here strikes me as more about Ted Cruz than Donald Trump. Trump is going to do well in Iowa and almost certainly win NH easily. It doesn't too much matter from his point of view whether he wins both, or comes narrowly second in Iowa; he'll still be the leader of the pack.
Ted Cruz, on the other hand, needs to win Iowa (or at worst come a close second, well ahead of the others) to maintain his position as the second-leading candidate.
If Trump manages to see off Cruz decisively in Iowa, then someone else may emerge as the main challenger to Trump. That could be Rubio. We might be about to see Cruz's star fade.
On topic: the dynamic here strikes me as more about Ted Cruz than Donald Trump. Trump is going to do well in Iowa and almost certainly win NH easily. It doesn't too much matter from his point of view whether he wins both, or comes narrowly second in Iowa; he'll still be the leader of the pack.
Ted Cruz, on the other hand, needs to win Iowa (or at worst come a close second) to maintain his position as the second-leading candidate.
If Trump manages to see off Cruz decisively in Iowa, then someone else may emerge as the main challenger to Trump. That could be Rubio. We could be about to see Cruz's star fade.
I know US is a lot bigger, but compared to the US we really are small time when it comes to political spending on campaigns. Trump said last night Jeb Bush has already spent $79 million on his campaign to get single digit polling in primaries (and obviously we haven't even got to the main event yet).
I know US is a lot bigger, but compared to the US we really are small time when it comes to political spending on campaigns. Trump said last night Jeb Bush has already spent $79 million on his campaign to get single digit polling in primaries (and obviously we haven't even got to the main event yet).
On topic: the dynamic here strikes me as more about Ted Cruz than Donald Trump. Trump is going to do well in Iowa and almost certainly win NH easily. It doesn't too much matter from his point of view whether he wins both, or comes narrowly second in Iowa; he'll still be the leader of the pack.
Ted Cruz, on the other hand, needs to win Iowa (or at worst come a close second, well ahead of the others) to maintain his position as the second-leading candidate.
If Trump manages to see off Cruz decisively in Iowa, then someone else may emerge as the main challenger to Trump. That could be Rubio. We might be about to see Cruz's star fade.
Comments
But the whole thing is ridiculous. Donald Trump - whose companies all manufacture in China - has no intention of keeping his campaign promises.
If he is elected, he will - I suspect - turn out to be a socially liberal centrist.
And there will be a lot of very disappointed people.
I'm still of the opinion that anyone is better than Obama. Trump could yet prove my hypothesis wrong, but I'm not convinced.
Why do you think Scotland is falling further and further behind?
These are the same police who always say they have no time or resources to investigate burglaries, of course. Again, it's all about box-ticking, a*se-covering and easy targets.
'ONS figures show Scottish employment at record high'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-35357497
That's the basis of the iPhone. Apple design just one part of that, the processor. Everything else is other companies and then they proved the software, which for the user is more important than hardware.
If he is able just to shrug that stuff off, does it establish a baseline for future campaigns: promise anything, the less credible the better, to get attention. It won't matter if you win.
Whilst often similar verbal jousts have been held here (and I'm a pretty firm Leave voter), I do suspect that's more in tune with most people in the country.
So-called 'misery index' of unempl + inflation at just 5.3% - nearing 1960s levels. TBH, a slight surprise that Cons rating isn't higher.
@KateEMcCann: Ed Miliband saw and amended Margaret Beckett's report into why Labour lost the election before it was published: https://t.co/iAPO2mbaPg
That's staggering. 22.8 million digits.
174,000 working days lost due to strikes in the 12 months to November 2015 @ONS https://t.co/iv7f4F5eyI
@PlatoSays @ONS 99,000 public sector and 74,000 private sector.
What's remarkable, is that on the BBC website, this mornings employment figures seem to be relegated to the third or fourth item on the business page. In the past they have been front page headlines. .
Must be a plot.
'The SNP, letting down Scotland's workers and young if it wasn't for the wise hand of Westminster.'
Yes, that and there being no General Election for another 4 years.
Also nice to see Economic Inactivity at its lowest rate since 1990 and unemployment at its lowest since 2005. Looks like we are fully past the unemployment effects of the Great Recession.
Palin has delivered all Trump needs of her. I wouldn't be surprised if it's the last time we see them together unless he's planning on doing a rally in Alaska (not really necessary). She hits a certain section of the Republican base. If you're going to win, you need the votes and you get them the best way you can. However, I'm quite sure he'll have learned from the McCain and George HW Bush examples that you need a VP who's not a liability. You might still get it wrong but you won't pick someone who's already known to be a liability.
As an aside, what was Trump doing wearing an overcoat inside? It looks strange.
(Actually, the Guardian is pretty good at turning news into "I can't believe what they're just done!" outrage for its demographic. But it doesn't seem able to make money from it.)
No one's going to shoot me with Sarah Palin next in line.
theguardian.com/media/2008/may/03/1
I think the opacity you refer to is a problem in itself, for Remain.
http://order-order.com/2016/01/20/fk-israel-palestine-activists-throw-chairs-and-smash-windows/
20% off peak.
I don't know if you have managed people in the past, but in big organisations sometimes it is better not to give people discretion, especially at the 'fact finding' stage. This is particularly the case where you have to get separate agencies to co-operate.
My guess would be a mixture of the second and third options.
Did anyone get on the other side of that 1/25?
The legal niceties (could we be forced to accept? No - is my current understanding. Would we able to deport to first country of arrival? No - and that's the issue. Once arrived here - by whatever means, we would be stuck) are less important to my mind than the bigger issue about what it says about the EU's attitude to us vs other members.
When EU rules don't suit some countries, they get changed or ignored. But when we want changes we're told that nothing can be done. Everything is unchangeable. Otherwise the sky would fall in.
Sod it, no: either we're a full member - and we pay a huge amount to the organisation - and our wishes are at least as important as other countries and more so than those who contribute little or nothing - or we're not. But not this: "you must follow all the rules and pay handsomely for doing so and lectured if you don't even as others ignore rules and court judgments and do what they hell what they want".
36 from three overs, it's Australia's to lose now.
Betfair have £25,700,000 bet on this match
Edit: Nine down. 1/33 Aus.
But you get it with consumer software too. "This app should be free" etc.
I heard it on the radio about 630am and thought yippee this must improve Leave's chances.
47.2
Marsh to Yadav, 1 run, Richardson drops a sitter.
47.1
Marsh to Yadav, no run, full and wide outside off, another slog. Another miss
46.6
Faulkner to Yadav, 1 run, finally he gets bat on it, but all he will do is get one. Things just not happening for India. Slogged to deep midwicket
46.5
Faulkner to Yadav, no run, full on off, driven back to the bowler
Vivek : "This is called catastrophic breakdown of Indian Batting Lineup..."
46.4
Faulkner to Yadav, no run, length outside off, Yadav is beaten
46.3
Faulkner to Yadav, no run, this is not clever slogging from Yadav. Doesn't keep his shape, or his eyes on the ball. Just goes after an almighty swing. Missed
46.2
Faulkner to Yadav, no run, length delivery on leg, Yadav is hustled for pace and is struck on the pad high up
Lol.
Yadav is channeling the combined powers of Davydenko, Cronje, Lance Armstrong and Sepp Blatter there.
Btw, I'm not advocating this, just passing the time of day.
Edit: our comments have crossed in the post
2015 General Election campaign expenditure by party:
CON: £15.6m
LAB: £12.1m
LDEM: £3.5m
UKIP: £2.9m
SNP: £1.5m
GRN: £1.1m
Conservatives operating a two power standard, it seems.
@paulhutcheon: Electoral Commission: @thesnp spent £35,450 on helicopters at the general election
For comparison, Tory MP's worked out at £47K each.
Profligate Labour as ever....
Ted Cruz, on the other hand, needs to win Iowa (or at worst come a close second, well ahead of the others) to maintain his position as the second-leading candidate.
If Trump manages to see off Cruz decisively in Iowa, then someone else may emerge as the main challenger to Trump. That could be Rubio. We might be about to see Cruz's star fade.
As commended by Shadsy
Its like a medieval community picking on the village idiot. It's not even close to fair.
Cameron has already throttled back to easy but I really wonder if he needs to throttle back just a little more. It's not fun, its kinda dirty.