On a serious note (again) in History the exams are getting easier, not harder. Much more focus on blind sources (which is pointless) and much less on reasoned analysis backed by hard evidence.
Of course the poor quality of some of the marking means that's likely to be irrelevant, but it shows how regardless of the intentions the outcome is sometimes highly undesirable or even the opposite of what was intended.
We do seem to have heard rather less of the Scolympians this time.
That is down to the EBC and teh biased media, they have been winning plenty of medals and Scotland would be around 11th or 12th in table on its own. Team GB is a fake.
When you complain about "biased media" you sound like a deranged Trump fan.
We do seem to have heard rather less of the Scolympians this time.
That is down to the EBC and teh biased media, they have been winning plenty of medals and Scotland would be around 11th or 12th in table on its own. Team GB is a fake.
Eh? Because it represents the entirety of the nation rather than the constituent cou tries competing individually a la the commonwealth games? That's like that idiotic argument Dair used to push that the uk is fake because is was artificially created like, I don't know, every single national political entity ever since we're all human beings and there's no need for any such distinction, so if you go back far enough all divisions are artificial.
Surely the rise in passengers is driven by commuting, with cities (esp London) becoming unaffordable to live within and more expensive and impractical to drive into?
That's part of the story, but only part. It's interesting to see maps which show how passenger usage has increased on each station and line - it's not just obvious commuter lines.
Saying that *all* the increase is due to privatisation is as silly as saying that privatisation has had no effect and all the growth has been caused by other factors. But what I can say from having studied this a little is that the private companies are far more responsive to passengers' needs, and that the growing network we see today was incompatible with the mindset of most of BR's managers.
Apparently we must unilaterally guarantee EU citizens currently in the UK lots of rights, despite no reciprocal arrangement in place for British citizens in the EU. May got stick for her stance, which is entirely correct, so this is an early opportunity to see whether she's got backbone to back up (in this instance) sound judgement.
Why do I suspect Theresa May or someone very close to her has had a hand in this appointment - give all Vote Leave leaders the awkward consequences to deal with....
A very long, sprawling, partly inconclusive, but rather impressive article attempting to analyse the entirety of world political developments, from Trump to Brexit to ISIS to Merkel to lots more, with an important central theme of the phenomenon of illiberal democrats:
Hmm. I wonder if the Roman Empire or Genghis Khan's [or his son's, to go larger] would have more medals. Khan would have China and Russia, but Rome would have a plethora of European countries.
A very long, sprawling, partly inconclusive, but rather impressive article attempting to analyse the entirety of world political developments, from Trump to Brexit to ISIS to Merkel to lots more, with an important central theme of the phenomenon of illiberal democrats:
On a serious note (again) in History the exams are getting easier, not harder. Much more focus on blind sources (which is pointless) and much less on reasoned analysis backed by hard evidence.
Of course the poor quality of some of the marking means that's likely to be irrelevant, but it shows how regardless of the intentions the outcome is sometimes highly undesirable or even the opposite of what was intended.
Thankfully neither of my twins are doing history in Year 10 (they have both now switched to Geography)... Given that they are the full guinea pigs for the new style GCSE's I'm glad that they only thing we have to worry about is the field research paper worth between 10-20% as no one knows yet..
On a serious note (again) in History the exams are getting easier, not harder. Much more focus on blind sources (which is pointless) and much less on reasoned analysis backed by hard evidence.
Of course the poor quality of some of the marking means that's likely to be irrelevant, but it shows how regardless of the intentions the outcome is sometimes highly undesirable or even the opposite of what was intended.
What's the point of a blind source? In order to evaluate source material, you need to know who the author was, what their biases were, who contradicts them etc.
On a serious note (again) in History the exams are getting easier, not harder. Much more focus on blind sources (which is pointless) and much less on reasoned analysis backed by hard evidence.
Of course the poor quality of some of the marking means that's likely to be irrelevant, but it shows how regardless of the intentions the outcome is sometimes highly undesirable or even the opposite of what was intended.
What's the point of a blind source? In order to evaluate source material, you need to know who the author was, what their biases were, who contradicts them etc.
Don't ask me, I don't know, and I've only been a professional historian including an author and editor for 10 years before going into teaching.
I think the idea is to show how they can analyse sources they haven't seen before. But it's a daft way of doing it because no historian will work on a source they've seen only once and can't do further research to check its content if needed.
Interesting that both the incumbent U.S. president, a Democrat and the incumbent UK P.M., a Tory, both have the highest favourability ratings. Also interesting that while Remainers like Obama, Merkel and Clinton best and put UKIP and Trump bottom, Leavers put May, Johnson, Obama and UKIP top and MPs and the SNP bottom (both behind Trump)
On a serious note (again) in History the exams are getting easier, not harder. Much more focus on blind sources (which is pointless) and much less on reasoned analysis backed by hard evidence.
Of course the poor quality of some of the marking means that's likely to be irrelevant, but it shows how regardless of the intentions the outcome is sometimes highly undesirable or even the opposite of what was intended.
Thankfully neither of my twins are doing history in Year 10 (they have both now switched to Geography)... Given that they are the full guinea pigs for the new style GCSE's I'm glad that they only thing we have to worry about is the field research paper worth between 10-20% as no one knows yet..
Don't be so sure there will be no problems In Geography. The residential field course may still cause problems and if you have two doing it, is going to be expensive for you.
That said, it is much closer to the old GCSE than the History equivalent so there is likely to be less experimentation.
On a serious note (again) in History the exams are getting easier, not harder. Much more focus on blind sources (which is pointless) and much less on reasoned analysis backed by hard evidence.
Of course the poor quality of some of the marking means that's likely to be irrelevant, but it shows how regardless of the intentions the outcome is sometimes highly undesirable or even the opposite of what was intended.
Blind sources ?
You might as well do history lessons about Hannibal based on Mr Dancer's deranged witterings.
The Battle of Zama was a great success for Carthage
Generation safe space are going to get a shock in two days according to headteachers. Finally it seems like the government are making exams tougher again. The Labour years of falling standards and lower difficulty were a joke.
That's nothing do with Labour. The system of competing exam boards in England who explicitly advertise that if you go with them your school will get more A's sees to that.
The only people who could fix that would be Universities to announce that a B in AQA history is the equivalent of an A from EDEXCEL.
Unfortunately universities are incentivised not to push this point as they can take as many people as they can with 3Bs or above...
Mr. Eagles, when Hannibal lost a battle to Scipio it was because he was forced to defend his home city [which was a place not noted for common sense, unlike Rome], whilst facing veteran forces under a great command, himself equipped with mostly fresh troops of dubious quality.
When Caesar lost to Pompey at Dyrrachium, he chose to attack with veteran forces and managed to be defeated by newly raised troops.
Also worth noting that, after the respective wars ended, Hannibal became ruler of Carthage. Caesar got murdered by his own side.
They're reducing things like reasoning, evidence and sound sources to focus on the anonymous? How the hell is that supposed to make sense?
FFS.
It was devised by the DFES, Mr Dancer. That I think on its own answers your question.
But seriously, on the old A-level such questions accounted for about 8% of the overall mark, which was OK. Now they account for approximately 30% of the mark, which is absurd.
What I found really offensive was that the boards and the DfES blamed the university history departments for it, saying this greater emphasis was what they wanted - despite the fact that two academic advisers, one a personal friend and one a friend of a friend, had resigned from the panel in protest at them being included at all.
Mr. Eagles, when Hannibal lost a battle to Scipio it was because he was forced to defend his home city [which was a place not noted for common sense, unlike Rome], whilst facing veteran forces under a great command, himself equipped with mostly fresh troops of dubious quality.
When Caesar lost to Pompey at Dyrrachium, he chose to attack with veteran forces and managed to be defeated by newly raised troops.
Also worth noting that, after the respective wars ended, Hannibal became ruler of Carthage. Caesar got murdered by his own side.
Caesar become a byword for Kings.
Hannibal less so.
Because Caesar won the war, loser Hannibal lost the war.
On a serious note (again) in History the exams are getting easier, not harder. Much more focus on blind sources (which is pointless) and much less on reasoned analysis backed by hard evidence.
Of course the poor quality of some of the marking means that's likely to be irrelevant, but it shows how regardless of the intentions the outcome is sometimes highly undesirable or even the opposite of what was intended.
Thankfully neither of my twins are doing history in Year 10 (they have both now switched to Geography)... Given that they are the full guinea pigs for the new style GCSE's I'm glad that they only thing we have to worry about is the field research paper worth between 10-20% as no one knows yet..
Don't be so sure there will be no problems In Geography. The residential field course may still cause problems and if you have two doing it, is going to be expensive for you.
That said, it is much closer to the old GCSE than the History equivalent so there is likely to be less experimentation.
I'm not expecting it to be problem free but at least I personally know their Geography teacher (she basically wrote half the appeal statement that got them into the school). Also I don't think its residential courses for us we have enough suitable places within an hour or so's drive (Dales, Moors, Lakes)....
The concern at the school is how do you compare the very different approaches schools will take to this field work exam - it used to be that schools in less fortunate parts of the country could avoid that bit...
These polls are a hugely welcome development for the site and for British polling in general. Having a series of favourability scores will be very helpful both for the individual ratings and - going forward - for the changes over time.
On these figures, what's clear to me is the extent to which the country is divided between Remain and Leave - it's probably a bigger divide in some ways that between party support and certainly than between, say, men and women or rich and poor. What the causality is there though is harder to say. Do people divide their views because they are Remain or Leave (i.e. is their Euro-vote preference driving their other opinions), or is the split deeper than that, with Remain and Leave also consequences or that difference in outlook?
Partly it's a right/left split. Right wing voters went 70/30 Leave, left wing voters 2/1 Remain.
To get meaningful numbers, you should break it down further, to see if there are significant differences between right wing Remain/Leave voters, and left wing Remain/Leave voters.
I find the contrasting view of SNP is fascinating
Hostility to the SNP among eurosceptic English and Welsh voters is a winning card for the Conservatives.
It seems to be becoming a winning (or at least runner up) card for unionist Scottish voters as well.
It was always assumed that ScotIndy would be a disaster for Labour. But now, with the prospect of few Scottish seats for a generation at least, maybe Labour would be better off without the millstone of ever-prospective independence around its neck, by actually letting Scotland go? In E&W the Tories would lose their main card, and in Scotland the SNP its purpose.
It is easier for Labour to win power via a deal with the SNP than via a majority in England and Wales especially with Corbyn as leader. The SNP could be a Scottish Fianna Fail if Scotland went independent
They're reducing things like reasoning, evidence and sound sources to focus on the anonymous? How the hell is that supposed to make sense?
FFS.
If one included Procopius' account of the early life of Theodora on the GCSE curriculum, without naming the author, generations of schoolchildren might get quite misleading ideas.
Surely the rise in passengers is driven by commuting, with cities (esp London) becoming unaffordable to live within and more expensive and impractical to drive into?
That's part of the story, but only part. It's interesting to see maps which show how passenger usage has increased on each station and line - it's not just obvious commuter lines.
Saying that *all* the increase is due to privatisation is as silly as saying that privatisation has had no effect and all the growth has been caused by other factors. But what I can say from having studied this a little is that the private companies are far more responsive to passengers' needs, and that the growing network we see today was incompatible with the mindset of most of BR's managers.
Sadly it isn't the network that is growing, but rather the number of people using the network we have (or were left with by Beeching).
The joys of going from Bedfordshire to Heathrow at 70mph uninterrupted on the M1 and M25 with the message signs saying things like Junction 16 M40 8 miles 8 minutes...
Alas you need to be travelling no later than approx 5am to see this - and it is still busy then.
"At the 2016 locals the R&T projection was CON 32%, LAB 33%, LDEM 14%, UKIP 12%; a one point lead for Labour. Jeremy Corbyn’s supporters have presented this as a sign of Labour doing well, on the grounds they beat the Conservatives. The TSSA have presented it as positive because it is a four point swing from the R&T projection of support at the local elections in 2015. These claims are flawed. Looking at historical comparisons, Labour’s performance in the 2016 local elections was pretty mediocre compared to previous oppositions."
I'm not expecting it to be problem free but at least I personally know their Geography teacher (she basically wrote half the appeal statement that got them into the school). Also I don't think its residential courses for us we have enough suitable places within an hour or so's drive (Dales, Moors, Lakes)....
The concern at the school is how do you compare the very different approaches schools will take to this field work exam - it used to be that schools in less fortunate parts of the country could avoid that bit...
They're not the only ones. I have had many conversations about this with the Head of Geography about how he will be doing it, and we're still guessing a bit.
One school in Lichfield is making it a compulsory residential. Just to confuse matter, that's a compulsory residential in Iceland studying volcanoes. That's why I was alarmed for the expense you might have to meet.
On a serious note (again) in History the exams are getting easier, not harder. Much more focus on blind sources (which is pointless) and much less on reasoned analysis backed by hard evidence.
Of course the poor quality of some of the marking means that's likely to be irrelevant, but it shows how regardless of the intentions the outcome is sometimes highly undesirable or even the opposite of what was intended.
That seems like a mad idea. Surely knowing the source of information is extremely important to its historical context?
'The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how private transport operators cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart," Mr Corbyn said in advance of launching his "Transport Tuesday" initiative.
Or, alternatively: The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how unions cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart.
"Public ownership of our railways is needed now to fix the transport nightmare we are currently faced with, and we know there is overwhelming support among the British public for a people's railway."
Yet again, he's got an answer and is trying to make the question fit. As for transport nightmare: can he not remember BR?
Those who wish for the railways to be renationalised are harking back to a golden age that never existed.
As an illustration of this, I remember (on more than one occassion) my father coming home very late from London because his train had been delayed and the driver had 'clocked off', and pretty much abandoned the train, having completed the hours for his shift, but two stations and 11 miles shy of the terminus of our branch line where we lived.
It may not have been a golden age in terms of service, but it certainly was in terms of ticket pricing, which was simple and clear (and cheaper, in real terms).
Yesterday I was booking a rail trip, and precisely the same single journey, same stations and time, was £75 on the national rail site but £28 on trainline.
That shouldn't be possible because the various sites all use the same ticketing database.
Well I checked National Rail again just now, and the prices are now down to the same level as trainline. But they were not, yesterday, otherwise I wouldn't have gone near trainline in the first place; how do they hope to make money when they add a booking fee on top and charge more for postage than the other sites?
If you are right I guess the only explanation is a mysterious and dramatic price drop during the few minutes between sites?
The joys of going from Bedfordshire to Heathrow at 70mph uninterrupted on the M1 and M25 with the message signs saying things like Junction 16 M40 8 miles 8 minutes...
Alas you need to be travelling no later than approx 5am to see this - and it is still busy then.
Now just imagine the hub was at Gatwick and you had to go all the way down to Surrey!
'The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how private transport operators cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart," Mr Corbyn said in advance of launching his "Transport Tuesday" initiative.
Or, alternatively: The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how unions cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart.
"Public ownership of our railways is needed now to fix the transport nightmare we are currently faced with, and we know there is overwhelming support among the British public for a people's railway."
Yet again, he's got an answer and is trying to make the question fit. As for transport nightmare: can he not remember BR?
Those who wish for the railways to be renationalised are harking back to a golden age that never existed.
As an illustration of this, I remember (on more than one occassion) my father coming home very late from London because his train had been delayed and the driver had 'clocked off', and pretty much abandoned the train, having completed the hours for his shift, but two stations and 11 miles shy of the terminus of our branch line where we lived.
It may not have been a golden age in terms of service, but it certainly was in terms of ticket pricing, which was simple and clear (and cheaper, in real terms).
Yesterday I was booking a rail trip, and precisely the same single journey, same stations and time, was £75 on the national rail site but £28 on trainline.
That shouldn't be possible because the various sites all use the same ticketing database.
Well I checked National Rail again just now, and the prices are now down to the same level as trainline. But they were not, yesterday, otherwise I wouldn't have gone near trainline in the first place; how do they hope to make money when they add a booking fee on top and charge more for postage than the other sites?
If you are right I guess the only explanation is a mysterious and dramatic price drop during the few minutes between sites?
The price could have been cached. Or there could indeed have been the price drop. Train ticket prices are as complicated as airline prices.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
I think people are getting a bit confused by the words I'm using. A 'blind source' in this context means one they haven't seen before (this is the phrase the exam board uses). They are told who wrote it. However, the question is then about the source, not about the information in it.
Furthermore, the exam boards have dramatically reduced the amount of contextual information they provide on their sources, including removing further information on the authors. Which is not terribly helpful given it is sometimes hard to work out their leanings from the tiny, often edited extract provided.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Think of it this way Patrick. US domestic policy doesn't directly affect us, while foreign policy ventures do. Under Bush, the effects were disastrous and extensive, so Obama's policy of drift has been an improvement for us if hardly for the people of Africa, Arabia and the Caucasus.
Meanwhile few know or care about the failures of his domestic policy, so that doesn't impact on their view of him. Coupled to a genuine rhetorical talent that matches Bill Clinton and an ability so far as we know to keep his hands off young women, it's not surprising that those who know of him only superficially view him very positively.
He will also do well compared to his successor. Clinton has all his drawbacks and none of his talents, and as for Trump...
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
Have you seen the two that will be chosen from to replace him?
The New YouGov poll looks great. However, as a cynic who doubts most respondents have a significant awareness of their own domestic politicians, let alone foreign leaders, I’ll take the Merkel, Putin, Trump etc figures, with a large pinch of salt.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
Have you seen the two that will be chosen from to replace him?
Obama will feel like a colossus of the ages by the end of 2017!
The joys of going from Bedfordshire to Heathrow at 70mph uninterrupted on the M1 and M25 with the message signs saying things like Junction 16 M40 8 miles 8 minutes...
Alas you need to be travelling no later than approx 5am to see this - and it is still busy then.
Now just imagine the hub was at Gatwick and you had to go all the way down to Surrey!
Tbat would be great. Walk to station, get on Thameslink, get off at Gatwick airport.
Oh for the days when Nationwide Airlines flew from Joburg to Gatwick.
Gatwick is just so much more accesible by public transport.
Mr. Doethur, that's like asking someone to read Livy's Early History of Rome, then asking them about the paper quality and font size.
Well. Maybe not quite that bad. But it's still rubbish.
Mr Dancer, you are preaching to the converted. But there's not a lot I can do about it. If they won't listen to the senior professors they recruited to the advisory committee and then lie about their stance, what chance have I got?
Surely the rise in passengers is driven by commuting, with cities (esp London) becoming unaffordable to live within and more expensive and impractical to drive into?
That's part of the story, but only part. It's interesting to see maps which show how passenger usage has increased on each station and line - it's not just obvious commuter lines.
Saying that *all* the increase is due to privatisation is as silly as saying that privatisation has had no effect and all the growth has been caused by other factors. But what I can say from having studied this a little is that the private companies are far more responsive to passengers' needs, and that the growing network we see today was incompatible with the mindset of most of BR's managers.
Sadly it isn't the network that is growing, but rather the number of people using the network we have (or were left with by Beeching).
True, there has been relatively little growth in the physical network. But it has been growing, unlike in BR times when it was constantly shrinking.
I was referring (though misusing the terms) to both the increase in 'routes' and the number of services on those routes.
It looks as though a significant proportion of the growth in passengers occurs when more services are laid on a route. This may be due to a decrease in overcrowding attracting passengers or, more likely, that you are more likely to use the train if there is a service every half-hour instead of every hour, meaning that you wait less for a train and are more likely to catch a connection. Or even one every fifteen minutes instead of half-hour.
The quality of many stations has also improved immeasurably since privatisation. Just look at photos of stations in the 1970s and 1980s and them now. This perhaps started with Liverpool Street's renovation in the 1980s. (*)
I only travelled on BR in the last decade of its existence, but I have little doubt that the current railway is much better for passenger comfort and convenience. As an example: Pacer trains are widely derided, but when they were introduced in the 1980s they were seen as being better than the first-generation DMUs they replaced.
(*) When the adjacent Broad Street station was sadly closed.
Mr. Max, the Colossus of Rhodes fell over not so long after it was put up. In its defence, that was due to an earthquake...
It was created to celebrate seeing off Demetrius, who may have acquired his nickname (Besieger/Poliorcetes) ironically after failing to take it by siege.
'The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how private transport operators cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart," Mr Corbyn said in advance of launching his "Transport Tuesday" initiative.
Or, alternatively: The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how unions cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart.
"Public ownership of our railways is needed now to fix the transport nightmare we are currently faced with, and we know there is overwhelming support among the British public for a people's railway."
Yet again, he's got an answer and is trying to make the question fit. As for transport nightmare: can he not remember BR?
The purpose of companies is to make profits for their shareholders. The purpose of unions is to look after their members. NEITHER of them either do or should be expected to put passengers first, except insofar as it assists or is at least neutral with respect to their primary purpose.
That's why key infrastructure like railways should be publicly owned, since the purpose of governments is to represent voters, including passengers. Even better, if you think they do a rubbish job, you have recourse (voting), which you don't have with a regional monopoly rail company or a trade union of which you aren't a member.
It's an issue on which Corbyn and the public are largely in agreement.
The staff should be expected to put the passengers first: that is their job. If they don't want to do that they should leave and let the company replace them.
Also it's naive to assume governments will put passengers first. They respond to those with the loudest voices. In practice this will mean higher eYes (don't want to fight the unions) and artifically low fares . Result is underinvestment, chronic unprofitability, a long term drain on the taxpayer and a steady decline in the quality of the system
Haven't read the article but the death of the banana is greatly overstated. The current Cavandish Banana that is grown replaced the previous commercial banana, the Gros Michel, that was wiped out by a banana blight.
There's plenty of new candidate bananas that would be able to be bred for commercial cultivation once thne Cavendish is blighted out of existence.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
He is a lot better than George W Bush and will probably have been better than either Hillary or Trump. He is not as good as Reagan or Bill Clinton but about level with Bush Snr
I think people are getting a bit confused by the words I'm using. A 'blind source' in this context means one they haven't seen before (this is the phrase the exam board uses). They are told who wrote it. However, the question is then about the source, not about the information in it.
Furthermore, the exam boards have dramatically reduced the amount of contextual information they provide on their sources, including removing further information on the authors. Which is not terribly helpful given it is sometimes hard to work out their leanings from the tiny, often edited extract provided.
That sounds less like History and more like English comprehension...
True, there has been relatively little growth in the physical network. But it has been growing, unlike in BR times when it was constantly shrinking.
...
I only travelled on BR in the last decade of its existence, but I have little doubt that the current railway is much better for passenger comfort and convenience. As an example: Pacer trains are widely derided, but when they were introduced in the 1980s they were seen as being better than the first-generation DMUs they replaced.
(*) When the adjacent Broad Street station was sadly closed.
First paragraph is not quite fair JJ. Cannock was reconnected to the national network under BR, when the Chase line was promoted from freight only status. It wasn't common, but it happened.
Entirely agree with your second paragraph. BR's record in the provinces was absolutely dismal, especially in terms of punctuality, comfort and service. Things have improved enormously since privatisation. And it's not just where there is no alternative. The Cambrian lines are much more heavily used despite their remoteness and low speeds. In the 1980s you had a one car train every two hours from Mac along the lines. Now they are two car trains every hour, and they are well used.
The big disconnect between "Your MP" and "MPs generally" is interesting.
Your MP is a person (who half the respondents will have voted for) whereas MPs generally are a bunch of useless crooks.
There’s a similar situation with regard to GP services.
I think we are probably on the verge of a big switch to private GP services. A few years back I had terrible sinusitis. Suffered for a couple of days but managed to get GP appointment.
New doc at GP said it wasnt bad enough to give antibiotics and that I should just steam it.
Went from there to London to work. Pain got worse. Not fancying being laid up for the bank holiday I phoned a private GP service near Bank. Appointment 40 mins later. Thorough unrushed examination by nurse who diagnosed acute sinusitis. Prescribed antibiotics which they promptly supplied. £70. Plus that included the prescription so £61 really when you take off NHS prescription charge.
They also offered an annual season ticket for about £200.
So much better than NHS and pretty reasonable cost.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
Worse than George W Bush? Give over, pull the other one it hath bells upon it.
Obama stood (twice) on a platform of healthcare reform and got it through a hostile congress and senate
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Think of it this way Patrick. US domestic policy doesn't directly affect us, while foreign policy ventures do. Under Bush, the effects were disastrous and extensive, so Obama's policy of drift has been an improvement for us if hardly for the people of Africa, Arabia and the Caucasus.
Meanwhile few know or care about the failures of his domestic policy, so that doesn't impact on their view of him. Coupled to a genuine rhetorical talent that matches Bill Clinton and an ability so far as we know to keep his hands off young women, it's not surprising that those who know of him only superficially view him very positively.
He will also do well compared to his successor. Clinton has all his drawbacks and none of his talents, and as for Trump...
I'd argue it's even simpler - being black, smoothly dressed and sounding professorial/learned is more than enough for the casual TV watcher. I was initially impressed - then paid attention to a Q&A he did at Facebook midway through his first term. A content free 2hrs and answered IIRC 4 questions. He's such an empty suit.
'The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how private transport operators cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart," Mr Corbyn said in advance of launching his "Transport Tuesday" initiative.
Or, alternatively: The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how unions cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart.
"Public ownership of our railways is needed now to fix the transport nightmare we are currently faced with, and we know there is overwhelming support among the British public for a people's railway."
Yet again, he's got an answer and is trying to make the question fit. As for transport nightmare: can he not remember BR?
Those who wish for the railways to be renationalised are harking back to a golden age that never existed.
As an illustration of this, I remember (on more than one occassion) my father coming home very late from London because his train had been delayed and the driver had 'clocked off', and pretty much abandoned the train, having completed the hours for his shift, but two stations and 11 miles shy of the terminus of our branch line where we lived.
It may not have been a golden age in terms of service, but it certainly was in terms of ticket pricing, which was simple and clear (and cheaper, in real terms).
Yesterday I was booking a rail trip, and precisely the same single journey, same stations and time, was £75 on the national rail site but £28 on trainline.
That shouldn't be possible because the various sites all use the same ticketing database.
Well I checked National Rail again just now, and the prices are now down to the same level as trainline. But they were not, yesterday, otherwise I wouldn't have gone near trainline in the first place; how do they hope to make money when they add a booking fee on top and charge more for postage than the other sites?
If you are right I guess the only explanation is a mysterious and dramatic price drop during the few minutes between sites?
The price could have been cached. Or there could indeed have been the price drop. Train ticket prices are as complicated as airline prices.
the National Rail site rarely shows the best deal as its designed to show the full price rather than discounted ones..
My best advice is just to use the appropriate website for the rail company you will be travelling on for the majority of the journey..
The joys of going from Bedfordshire to Heathrow at 70mph uninterrupted on the M1 and M25 with the message signs saying things like Junction 16 M40 8 miles 8 minutes...
Alas you need to be travelling no later than approx 5am to see this - and it is still busy then.
Now just imagine the hub was at Gatwick and you had to go all the way down to Surrey!
Tbat would be great. Walk to station, get on Thameslink, get off at Gatwick airport.
Oh for the days when Nationwide Airlines flew from Joburg to Gatwick.
Gatwick is just so much more accesible by public transport.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Think of it this way Patrick. US domestic policy doesn't directly affect us, while foreign policy ventures do. Under Bush, the effects were disastrous and extensive, so Obama's policy of drift has been an improvement for us if hardly for the people of Africa, Arabia and the Caucasus.
Meanwhile few know or care about the failures of his domestic policy, so that doesn't impact on their view of him. Coupled to a genuine rhetorical talent that matches Bill Clinton and an ability so far as we know to keep his hands off young women, it's not surprising that those who know of him only superficially view him very positively.
He will also do well compared to his successor. Clinton has all his drawbacks and none of his talents, and as for Trump...
I'd argue it's even simpler - being black, smoothly dressed and sounding professorial/learned is more than enough for the casual TV watcher. I was initially impressed - then paid attention to a Q&A he did at Facebook midway through his first term. A content free 2hrs and answered IIRC 4 questions. He's such an empty suit.
Answering absolutely nothing in 2 hours is a skill I really would like to have...
I think people are getting a bit confused by the words I'm using. A 'blind source' in this context means one they haven't seen before (this is the phrase the exam board uses). They are told who wrote it. However, the question is then about the source, not about the information in it.
Furthermore, the exam boards have dramatically reduced the amount of contextual information they provide on their sources, including removing further information on the authors. Which is not terribly helpful given it is sometimes hard to work out their leanings from the tiny, often edited extract provided.
That sounds less like History and more like English comprehension...
One further worry I have is that in English candidates also have to talk about the context of their extracts. Which means that the exams are sometimes alarmingly similar. If I were paranoid, I would wonder if the ultimate goal is to abolish History as a discrete discipline and throw it all into English.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Think of it this way Patrick. US domestic policy doesn't directly affect us, while foreign policy ventures do. Under Bush, the effects were disastrous and extensive, so Obama's policy of drift has been an improvement for us if hardly for the people of Africa, Arabia and the Caucasus.
Meanwhile few know or care about the failures of his domestic policy, so that doesn't impact on their view of him. Coupled to a genuine rhetorical talent that matches Bill Clinton and an ability so far as we know to keep his hands off young women, it's not surprising that those who know of him only superficially view him very positively.
He will also do well compared to his successor. Clinton has all his drawbacks and none of his talents, and as for Trump...
I'd argue it's even simpler - being black, smoothly dressed and sounding professorial/learned is more than enough for the casual TV watcher. I was initially impressed - then paid attention to a Q&A he did at Facebook midway through his first term. A content free 2hrs and answered IIRC 4 questions. He's such an empty suit.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
I really don't get it.
I hope this doesn't come as a massive shock to you, but there's a pretty good chance that loads and loads of people don't share your views.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
He is a lot better than George W Bush and will probably have been better than either Hillary or Trump. He is not as good as Reagan or Bill Clinton but about level with Bush Snr
Better than Nixon. Not as good as Johnson, apart from the latter’s being involved with the Vietnam War.
Given the way the US system works though, to be an effective (is that the same as good?) President one needs to have at least one sympathetic House of Congress.
'The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how private transport operators cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart," Mr Corbyn said in advance of launching his "Transport Tuesday" initiative.
Or, alternatively: The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how unions cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart.
"Public ownership of our railways is needed now to fix the transport nightmare we are currently faced with, and we know there is overwhelming support among the British public for a people's railway."
Yet again, he's got an answer and is trying to make the question fit. As for transport nightmare: can he not remember BR?
Those who wish for the railways to be renationalised are harking back to a golden age that never existed.
As an illustration of this, I remember (on more than one occassion) my father coming home very late from London because his train had been delayed and the driver had 'clocked off', and pretty much abandoned the train, having completed the hours for his shift, but two stations and 11 miles shy of the terminus of our branch line where we lived.
It may not have been a golden age in terms of service, but it certainly was in terms of ticket pricing, which was simple and clear (and cheaper, in real terms).
Yesterday I was booking a rail trip, and precisely the same single journey, same stations and time, was £75 on the national rail site but £28 on trainline.
That shouldn't be possible because the various sites all use the same ticketing database.
Well I checked National Rail again just now, and the prices are now down to the same level as trainline. But they were not, yesterday, otherwise I wouldn't have gone near trainline in the first place; how do they hope to make money when they add a booking fee on top and charge more for postage than the other sites?
If you are right I guess the only explanation is a mysterious and dramatic price drop during the few minutes between sites?
I can think of a couple of possibilities:
(1) a database glitch, perhaps if it's a long way in advance and the cheaper tickets hadn't filtered through, or (2) sorry, I can't think of a better way to put this, user error.
I generally recommend using one of the TOC websites, they don't charge fees like Trainline.
The big disconnect between "Your MP" and "MPs generally" is interesting.
Your MP is a person (who half the respondents will have voted for) whereas MPs generally are a bunch of useless crooks.
There’s a similar situation with regard to GP services.
I think we are probably on the verge of a big switch to private GP services. A few years back I had terrible sinusitis. Suffered for a couple of days but managed to get GP appointment.
New doc at GP said it wasnt bad enough to give antibiotics and that I should just steam it.
Went from there to London to work. Pain got worse. Not fancying being laid up for the bank holiday I phoned a private GP service near Bank. Appointment 40 mins later. Thorough unrushed examination by nurse who diagnosed acute sinusitis. Prescribed antibiotics which they promptly supplied. £70. Plus that included the prescription so £61 really when you take off NHS prescription charge.
They also offered an annual season ticket for about £200.
So much better than NHS and pretty reasonable cost.
If everyone goes private then you'll have the same overutilisation problem causing short examination times and long waits.
Private GPs only 'work' at the moments as there are the public GPs taking the strain.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
He is a lot better than George W Bush and will probably have been better than either Hillary or Trump. He is not as good as Reagan or Bill Clinton but about level with Bush Snr
Better than Nixon. Not as good as Johnson, apart from the latter’s being involved with the Vietnam War.
In many ways rather similar to Kennedy - the clean cut smooth talker who didn't achieve anything. But again, a better human being than Kennedy so far as we know (I think we would have heard if he had raped any teenage girls).
True, there has been relatively little growth in the physical network. But it has been growing, unlike in BR times when it was constantly shrinking.
I was referring (though misusing the terms) to both the increase in 'routes' and the number of services on those routes.
It looks as though a significant proportion of the growth in passengers occurs when more services are laid on a route. This may be due to a decrease in overcrowding attracting passengers or, more likely, that you are more likely to use the train if there is a service every half-hour instead of every hour, meaning that you wait less for a train and are more likely to catch a connection. Or even one every fifteen minutes instead of half-hour.
The quality of many stations has also improved immeasurably since privatisation. Just look at photos of stations in the 1970s and 1980s and them now. This perhaps started with Liverpool Street's renovation in the 1980s. (*)
I only travelled on BR in the last decade of its existence, but I have little doubt that the current railway is much better for passenger comfort and convenience. As an example: Pacer trains are widely derided, but when they were introduced in the 1980s they were seen as being better than the first-generation DMUs they replaced.
(*) When the adjacent Broad Street station was sadly closed.
The pacers were a cheap solution to stop Thatcher implementing the Serpell report and closing lines wholesale.
I think what is driving it is the rising congestion on roads making driving unpleasant, uncomfortable and unreliable journey time wise along with ever greater parking charges and restrictions.
Last may the first train of the year rolled up at Okehampton. This runs sundays only principally for people to visit Dartmoor. The crew were astonished to find over 100 people on the platform travelling as far as Maidstone.
Similarly a new service Summer Saturdays one each way only from London to Weymouth via Salisbury and Yeovil has been so well used that it has had to be increased from three to five coaches.
The big disconnect between "Your MP" and "MPs generally" is interesting.
Your MP is a person (who half the respondents will have voted for) whereas MPs generally are a bunch of useless crooks.
There’s a similar situation with regard to GP services.
I think we are probably on the verge of a big switch to private GP services. A few years back I had terrible sinusitis. Suffered for a couple of days but managed to get GP appointment.
New doc at GP said it wasnt bad enough to give antibiotics and that I should just steam it.
Went from there to London to work. Pain got worse. Not fancying being laid up for the bank holiday I phoned a private GP service near Bank. Appointment 40 mins later. Thorough unrushed examination by nurse who diagnosed acute sinusitis. Prescribed antibiotics which they promptly supplied. £70. Plus that included the prescription so £61 really when you take off NHS prescription charge.
They also offered an annual season ticket for about £200.
So much better than NHS and pretty reasonable cost.
If everyone goes private then you'll have the same overutilisation problem causing short examination times and long waits.
Private GPs only 'work' at the moments as there are the public GPs taking the strain.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Think of it this way Patrick. US domestic policy doesn't directly affect us, while foreign policy ventures do. Under Bush, the effects were disastrous and extensive, so Obama's policy of drift has been an improvement for us if hardly for the people of Africa, Arabia and the Caucasus.
Meanwhile few know or care about the failures of his domestic policy, so that doesn't impact on their view of him. Coupled to a genuine rhetorical talent that matches Bill Clinton and an ability so far as we know to keep his hands off young women, it's not surprising that those who know of him only superficially view him very positively.
He will also do well compared to his successor. Clinton has all his drawbacks and none of his talents, and as for Trump...
I'd argue it's even simpler - being black, smoothly dressed and sounding professorial/learned is more than enough for the casual TV watcher. I was initially impressed - then paid attention to a Q&A he did at Facebook midway through his first term. A content free 2hrs and answered IIRC 4 questions. He's such an empty suit.
Answering absolutely nothing in 2 hours is a skill I really would like to have...
The problem was he wasn't even interesting. I was waiting and waiting and waiting for a nugget/anything of any substance. It was like someone reading out the phonebook in a certain weighty style - with loads of self-regard thrown in. He referred to himself 118x during his DNC Hillary endorsement speech.
Trump talks about himself, and in cliches/random words too - but at least he sounds interesting. Obama reminds me of the blah blah blah of a Peanuts cartoon.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
He is a lot better than George W Bush and will probably have been better than either Hillary or Trump. He is not as good as Reagan or Bill Clinton but about level with Bush Snr
Better than Nixon. Not as good as Johnson, apart from the latter’s being involved with the Vietnam War.
In many ways rather similar to Kennedy - the clean cut smooth talker who didn't achieve anything. But again, a better human being than Kennedy so far as we know (I think we would have heard if he had raped any teenage girls).
Kennedy did however a) kind of save the world during the Cuban missile crisis; and b) put a man on the moon. A scuzzy blob of testosterone but with some redeeming achievements. Obama has none of that. An arrogant empty suit.
True, there has been relatively little growth in the physical network. But it has been growing, unlike in BR times when it was constantly shrinking.
...
I only travelled on BR in the last decade of its existence, but I have little doubt that the current railway is much better for passenger comfort and convenience. As an example: Pacer trains are widely derided, but when they were introduced in the 1980s they were seen as being better than the first-generation DMUs they replaced.
(*) When the adjacent Broad Street station was sadly closed.
First paragraph is not quite fair JJ. Cannock was reconnected to the national network under BR, when the Chase line was promoted from freight only status. It wasn't common, but it happened.
Entirely agree with your second paragraph. BR's record in the provinces was absolutely dismal, especially in terms of punctuality, comfort and service. Things have improved enormously since privatisation. And it's not just where there is no alternative. The Cambrian lines are much more heavily used despite their remoteness and low speeds. In the 1980s you had a one car train every two hours from Mac along the lines. Now they are two car trains every hour, and they are well used.
Oh, indeed it happened. Willington station in South Derbyshire also reopened in late BR times, albeit that was on a passenger line. There was also an abortive first attempt at reopening the station at Corby in 1987, although BR closed it a few years later. It has since reopened again, and passenger numbers have doubled.
In fact, Corby's two reopenings are an indication of privatisation's success. BR could not make the station work. The private companies have.
But think of all the lines we lost, both passenger and freight.
Think of the lucky escape we had when the Settle and Carlisle was saved. The Woodhead line was not so lucky.
The Serpell report is also well worth studying. Imagine if that had gone through!
The big disconnect between "Your MP" and "MPs generally" is interesting.
Your MP is a person (who half the respondents will have voted for) whereas MPs generally are a bunch of useless crooks.
There’s a similar situation with regard to GP services.
I think we are probably on the verge of a big switch to private GP services. A few years back I had terrible sinusitis. Suffered for a couple of days but managed to get GP appointment.
New doc at GP said it wasnt bad enough to give antibiotics and that I should just steam it.
Went from there to London to work. Pain got worse. Not fancying being laid up for the bank holiday I phoned a private GP service near Bank. Appointment 40 mins later. Thorough unrushed examination by nurse who diagnosed acute sinusitis. Prescribed antibiotics which they promptly supplied. £70. Plus that included the prescription so £61 really when you take off NHS prescription charge.
They also offered an annual season ticket for about £200.
So much better than NHS and pretty reasonable cost.
If everyone goes private then you'll have the same overutilisation problem causing short examination times and long waits.
Private GPs only 'work' at the moments as there are the public GPs taking the strain.
True, there has been relatively little growth in the physical network. But it has been growing, unlike in BR times when it was constantly shrinking.
...
I only travelled on BR in the last decade of its existence, but I have little doubt that the current railway is much better for passenger comfort and convenience. As an example: Pacer trains are widely derided, but when they were introduced in the 1980s they were seen as being better than the first-generation DMUs they replaced.
(*) When the adjacent Broad Street station was sadly closed.
First paragraph is not quite fair JJ. Cannock was reconnected to the national network under BR, when the Chase line was promoted from freight only status. It wasn't common, but it happened.
Entirely agree with your second paragraph. BR's record in the provinces was absolutely dismal, especially in terms of punctuality, comfort and service. Things have improved enormously since privatisation. And it's not just where there is no alternative. The Cambrian lines are much more heavily used despite their remoteness and low speeds. In the 1980s you had a one car train every two hours from Mac along the lines. Now they are two car trains every hour, and they are well used.
Oh, indeed it happened. Willington station in South Derbyshire also reopened in late BR times, albeit that was on a passenger line. There was also an abortive first attempt at reopening the station at Corby in 1987, although BR closed it a few years later. It has since reopened again, and passenger numbers have doubled.
In fact, Corby's two reopenings are an indication of privatisation's success. BR could not make the station work. The private companies have.
But think of all the lines we lost, both passenger and freight.
Think of the lucky escape we had when the Settle and Carlisle was saved. The Woodhead line was not so lucky.
The Serpell report is also well worth studying. Imagine if that had gone through!
Having looked at it, it is hard to imagine railways could have survived at all. A classic accountant's mentality that assumed passengers went from station to station.
The Waverley route was a loss, but the worst was and remains the Great Central. If we still had that, we wouldn't be arguing over HS2 now. And if it hadn't been sold off for building we could just put it back.
I'd be interested in hearing why those people in the minority think Barack Obama has been so bad. He seems to have been reasonably adequate to me, bearing in mind the very difficult circumstances in which he took office.
I'm cautiously hopeful that machine politician Hillary Clinton will be a machine politician president in the vein of LBJ. That wouldn't be too shabby.
In the event of a Trump defeat, how will the Republican party react? If they are divided, as currently seems probable, will Hillary Clinton be able to form constructive working arrangements with some Republicans for the first time in years?
Most attractive aspect of rail travel was that from the 90s onward I could actually work on the train. Given my billing rate this made it a no-brainer over the alternatives.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
He is a lot better than George W Bush and will probably have been better than either Hillary or Trump. He is not as good as Reagan or Bill Clinton but about level with Bush Snr
Better than Nixon. Not as good as Johnson, apart from the latter’s being involved with the Vietnam War.
In many ways rather similar to Kennedy - the clean cut smooth talker who didn't achieve anything. But again, a better human being than Kennedy so far as we know (I think we would have heard if he had raped any teenage girls).
Kennedy did however a) kind of save the world during the Cuban missile crisis; and b) put a man on the moon. A scuzzy blob of testosterone but with some redeeming achievements. Obama has none of that. An arrogant empty suit.
I think you'll find the moon landings were in 1969, some years after Kennedy's death, and I'm reluctant to praise Kennedy's skilled diplomacy for saving the world when it was his mindless bungling and schoolboy aggression that had imperilled it in the first place.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
Obama stood (twice) on a platform of healthcare reform and got it through a hostile congress and senate
Getting legislation passed is not a measure of success. Obamacare is an out and out failure. Trump won't even need to repeal it if he gets elected as it is about to implode anyway. Obama lied blatantly to get it passed and now premiums are exploding upwards as (no shit Sherlock) the healthy young are avoiding participation. Obama has profoundly damaged the US health system in an act of pure petulance. Not being able to afford health insurance in the US is a serous serious problem. History will not be kind to him.
The big disconnect between "Your MP" and "MPs generally" is interesting.
Your MP is a person (who half the respondents will have voted for) whereas MPs generally are a bunch of useless crooks.
There’s a similar situation with regard to GP services.
I think we are probably on the verge of a big switch to private GP services. A few years back I had terrible sinusitis. Suffered for a couple of days but managed to get GP appointment.
New doc at GP said it wasnt bad enough to give antibiotics and that I should just steam it.
Went from there to London to work. Pain got worse. Not fancying being laid up for the bank holiday I phoned a private GP service near Bank. Appointment 40 mins later. Thorough unrushed examination by nurse who diagnosed acute sinusitis. Prescribed antibiotics which they promptly supplied. £70. Plus that included the prescription so £61 really when you take off NHS prescription charge.
They also offered an annual season ticket for about £200.
So much better than NHS and pretty reasonable cost.
If everyone goes private then you'll have the same overutilisation problem causing short examination times and long waits.
Private GPs only 'work' at the moments as there are the public GPs taking the strain.
'The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how private transport operators cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart," Mr Corbyn said in advance of launching his "Transport Tuesday" initiative.
Or, alternatively: The Southern rail debacle just goes to show how unions cannot be trusted with having passengers' best interests at heart.
"Public ownership of our railways is needed now to fix the transport nightmare we are currently faced with, and we know there is overwhelming support among the British public for a people's railway."
Yet again, he's got an answer and is trying to make the question fit. As for transport nightmare: can he not remember BR?
Those who wish for the railways to be renationalised are harking back to a golden age that never existed.
As an illustration of this, I remember (on more than one occassion) my father coming home very late from London because his train had been delayed and the driver had 'clocked off', and pretty much abandoned the train, having completed the hours for his shift, but two stations and 11 miles shy of the terminus of our branch line where we lived.
It may not have been a golden age in terms of service, but it certainly was in terms of ticket pricing, which was simple and clear (and cheaper, in real terms).
Yesterday I was booking a rail trip, and precisely the same single journey, same stations and time, was £75 on the national rail site but £28 on trainline.
That shouldn't be possible because the various sites all use the same ticketing database.
Well I checked National Rail again just now, and the prices are now down to the same level as trainline. But they were not, yesterday, otherwise I wouldn't have gone near trainline in the first place; how do they hope to make money when they add a booking fee on top and charge more for postage than the other sites?
If you are right I guess the only explanation is a mysterious and dramatic price drop during the few minutes between sites?
I can think of a couple of possibilities:
(1) a database glitch, perhaps if it's a long way in advance and the cheaper tickets hadn't filtered through, or (2) sorry, I can't think of a better way to put this, user error.
I generally recommend using one of the TOC websites, they don't charge fees like Trainline.
One of the under-the-hood changes of the last few years is the growth of distributed databases. These have a feature that can be quite disconcerting for the unwary.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Think of it this way Patrick. US domestic policy doesn't directly affect us, while foreign policy ventures do. Under Bush, the effects were disastrous and extensive, so Obama's policy of drift has been an improvement for us if hardly for the people of Africa, Arabia and the Caucasus.
Meanwhile few know or care about the failures of his domestic policy, so that doesn't impact on their view of him. Coupled to a genuine rhetorical talent that matches Bill Clinton and an ability so far as we know to keep his hands off young women, it's not surprising that those who know of him only superficially view him very positively.
He will also do well compared to his successor. Clinton has all his drawbacks and none of his talents, and as for Trump...
I'd argue it's even simpler - being black, smoothly dressed and sounding professorial/learned is more than enough for the casual TV watcher. I was initially impressed - then paid attention to a Q&A he did at Facebook midway through his first term. A content free 2hrs and answered IIRC 4 questions. He's such an empty suit.
The American Chucka Umuna, perchance?
I find Chuka worse - he's looks expensive. I could imagine him as the playboy offspring of an oligarch who appears in Hello. Obama looks like he went to Harvard and bores the tits off people, Chuka bathes in asses milk.
I'd be interested in hearing why those people in the minority think Barack Obama has been so bad. He seems to have been reasonably adequate to me, bearing in mind the very difficult circumstances in which he took office.
I'm cautiously hopeful that machine politician Hillary Clinton will be a machine politician president in the vein of LBJ. That wouldn't be too shabby.
In the event of a Trump defeat, how will the Republican party react? If they are divided, as currently seems probable, will Hillary Clinton be able to form constructive working arrangements with some Republicans for the first time in years?
Not bad, just a nothing President who achieved nothing of value over his eight years. Indeed in that time gun violence, race relations and insurance premiums are worse than ever. He has let things slide domestically in a way that Clinton and Bush never did.
Having looked at it, it is hard to imagine railways could have survived at all. A classic accountant's mentality that assumed passengers went from station to station.
The Waverley route was a loss, but the worst was and remains the Great Central. If we still had that, we wouldn't be arguing over HS2 now. And if it hadn't been sold off for building we could just put it back.
I actually disagree about the Great Central. You'r right about it north of Aylesbury where it was it's own route, but south of there until near Marylebone it shared existing tracks, which are still in use and busy today. It would have done very little to ease congestion into London, as that part of the route's still open.
The real tragedy for me was the closure of my beloved Matlock to Derby line, which AIUI was not in the initial Beeching report. It was closed because the LNWR contingent of BR did not want two alternative routes to Manchester and campaigned for it to be closed instead of the Hope Valley. The Peak Line was used as a diversion during WCML electrification, and then unceremoniously closed.
Incidentally, there was a gun/axe attack in Cologne a couple of days ago, but minimal coverage.
It's possible the new approach of downplaying terrorist attacks will cause a pissing contest to try and actually get media attention. If knives and axes won't do it, there's the potential for (unwittingly) the current media policy to encourage mass shootings and explosive/vehicle attacks.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
Obama stood (twice) on a platform of healthcare reform and got it through a hostile congress and senate
Getting legislation passed is not a measure of success. Obamacare is an out and out failure. Trump won't even need to repeal it if he gets elected as it is about to implode anyway. Obama lied blatantly to get it passed and now premiums are exploding upwards as (no shit Sherlock) the healthy young are avoiding participation. Obama has profoundly damaged the US health system in an act of pure petulance. Not being able to afford health insurance in the US is a serous serious problem. History will not be kind to him.
True, there has been relatively little growth in the physical network. But it has been growing, unlike in BR times when it was constantly shrinking.
...
I only travelled on BR in the last decade of its existence, but I have little doubt that the current railway is much better for passenger comfort and convenience. As an example: Pacer trains are widely derided, but when they were introduced in the 1980s they were seen as being better than the first-generation DMUs they replaced.
(*) When the adjacent Broad Street station was sadly closed.
First paragraph is not quite fair JJ. Cannock was reconnected to the national network under BR, when the Chase line was promoted from freight only status. It wasn't common, but it happened.
Entirely agree with your second paragraph. BR's record in the provinces was absolutely dismal, especially in terms of punctuality, comfort and service. Things have improved enormously since privatisation. And it's not just where there is no alternative. The Cambrian lines are much more heavily used despite their remoteness and low speeds. In the 1980s you had a one car train every two hours from Mac along the lines. Now they are two car trains every hour, and they are well used.
Oh, indeed it happened. Willington station in South Derbyshire also reopened in late BR times, albeit that was on a passenger line. There was also an abortive first attempt at reopening the station at Corby in 1987, although BR closed it a few years later. It has since reopened again, and passenger numbers have doubled.
In fact, Corby's two reopenings are an indication of privatisation's success. BR could not make the station work. The private companies have.
But think of all the lines we lost, both passenger and freight.
Think of the lucky escape we had when the Settle and Carlisle was saved. The Woodhead line was not so lucky.
The Serpell report is also well worth studying. Imagine if that had gone through!
Having looked at it, it is hard to imagine railways could have survived at all. A classic accountant's mentality that assumed passengers went from station to station.
The Waverley route was a loss, but the worst was and remains the Great Central. If we still had that, we wouldn't be arguing over HS2 now. And if it hadn't been sold off for building we could just put it back.
Interesting comment in the Wikipedia entry that passenger numbers were picking up throughout the 80’s to a peak in 1988. Was that the influence of the petrol/diesel price increases at that time?
Incidentally, there was a gun/axe attack in Cologne a couple of days ago, but minimal coverage.
It's possible the new approach of downplaying terrorist attacks will cause a pissing contest to try and actually get media attention. If knives and axes won't do it, there's the potential for (unwittingly) the current media policy to encourage mass shootings and explosive/vehicle attacks.
The story doesn't sound very terrorist related: there was an argument between three men and another man; one person was stabbed, and said stabbed person pulled a gun and shot one of his attackers.
It's entirely possible it was Syrian refugees, but it doesn't fit the pattern. (Other than being in Germany.)
Mr. 1000, assuming that's true, it highlights another problem with the cover-up/minimising coverage approach I didn't think of yesterday.
Every time there's a knife or gun attack, people will wonder if it's terrorism that's being covered up. That might lead to a larger than accurate picture forming in the public's mind when it comes to the threat/terrorist activity. One more reason we need to be able to trust the media/politicians/the police.
I'd be interested in hearing why those people in the minority think Barack Obama has been so bad. He seems to have been reasonably adequate to me, bearing in mind the very difficult circumstances in which he took office.
I'm cautiously hopeful that machine politician Hillary Clinton will be a machine politician president in the vein of LBJ. That wouldn't be too shabby.
In the event of a Trump defeat, how will the Republican party react? If they are divided, as currently seems probable, will Hillary Clinton be able to form constructive working arrangements with some Republicans for the first time in years?
Not bad, just a nothing President who achieved nothing of value over his eight years. Indeed in that time gun violence, race relations and insurance premiums are worse than ever. He has let things slide domestically in a way that Clinton and Bush never did.
Obama and his empty campaign promise to close Guantanamo Bay - Still there after 8 yrs.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
Obama stood (twice) on a platform of healthcare reform and got it through a hostile congress and senate
Getting legislation passed is not a measure of success. Obamacare is an out and out failure. Trump won't even need to repeal it if he gets elected as it is about to implode anyway. Obama lied blatantly to get it passed and now premiums are exploding upwards as (no shit Sherlock) the healthy young are avoiding participation. Obama has profoundly damaged the US health system in an act of pure petulance. Not being able to afford health insurance in the US is a serous serious problem. History will not be kind to him.
The problem is that it has achieved that by making already expensive insurance for the middle classes even more expensive and the coverage worse overall. A system that creates so many losers, vocal ones, is going to get a tough time. I don't think it will be repealed, but they may have to look at a much better single-payer system and establish Medicare for all rather than free substandard insurance people lower down the income scale and substandard expensive insurance for the middle classes with the rich being able to afford the price rises for the best. That's what Obama should have done, been truly radical.
Interesting comment in the Wikipedia entry that passenger numbers were picking up throughout the 80’s to a peak in 1988. Was that the influence of the petrol/diesel price increases at that time?
The effect of Thatcherism, innit?
But seriously, probably down to the fact that BR management was given free reign from the early 1980s to manage themselves, and they came up with sectorisation. Network SouthEast was particularly successful.
However, I'd like to see the figures for that claim: my understanding was that any growth was very low, especialy in comparison to the doubling we've seen in the as twenty years. Figure 1 of (1) is illustrative:
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
Obama stood (twice) on a platform of healthcare reform and got it through a hostile congress and senate
Getting legislation passed is not a measure of success. Obamacare is an out and out failure. Trump won't even need to repeal it if he gets elected as it is about to implode anyway. Obama lied blatantly to get it passed and now premiums are exploding upwards as (no shit Sherlock) the healthy young are avoiding participation. Obama has profoundly damaged the US health system in an act of pure petulance. Not being able to afford health insurance in the US is a serous serious problem. History will not be kind to him.
The problem is that it has achieved that by making already expensive insurance for the middle classes even more expensive and the coverage worse overall. A system that creates so many losers, vocal ones, is going to get a tough time. I don't think it will be repealed, but they may have to look at a much better single-payer system and establish Medicare for all rather than free substandard insurance people lower down the income scale and substandard expensive insurance for the middle classes with the rich being able to afford the price rises for the best. That's what Obama should have done, been truly radical.
I'd be interested in hearing why those people in the minority think Barack Obama has been so bad. He seems to have been reasonably adequate to me, bearing in mind the very difficult circumstances in which he took office.
I'm cautiously hopeful that machine politician Hillary Clinton will be a machine politician president in the vein of LBJ. That wouldn't be too shabby.
In the event of a Trump defeat, how will the Republican party react? If they are divided, as currently seems probable, will Hillary Clinton be able to form constructive working arrangements with some Republicans for the first time in years?
Not bad, just a nothing President who achieved nothing of value over his eight years. Indeed in that time gun violence, race relations and insurance premiums are worse than ever. He has let things slide domestically in a way that Clinton and Bush never did.
Obama and his empty campaign promise to close Guantanamo Bay - Still there after 8 yrs.
His first act as President was to sign the order closing it within 60 days, in front of the TV cameras.
Only then did he realise he didn't know what to do with the inmates.
Rather a metaphor for all his domestic reforms - extremely well-meaning, but not thought through at all.
Incidentally, there was a gun/axe attack in Cologne a couple of days ago, but minimal coverage.
It's possible the new approach of downplaying terrorist attacks will cause a pissing contest to try and actually get media attention. If knives and axes won't do it, there's the potential for (unwittingly) the current media policy to encourage mass shootings and explosive/vehicle attacks.
Norwegians get everywhere... I think it's a massive strategic mistake. Pretending there isn't a problem/smothering stories with a pillow until they die fuels mistrust. It may yield short-term gains, but destroys faith long-term.
Obama net +46% ?????? Does not compute! WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Some Leavers were probably favourable to him because they think he did them a favour!
He's the shittiest president of modern times by a country mile. I really don't get it.
Obama stood (twice) on a platform of healthcare reform and got it through a hostile congress and senate
Getting legislation passed is not a measure of success. Obamacare is an out and out failure. Trump won't even need to repeal it if he gets elected as it is about to implode anyway. Obama lied blatantly to get it passed and now premiums are exploding upwards as (no shit Sherlock) the healthy young are avoiding participation. Obama has profoundly damaged the US health system in an act of pure petulance. Not being able to afford health insurance in the US is a serous serious problem. History will not be kind to him.
The problem is that it has achieved that by making already expensive insurance for the middle classes even more expensive and the coverage worse overall. A system that creates so many losers, vocal ones, is going to get a tough time. I don't think it will be repealed, but they may have to look at a much better single-payer system and establish Medicare for all rather than free substandard insurance people lower down the income scale and substandard expensive insurance for the middle classes with the rich being able to afford the price rises for the best. That's what Obama should have done, been truly radical.
No way could he have got that through Congress.
He didn't try, instead he gave insurance companies a new and better licence to print money.
Comments
Of course the poor quality of some of the marking means that's likely to be irrelevant, but it shows how regardless of the intentions the outcome is sometimes highly undesirable or even the opposite of what was intended.
Saying that *all* the increase is due to privatisation is as silly as saying that privatisation has had no effect and all the growth has been caused by other factors. But what I can say from having studied this a little is that the private companies are far more responsive to passengers' needs, and that the growing network we see today was incompatible with the mindset of most of BR's managers.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/08/the_week_democracy_died_how_brexit_nice_turkey_and_trump_are_all_connected.html
I think the idea is to show how they can analyse sources they haven't seen before. But it's a daft way of doing it because no historian will work on a source they've seen only once and can't do further research to check its content if needed.
They're reducing things like reasoning, evidence and sound sources to focus on the anonymous? How the hell is that supposed to make sense?
FFS.
That said, it is much closer to the old GCSE than the History equivalent so there is likely to be less experimentation.
You might as well do history lessons about Hannibal based on Mr Dancer's deranged witterings.
The Battle of Zama was a great success for Carthage
Unfortunately universities are incentivised not to push this point as they can take as many people as they can with 3Bs or above...
When Caesar lost to Pompey at Dyrrachium, he chose to attack with veteran forces and managed to be defeated by newly raised troops.
Also worth noting that, after the respective wars ended, Hannibal became ruler of Carthage. Caesar got murdered by his own side.
But seriously, on the old A-level such questions accounted for about 8% of the overall mark, which was OK. Now they account for approximately 30% of the mark, which is absurd.
What I found really offensive was that the boards and the DfES blamed the university history departments for it, saying this greater emphasis was what they wanted - despite the fact that two academic advisers, one a personal friend and one a friend of a friend, had resigned from the panel in protest at them being included at all.
Hannibal less so.
Because Caesar won the war, loser Hannibal lost the war.
The concern at the school is how do you compare the very different approaches schools will take to this field work exam - it used to be that schools in less fortunate parts of the country could avoid that bit...
Alas you need to be travelling no later than approx 5am to see this - and it is still busy then.
These claims are flawed. Looking at historical comparisons, Labour’s performance in the 2016 local elections was pretty mediocre compared to previous oppositions."
One school in Lichfield is making it a compulsory residential. Just to confuse matter, that's a compulsory residential in Iceland studying volcanoes. That's why I was alarmed for the expense you might have to meet.
If you are right I guess the only explanation is a mysterious and dramatic price drop during the few minutes between sites?
Does not compute!
WTF is going on with the British public? Did education standards drop or something? This is the hardest evidence I have ever seen for the triumph of image management over content.
Furthermore, the exam boards have dramatically reduced the amount of contextual information they provide on their sources, including removing further information on the authors. Which is not terribly helpful given it is sometimes hard to work out their leanings from the tiny, often edited extract provided.
Bananas to be wiped out in 5 years according to Dacre:
http://dailym.ai/2aYE9on
Meanwhile few know or care about the failures of his domestic policy, so that doesn't impact on their view of him. Coupled to a genuine rhetorical talent that matches Bill Clinton and an ability so far as we know to keep his hands off young women, it's not surprising that those who know of him only superficially view him very positively.
He will also do well compared to his successor. Clinton has all his drawbacks and none of his talents, and as for Trump...
The New YouGov poll looks great. However, as a cynic who doubts most respondents have a significant awareness of their own domestic politicians, let alone foreign leaders, I’ll take the Merkel, Putin, Trump etc figures, with a large pinch of salt.
Well. Maybe not quite that bad. But it's still rubbish.
Oh for the days when Nationwide Airlines flew from Joburg to Gatwick.
Gatwick is just so much more accesible by public transport.
I was referring (though misusing the terms) to both the increase in 'routes' and the number of services on those routes.
It looks as though a significant proportion of the growth in passengers occurs when more services are laid on a route. This may be due to a decrease in overcrowding attracting passengers or, more likely, that you are more likely to use the train if there is a service every half-hour instead of every hour, meaning that you wait less for a train and are more likely to catch a connection. Or even one every fifteen minutes instead of half-hour.
The quality of many stations has also improved immeasurably since privatisation. Just look at photos of stations in the 1970s and 1980s and them now. This perhaps started with Liverpool Street's renovation in the 1980s. (*)
I only travelled on BR in the last decade of its existence, but I have little doubt that the current railway is much better for passenger comfort and convenience. As an example: Pacer trains are widely derided, but when they were introduced in the 1980s they were seen as being better than the first-generation DMUs they replaced.
(*) When the adjacent Broad Street station was sadly closed.
Mr. Max, the Colossus of Rhodes fell over not so long after it was put up. In its defence, that was due to an earthquake...
It was created to celebrate seeing off Demetrius, who may have acquired his nickname (Besieger/Poliorcetes) ironically after failing to take it by siege.
There's plenty of new candidate bananas that would be able to be bred for commercial cultivation once thne Cavendish is blighted out of existence.
Entirely agree with your second paragraph. BR's record in the provinces was absolutely dismal, especially in terms of punctuality, comfort and service. Things have improved enormously since privatisation. And it's not just where there is no alternative. The Cambrian lines are much more heavily used despite their remoteness and low speeds. In the 1980s you had a one car train every two hours from Mac along the lines. Now they are two car trains every hour, and they are well used.
New doc at GP said it wasnt bad enough to give antibiotics and that I should just steam it.
Went from there to London to work. Pain got worse. Not fancying being laid up for the bank holiday I phoned a private GP service near Bank. Appointment 40 mins later. Thorough unrushed examination by nurse who diagnosed acute sinusitis. Prescribed antibiotics which they promptly supplied. £70. Plus that included the prescription so £61 really when you take off NHS prescription charge.
They also offered an annual season ticket for about £200.
So much better than NHS and pretty reasonable cost.
Obama stood (twice) on a platform of healthcare reform and got it through a hostile congress and senate
My best advice is just to use the appropriate website for the rail company you will be travelling on for the majority of the journey..
http://rankexploits.com/musings/2014/how-not-to-calculate-temperature/
Given the way the US system works though, to be an effective (is that the same as good?) President one needs to have at least one sympathetic House of Congress.
(1) a database glitch, perhaps if it's a long way in advance and the cheaper tickets hadn't filtered through, or
(2) sorry, I can't think of a better way to put this, user error.
I generally recommend using one of the TOC websites, they don't charge fees like Trainline.
Private GPs only 'work' at the moments as there are the public GPs taking the strain.
I think what is driving it is the rising congestion on roads making driving unpleasant, uncomfortable and unreliable journey time wise along with ever greater parking charges and restrictions.
Last may the first train of the year rolled up at Okehampton. This runs sundays only principally for people to visit Dartmoor. The crew were astonished to find over 100 people on the platform travelling as far as Maidstone.
Similarly a new service Summer Saturdays one each way only from London to Weymouth via Salisbury and Yeovil has been so well used that it has had to be increased from three to five coaches.
Trump talks about himself, and in cliches/random words too - but at least he sounds interesting. Obama reminds me of the blah blah blah of a Peanuts cartoon.
In fact, Corby's two reopenings are an indication of privatisation's success. BR could not make the station work. The private companies have.
But think of all the lines we lost, both passenger and freight.
Think of the lucky escape we had when the Settle and Carlisle was saved. The Woodhead line was not so lucky.
The Serpell report is also well worth studying. Imagine if that had gone through!
The Waverley route was a loss, but the worst was and remains the Great Central. If we still had that, we wouldn't be arguing over HS2 now. And if it hadn't been sold off for building we could just put it back.
I'm cautiously hopeful that machine politician Hillary Clinton will be a machine politician president in the vein of LBJ. That wouldn't be too shabby.
In the event of a Trump defeat, how will the Republican party react? If they are divided, as currently seems probable, will Hillary Clinton be able to form constructive working arrangements with some Republicans for the first time in years?
Most attractive aspect of rail travel was that from the 90s onward I could actually work on the train. Given my billing rate this made it a no-brainer over the alternatives.
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/technology/doctaly-app-lets-see-gp-within-30-minutes-saviour-route-nhs-privatisation/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eventual_consistency
The real tragedy for me was the closure of my beloved Matlock to Derby line, which AIUI was not in the initial Beeching report. It was closed because the LNWR contingent of BR did not want two alternative routes to Manchester and campaigned for it to be closed instead of the Hope Valley. The Peak Line was used as a diversion during WCML electrification, and then unceremoniously closed.
A typical example of BR's shrinking mindset.
It's possible the new approach of downplaying terrorist attacks will cause a pissing contest to try and actually get media attention. If knives and axes won't do it, there's the potential for (unwittingly) the current media policy to encourage mass shootings and explosive/vehicle attacks.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/09/21/the-success-of-the-affordable-care-act-is-a-hugely-inconvenient-truth-for-its-opponents/?utm_term=.d25cbf2aed98
"But I can tell you this about Obamacare: When it comes to meeting one of its most important goals — providing coverage to the uninsured — it is working extremely well. It’s posting historical gains on this front and, in so doing, both insulating itself from repeal and creating a daunting political challenge for its opponents."
http://www.cbpp.org/research/health/census-data-show-historic-coverage-gains-in-2014
Was that the influence of the petrol/diesel price increases at that time?
It's entirely possible it was Syrian refugees, but it doesn't fit the pattern. (Other than being in Germany.)
Every time there's a knife or gun attack, people will wonder if it's terrorism that's being covered up. That might lead to a larger than accurate picture forming in the public's mind when it comes to the threat/terrorist activity. One more reason we need to be able to trust the media/politicians/the police.
Team GB Tom Bosworth proposes to his partner making it the FOURTH #Rio2016 betrothal #GBR https://t.co/nT9vCkQTub https://t.co/NEdJeyzZr2
But seriously, probably down to the fact that BR management was given free reign from the early 1980s to manage themselves, and they came up with sectorisation. Network SouthEast was particularly successful.
However, I'd like to see the figures for that claim: my understanding was that any growth was very low, especialy in comparison to the doubling we've seen in the as twenty years. Figure 1 of (1) is illustrative:
(1) https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/363718/rail-trends-factsheet-2014.pdf
Only then did he realise he didn't know what to do with the inmates.
Rather a metaphor for all his domestic reforms - extremely well-meaning, but not thought through at all.
Anyway, work beckons alas. Have a good morning!
Cancel Brexit and bring back Osborne.
Is the one month I need inflation to be down.