Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » From Labour’s conference problems Mrs May might infer Labou

13

Comments

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,061
    John_M said:

    Re the FTPA act. If May stands up in parliament and says, "Hey boys, let's have an election, you're quite right, I need a mandate what say you?", I'd be fascinated to see how Labour respond.

    Given they called for an election when she became PM, in the standard 'unelected PM needs a fresh mandate' calls which have no basis in our system, presumably they'd be obliged to say they agree.
    AndyJS said:

    I'm hoping that Muslim women in Europe will start choosing themselves not to wear burkas. How long are we going to have to wait, though?

    The more we can all mix together the more chance they'll have I guess.

  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    PlatoSaid said:

    Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.

    But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.

    This is part of the problem: I am sitting very close to three (very attractive) teenage girls on the train. All probably about seventeen.

    As I type they are all busy on their iPhones posing and taking selfies of themselves.
    It's provided newspapers with an endless supply of photos when they become media fodder. The pouting selfie look is so weird. All head down, shoulders up, eyes coquettish.

    I honestly thought the 'selfie stick' was a joke for ages - then saw one. It's vanity on a scale I can't fathom. As a teenager, I'd a boyfriend who spent most of the time admiring himself in shop windows - he'd be in element now, shame he's 50 :wink:
    Do you remember, from last October, the Dildo Selfie Stick?

    Unfortunately it turned out to be fake but it spawned some other fun spoof gadgets being advertised afterwards. This Dildo Hoverboard advert is brilliant and seriously NSFW ... or most home environments too.


  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,001

    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    kle4 said:



    And yet the very premise of this piece, and the concern many have with the FTPA, is that people have the temptation. Just the possibility of it causes disruption, recriminations at lost opportunities (if we had no FTPA and May did not got for a snap election now then, somehow, lost the next election, you can bet there'd be complaints).

    The negative of binding a future parliament (except it is not really bound, since repeal will always be possible, it will just be politically more costly to try) would seem to me to be less than the positive of eliminating the possibility of partisan based scheduling of elections, whether they are likely or not.

    Yet the governing party can still call an election. It simply has to pass a vote of no confidence in itself, and as no other government can be formed, and election must be called.

    I'm also somewhat opposed to legislation that require more than a simple majority of Parliament to get things done. The two thirds majority stinks.
    It's not perfect. But having to pass a no confidence motion against itself is a much tougher proposition (because it sounds stupid) than a government just deciding it wants an election now thank you very much. And making it tougher to call an election whenever you want, which would be for political purposes, is on balance a good thing.
    If the Conservatives vote No Confidence in themselves, can't Corbyn approach the Queen and attempt to form a Government? Obviously it'd be voted down but he would go into the election as PM...
    Yes, as I understand it there is a period of two weeks where a new government can be formed. The Tories would just have to vote down each one.
  • Options
    FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 3,902
    edited August 2016
    Floater said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.

    But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.

    No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.

    No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
    ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
    You generally are a sensible man (and I think we may have attended the same school in London albeit at different times) so I will cut you some slack

    But you clearly have no fucking clue on this matter.

    I have 4 children 2 of whom have ADHD perhaps I and my wife just did a shit job with 2 of them.....

    You really have no idea

    Muppet.
    I used to know a lad at school in the late 70s who was forever doing the daftest things and was totally incapable of paying attention to anything the teachers said. He was always in detention, and his poor parents used to despair of him. They were nice, friendly, working-class folk, and they didn't understand why he was so naughty while his brothers were well-behaved. He wasn't a bad lad, and could be funny sometimes, but he was pretty much given up as a lost cause.

    Anyway, I ran into him by chance a couple of years ago. He was still living a pretty chaotic life, but he had been retroactively diagnosed with ADHD. Looking back, it makes a lot of sense. Hopefully kids like him (and their parents) get more help and understanding nowadays than he did.
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:
    Why do I get the feeling there's something big going to (figuratively) blow up in the face of either or both Clinton or Trump before the election?

    They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
    Clinton has been claiming that there are no more embarrassing emails. Amusingly Assange is promising to reveal thousands of emails in the run up to November.

    The Republicans could have easily beat her with the right candidate. Unfortunately they picked Trump and will likely lead to Clinton,the ultimate crony capitalist, winning the race.
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    edited August 2016
    Pulpstar said:


    What on earth is the fish pout look about?

    Not attractive.

    A teenager saw an old photo of me in which I was smiling (as one was wont to do once up a time, "Say Cheese!" and all that) and said how wrong it was, everyone is meant to pout!

    But then, I have photos of my great-grandparents from the 19th century, in which they are all practically scowling - to be charitable, they have a severely serious look. But that is the way they used to be posed, in a studio, at a serious event, holding the pose... looking through the family album the smile only really seemed to kick in in the 1920s or so, and that would be a slight one. The more unreserved, light-hearted and "cheesy" smiles only seem to be there from the 60s or 70s onwards - even relatives who I know to have been fun-loving, laugh-a-minute and gregarious types might only seem to manage half-smiles until then.

    It's funny seeing someone in a 1920s photograph look so stern as a youth, and looking much more light-hearted and smiley come the 1980s or 1990s in the depths of old age!

    Had they shown those later photographs to their parents or studio photographer in the 1920s, no doubt he would have told them to wipe that silly expression off of their face!!
    I don' think either a duck face, "cheese smile" or overly stern face is correct. A 'light' smile works best in my opinion.
    I believe early photographs required long exposures, so rigid immobility was a must. I don't like being photographed, so images of my exalted self will be hugely sought after by my legions of future biographers.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,953

    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:
    Why do I get the feeling there's something big going to (figuratively) blow up in the face of either or both Clinton or Trump before the election?

    They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
    Julian Assanage really seems to be gunning for Clinton.
    Yes, and I think he's saving things up too - one revelation a week for October, with each more serious than the last?

    I get the feeling there's something in the Foundation from when she was SoS that will look like a huge pile of personal cash in exchange for a policy, from someone foreign and powerful.

    It's really difficult to read what's going on in the US right now, I've got a total of a tenner on Trump at about 5/1 from half way through the primaries, which I think represents value. But then again he could go down to a landslide, or could win a landslide if he gets the DNVs out. I haven't a bloody clue!!
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited August 2016

    An interesting question. What would be the actuarial value of the bog standard state pension for someone on the brink of retirement, assuming they had average life expectancy?

    Annuity rates for a single life, RPI linked, at age 65, are around 2.6%. So the capital value of the basic state pension (£119.30 per week) is something of the order of £238K. More for women who can still get it earlier and who, in real terms, are a worse risk.
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234

    PlatoSaid said:

    Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.

    But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.

    No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.

    No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
    ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
    I have ADHD. Where are my rich parents pls?
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    CBC of Canada and their snapshot of the race for POTUS :

    http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/uspolltracker/
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,061
    Love it

    With his re-election as Labour leader a certainty, Jeremy Corbyn has admitted he is only performing hopelessly to annoy rival Owen Smith.

    "I’m going to address tonight’s rally in Dundee facing the wrong way, spend a televised hustings failing to understand that my microphone’s broken, and when the entire Tory cabinet resigns in September I will be sorting out old folk records in the attic for three days.

    What kind of appalling political suicide case would do something like that? A political suicide case who’s going to beat Owen Smith by ten clear percentage points, that’s who"


    http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/corbyn-incompetence-just-to-wind-up-owen-smith-20160826112990
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,298
    edited August 2016
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:
    Why do I get the feeling there's something big going to (figuratively) blow up in the face of either or both Clinton or Trump before the election?

    They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
    Julian Assanage really seems to be gunning for Clinton.
    Yes, and I think he's saving things up too - one revelation a week for October, with each more serious than the last?

    I get the feeling there's something in the Foundation from when she was SoS that will look like a huge pile of personal cash in exchange for a policy, from someone foreign and powerful.

    It's really difficult to read what's going on in the US right now, I've got a total of a tenner on Trump at about 5/1 from half way through the primaries, which I think represents value. But then again he could go down to a landslide, or could win a landslide if he gets the DNVs out. I haven't a bloody clue!!
    There is already stuff in the public that looks at best shall we say ill advised and worst exactly that. One problem is the whole thing is very complex and not easy to sum up in a simple soundbite....which appears to be what is required.

    Also, even Fox don't want Trump, so who is going run with anything...and as you say it isn't exactly hard to find dodgy things about Trumps past.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,004

    I'm not wealthy claims Jeremy Corbyn, despite earning £138,000 a-year, owning a £600,000 home and £1.6million pension

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3760248/I-m-not-wealthy-claims-Jeremy-Corbyn-despite-earning-138-000-year-owning-600-000-home-1-6million-pension.html

    I'm so poor I even have to make my own jam.....

    An interesting question. What would be the actuarial value of the bog standard state pension for someone on the brink of retirement, assuming they had average life expectancy?

    Add that to the expected present value of our medical treatment, if we were to pay for it ourselves and crystallising that cashflow as a one-off lump sum payment at the point of retirement?

    We're all a lot richer than we think.
    £155.65 / week = £8093.80 / year - which requires a pot equivalent of £200,000 by my reckoning.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Pulpstar said:

    I'm not wealthy claims Jeremy Corbyn, despite earning £138,000 a-year, owning a £600,000 home and £1.6million pension

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3760248/I-m-not-wealthy-claims-Jeremy-Corbyn-despite-earning-138-000-year-owning-600-000-home-1-6million-pension.html

    I'm so poor I even have to make my own jam.....

    An interesting question. What would be the actuarial value of the bog standard state pension for someone on the brink of retirement, assuming they had average life expectancy?

    Add that to the expected present value of our medical treatment, if we were to pay for it ourselves and crystallising that cashflow as a one-off lump sum payment at the point of retirement?

    We're all a lot richer than we think.
    £155.65 / week = £8093.80 / year - which requires a pot equivalent of £200,000 by my reckoning.
    That's the 'new' state pension, which as you say is £155.65 a week (in theory).
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,004
    edited August 2016

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm not wealthy claims Jeremy Corbyn, despite earning £138,000 a-year, owning a £600,000 home and £1.6million pension

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3760248/I-m-not-wealthy-claims-Jeremy-Corbyn-despite-earning-138-000-year-owning-600-000-home-1-6million-pension.html

    I'm so poor I even have to make my own jam.....

    An interesting question. What would be the actuarial value of the bog standard state pension for someone on the brink of retirement, assuming they had average life expectancy?

    Add that to the expected present value of our medical treatment, if we were to pay for it ourselves and crystallising that cashflow as a one-off lump sum payment at the point of retirement?

    We're all a lot richer than we think.
    £155.65 / week = £8093.80 / year - which requires a pot equivalent of £200,000 by my reckoning.
    That's the 'new' state pension, which as you say is £155.65 a week (in theory).
    Is it not that in reality ?

    One of the more amusing effects of the recent changes is that my Mum will be getting her pension after my Dad (In absolute age terms) Feb 54 vs July 51 - they must be one of the closest age gap couples and first lot this has happened to :p
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Seriously?!?

    Wikileaks
    Video: Assange kitten fitted out with infra-red camera trains for spy bug hunting inside the Ecuadorian embassy https://t.co/ybmN3N0EiE
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,953

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:
    Why do I get the feeling there's something big going to (figuratively) blow up in the face of either or both Clinton or Trump before the election?

    They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
    Julian Assanage really seems to be gunning for Clinton.
    Yes, and I think he's saving things up too - one revelation a week for October, with each more serious than the last?

    I get the feeling there's something in the Foundation from when she was SoS that will look like a huge pile of personal cash in exchange for a policy, from someone foreign and powerful.

    It's really difficult to read what's going on in the US right now, I've got a total of a tenner on Trump at about 5/1 from half way through the primaries, which I think represents value. But then again he could go down to a landslide, or could win a landslide if he gets the DNVs out. I haven't a bloody clue!!
    There is already stuff in the public that looks at best shall we say ill advised. One problem is the whole thing is very complex and not easy to sum up in a simple soundbite....which appears to be what is required.

    Also, even Fox don't want Trump, so who is going run with anything...and as you say it isn't exactly hard to find dodgy things about Trumps past.
    Yes, the smoking gun, for either candidate, won't necessarily be the worst thing they've ever done, but rather something that makes for a simple soundbite that can't be easily explained away. If either side can make something stick for a week, the election is as good as over. It'll be something like "Trump doesn't pay his taxes" or "Hillary took a bribe" with no caveats.

    It will be interesting to see how the media react though, as you say even Fox aren't huge Trump fans and most are now starting to get upset with Hillary hiding away and hoping to say nothing between now and the election.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    GeoffM said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.

    But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.

    This is part of the problem: I am sitting very close to three (very attractive) teenage girls on the train. All probably about seventeen.

    As I type they are all busy on their iPhones posing and taking selfies of themselves.
    It's provided newspapers with an endless supply of photos when they become media fodder. The pouting selfie look is so weird. All head down, shoulders up, eyes coquettish.

    I honestly thought the 'selfie stick' was a joke for ages - then saw one. It's vanity on a scale I can't fathom. As a teenager, I'd a boyfriend who spent most of the time admiring himself in shop windows - he'd be in element now, shame he's 50 :wink:
    Do you remember, from last October, the Dildo Selfie Stick?

    Unfortunately it turned out to be fake but it spawned some other fun spoof gadgets being advertised afterwards. This Dildo Hoverboard advert is brilliant and seriously NSFW ... or most home environments too.


    Epic :lol:
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,001
    JackW said:

    CBC of Canada and their snapshot of the race for POTUS :

    http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/uspolltracker/

    I dunno, if I was a Canadian I'd be miffed if my tax dollars were being spent on doing such detailed coverage of an election in another country. They aren't even adding anything new to the mix, there are a dozen or so similar sites.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,298
    edited August 2016
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:
    Why do I get the feeling there's something big going to (figuratively) blow up in the face of either or both Clinton or Trump before the election?

    They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
    Julian Assanage really seems to be gunning for Clinton.
    Yes, and I think he's saving things up too - one revelation a week for October, with each more serious than the last?

    I get the feeling there's something in the Foundation from when she was SoS that will look like a huge pile of personal cash in exchange for a policy, from someone foreign and powerful.

    It's really difficult to read what's going on in the US right now, I've got a total of a tenner on Trump at about 5/1 from half way through the primaries, which I think represents value. But then again he could go down to a landslide, or could win a landslide if he gets the DNVs out. I haven't a bloody clue!!
    There is already stuff in the public that looks at best shall we say ill advised. One problem is the whole thing is very complex and not easy to sum up in a simple soundbite....which appears to be what is required.

    Also, even Fox don't want Trump, so who is going run with anything...and as you say it isn't exactly hard to find dodgy things about Trumps past.
    Yes, the smoking gun, for either candidate, won't necessarily be the worst thing they've ever done, but rather something that makes for a simple soundbite that can't be easily explained away. If either side can make something stick for a week, the election is as good as over. It'll be something like "Trump doesn't pay his taxes" or "Hillary took a bribe" with no caveats.

    It will be interesting to see how the media react though, as you say even Fox aren't huge Trump fans and most are now starting to get upset with Hillary hiding away and hoping to say nothing between now and the election.
    I think a lot of people want is a "do over"....what they need is RON (reopen nominations) option....can we start again.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Mr. Urquhart, the people have spoken.

    It turns out they're idiots.

    :p
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Pulpstar said:

    Is it not that in reality ?

    Not if you were 'contracted out' at any time
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,061

    Mr. Urquhart, the people have spoken.

    It turns out they're idiots.

    :p

    Twas ever thus. We know for certain many think it of us right now.
  • Options
    The Labour conference security problem has been sorted. Len McCluskey will be pissed off about that. Poor old Len.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/26/labour-security-deal-to-rescue-party-conference-ocs-group
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,001

    The Labour conference security problem has been sorted. Len McCluskey will be pissed off about that. Poor old Len.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/26/labour-security-deal-to-rescue-party-conference-ocs-group

    They probably had to pay through the nose for it.
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    edited August 2016

    PlatoSaid said:

    Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.

    But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.

    No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.

    No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
    ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
    I have ADHD. Where are my rich parents pls?
    what stupid thing to type. Lol. I wonder if people who say such things actually know people with ADHD?
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Marie le Conte
    LABOUR CONFERENCE IS HAPPENING! https://t.co/A2rXrSMgwA

    OCS?!?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,953

    The Labour conference security problem has been sorted. Len McCluskey will be pissed off about that. Poor old Len.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/26/labour-security-deal-to-rescue-party-conference-ocs-group

    I really hope OCS did their quote and put a zero on the end for the hassle and short notice. :D
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Mr. kle4, Churchill did say the best argument against democracy was a five minute conversation with the average voter.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,061
    RobD said:

    The Labour conference security problem has been sorted. Len McCluskey will be pissed off about that. Poor old Len.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/26/labour-security-deal-to-rescue-party-conference-ocs-group

    They probably had to pay through the nose for it.
    Given they wanted to go with the people they had previously decided to boycott rather than this current lot, it's hard to see how it cannot have been very expensive, comparitively.

    But one problem the party does not have right now is funds. Thanks Jeremy!
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    LBC
    Five men have been arrested in Birmingham and Stoke-on-Trent by West Midlands Police on suspicion of terrorism offences.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:
    Why do I get the feeling there's something big going to (figuratively) blow up in the face of either or both Clinton or Trump before the election?

    They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
    Julian Assanage really seems to be gunning for Clinton.
    Yes, and I think he's saving things up too - one revelation a week for October, with each more serious than the last?

    I get the feeling there's something in the Foundation from when she was SoS that will look like a huge pile of personal cash in exchange for a policy, from someone foreign and powerful.

    It's really difficult to read what's going on in the US right now, I've got a total of a tenner on Trump at about 5/1 from half way through the primaries, which I think represents value. But then again he could go down to a landslide, or could win a landslide if he gets the DNVs out. I haven't a bloody clue!!
    There is already stuff in the public that looks at best shall we say ill advised and worst exactly that. One problem is the whole thing is very complex and not easy to sum up in a simple soundbite....which appears to be what is required.

    Also, even Fox don't want Trump, so who is going run with anything...and as you say it isn't exactly hard to find dodgy things about Trumps past.
    Vote Trump in and impeach him within 3 months. The obvious solution.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    PlatoSaid said:

    Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.

    But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.

    No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.

    No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
    ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
    I have ADHD. Where are my rich parents pls?
    I have a nephew with it. ADHD definitely exists and can be quite difficult to manage, and his parents have been as loving and patient as saints with him.

    It may be over diagnosed, and not always treated appropriately, just like dyslexia, dyspraxia and aspergers, and all of these can be used as excuses rather than pathways to appropriate treatment.
  • Options
    PlatoSaid said:

    LBC
    Five men have been arrested in Birmingham and Stoke-on-Trent by West Midlands Police on suspicion of terrorism offences.

    Known locally as Bungle, Zippy, George, Rod and Jane?
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Sandpit said:

    The Labour conference security problem has been sorted. Len McCluskey will be pissed off about that. Poor old Len.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/26/labour-security-deal-to-rescue-party-conference-ocs-group

    I really hope OCS did their quote and put a zero on the end for the hassle and short notice. :D
    The conference bogs will be sparkling though.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Miss Plato, ah, terrorism. The crime that is now prepared, but not committed.

    They're going to have to start shouting "This is terrorism" to get that coverage now.
  • Options
    MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    Thank you for the pension calculations chaps.

    Anyone got any idea about the lump sum value of our healthcare costs?
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    PlatoSaid said:

    LBC
    Five men have been arrested in Birmingham and Stoke-on-Trent by West Midlands Police on suspicion of terrorism offences.

    Yes, but what were they wearing?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Mr. D, because F1 has silly bugger rules. Alonso's got about a 30-35 place grid penalty.
  • Options

    Mr. D, because F1 has silly bugger rules. Alonso's got about a 30-35 place grid penalty.

    Perhaps they have to go to the back of the line for visiting cars entering the car park.
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    RobD said:
    That just shows how pointless the rule is. Any places should be split between remaining races until they are all used up.
  • Options
    theakestheakes Posts: 842
    There is very scant evidence to support a Conservative lead of 11%. If anything all the recent ACTUAL polling date suggests they are falling back. But anyway no government is going to call for two votes of no confidence in itself and expect the media and public to keep a straight face.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    John_M said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    LBC
    Five men have been arrested in Birmingham and Stoke-on-Trent by West Midlands Police on suspicion of terrorism offences.

    Yes, but what were they wearing?
    They're talented rappers and young footballers. Neighbours said they'd do anything, for anyone.

    ...

    Oh and mentally ill, sad loners - who kept themselves to themselves. And not religious at all. Ate bacon, ogled at girls and drank like fish.

    Is that all the bases covered? :smirk:
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,953
    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:
    Why do I get the feeling there's something big going to (figuratively) blow up in the face of either or both Clinton or Trump before the election?

    They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
    Julian Assanage really seems to be gunning for Clinton.
    Yes, and I think he's saving things up too - one revelation a week for October, with each more serious than the last?

    I get the feeling there's something in the Foundation from when she was SoS that will look like a huge pile of personal cash in exchange for a policy, from someone foreign and powerful.

    It's really difficult to read what's going on in the US right now, I've got a total of a tenner on Trump at about 5/1 from half way through the primaries, which I think represents value. But then again he could go down to a landslide, or could win a landslide if he gets the DNVs out. I haven't a bloody clue!!
    There is already stuff in the public that looks at best shall we say ill advised and worst exactly that. One problem is the whole thing is very complex and not easy to sum up in a simple soundbite....which appears to be what is required.

    Also, even Fox don't want Trump, so who is going run with anything...and as you say it isn't exactly hard to find dodgy things about Trumps past.
    Vote Trump in and impeach him within 3 months. The obvious solution.
    Would enough Senate Republicans vote to impeach him though?

    If the sitting President is impeached and kicked out, what is the process to determine his replacement?
  • Options
    Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,626

    The Labour conference security problem has been sorted. Len McCluskey will be pissed off about that. Poor old Len.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/26/labour-security-deal-to-rescue-party-conference-ocs-group

    Look out for a congratulatory tweet from McCluskey to McNichol, or perhaps not. Rescuing the conference without using an unacceptable security firm is quite an achievement by McNichol.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,298
    edited August 2016
    PlatoSaid said:

    John_M said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    LBC
    Five men have been arrested in Birmingham and Stoke-on-Trent by West Midlands Police on suspicion of terrorism offences.

    Yes, but what were they wearing?
    They're talented rappers and young footballers. Neighbours said they'd do anything, for anyone.

    ...

    Oh and mentally ill, sad loners - who kept themselves to themselves. And not religious at all. Ate bacon, ogled at girls and drank like fish.

    Is that all the bases covered? :smirk:
    You missed out the gay tendencies and obsessed with right wing extremists, and definitely didn't have any money in their bank accounts.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    Thank you for the pension calculations chaps.

    Anyone got any idea about the lump sum value of our healthcare costs?

    That's harder! There's also the social-care costs to be considered as well, although of course lots of people aren't entitled to full or indeed any state help with that.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Mr. Urquhart, I believe if you get a 100 place penalty, Barack Obama makes a live broadcast telling you to get to the back of the queue.
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    PlatoSaid said:

    John_M said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    LBC
    Five men have been arrested in Birmingham and Stoke-on-Trent by West Midlands Police on suspicion of terrorism offences.

    Yes, but what were they wearing?
    They're talented rappers and young footballers. Neighbours said they'd do anything, for anyone.

    ...

    Oh and mentally ill, sad loners - who kept themselves to themselves. And not religious at all. Ate bacon, ogled at girls and drank like fish.

    Is that all the bases covered? :smirk:
    I believe you have reached the minimum levels of cynicism required for Q3 2016. Bravo!
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,298
    edited August 2016
    If they people already do security for the location, why didn't they just go to them in the first place (given they know they wouldn't use the two big boys)?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,953

    Mr. Urquhart, I believe if you get a 100 place penalty, Barack Obama makes a live broadcast telling you to get to the back of the queue.

    A 100 place penalty - will that become known as a Hamilton?
  • Options

    Mr. Urquhart, I believe if you get a 100 place penalty, Barack Obama makes a live broadcast telling you to get to the back of the queue.

    LOL...then on race day you actually find your car has been placed on the front row?
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37193801


    are we starting to actually save enough?
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    I am sure Momentum are going through everything they can find about OCS Group to prove that they are unfit to work with the beloved Jeremy.

    Time for another boycott, I reckon
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,001
    theakes said:

    There is very scant evidence to support a Conservative lead of 11%. If anything all the recent ACTUAL polling date suggests they are falling back. But anyway no government is going to call for two votes of no confidence in itself and expect the media and public to keep a straight face.

    As much as polls got a bad rep last election, I'm not sure they've sunk enough as to render them useless, especially against an unrepresentative set of by-elections.
  • Options

    I am sure Momentum are going through everything they can find about OCS Group to prove that they are unfit to work with the beloved Jeremy.

    Time for another boycott, I reckon

    I hope they have never worked a Tory event or a Gary Barlow concert....
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    nunu said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37193801


    are we starting to actually save enough?

    No. But the economy doesn't want us to save right now. Time for us all to buy those ballgowns and tiaras we've always wanted.
  • Options
    Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,819
    .
    theakes said:

    There is very scant evidence to support a Conservative lead of 11%. If anything all the recent ACTUAL polling date suggests they are falling back. But anyway no government is going to call for two votes of no confidence in itself and expect the media and public to keep a straight face.

    Aside, of course, from all the actual polls.
    So, on one side, we've got YouGov, Mori, ICM, TNS all pointing to ~double-digit polling leads for the Tories. And "Best PM", confidence in Leader, economic credibility questions all compatible with, if anything, larger leads.

    On the other, we have - sorry, you'll have to help me out. What was your "ACTUAL polling data"?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,001

    .

    theakes said:

    There is very scant evidence to support a Conservative lead of 11%. If anything all the recent ACTUAL polling date suggests they are falling back. But anyway no government is going to call for two votes of no confidence in itself and expect the media and public to keep a straight face.

    Aside, of course, from all the actual polls.
    So, on one side, we've got YouGov, Mori, ICM, TNS all pointing to ~double-digit polling leads for the Tories. And "Best PM", confidence in Leader, economic credibility questions all compatible with, if anything, larger leads.

    On the other, we have - sorry, you'll have to help me out. What was your "ACTUAL polling data"?
    Parish by-elections... titters :D
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,004

    Thank you for the pension calculations chaps.

    Anyone got any idea about the lump sum value of our healthcare costs?

    That's harder! There's also the social-care costs to be considered as well, although of course lots of people aren't entitled to full or indeed any state help with that.
    Going to see if I can calculate the internal rate of return on my pension pot this evening...
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    edited August 2016
    Sandpit said:

    Mr. Urquhart, I believe if you get a 100 place penalty, Barack Obama makes a live broadcast telling you to get to the back of the queue.

    A 100 place penalty - will that become known as a Hamilton?
    But Hamilton is on the $10 bill. So presumably, Hamilton is on a triple-Hamilton (or given that 1+1+1= a Nelson) a Nelson Hamilton, otherwise know as a Lady Nelson. Or should it be a Lady Hamilton?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,001
    Pulpstar said:

    Thank you for the pension calculations chaps.

    Anyone got any idea about the lump sum value of our healthcare costs?

    That's harder! There's also the social-care costs to be considered as well, although of course lots of people aren't entitled to full or indeed any state help with that.
    Going to see if I can calculate the internal rate of return on my pension pot this evening...
    I have access to a supercomputer cluster if you need it... ;)
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956
    MTimT said:

    Mortimer said:

    MTimT said:

    Mr. M, it's interesting being in the generation on the crest of the internet wave. I can remember nobody having mobile phones, and it being a bit weird to shop online.

    It's already changing society drastically.

    Education is what it will change most drastically, IMO. Our daughter came to us aged 15 and said she did not want to waste time going to (bricks and mortar) school anymore. We told her to make the case, she did. Came up with an online, distance learning school, with tutors for each subject at the end of an email or phone call to discuss her work.

    No commute, no homework, working at her own speed when she was self-motivated to do so, sleeping in when she needed so she never did schoolwork sleepy. Freed up probably 3-5 hours a day to ride her horses. Happy girl, grades went from B-/C+ average to straight As

    From the teacher's perspective, also more efficient. She/he only got involved when the daughter had questions, or to mark assigned work. With many of the assignments tested online, even marking time was reduced.

    I am now a huge fan of MOOCs (massive open on-line courses) which means you can get free Bachelor's level university courses and work them at your own speed. Why anyone would pay to go to university is beyond me (as his daughter is about to start her final year at the US' most expensive private university ;) )

    My mate runs Massolit. Might be worth a look?

    Not free, but also not expensive. And very good quality.
    Shame it seems to lack science completely. Or have I missed something.
    It is arts only - Apols, I forgot to mention that!
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    edited August 2016
    Pulpstar said:

    Thank you for the pension calculations chaps.

    Anyone got any idea about the lump sum value of our healthcare costs?

    That's harder! There's also the social-care costs to be considered as well, although of course lots of people aren't entitled to full or indeed any state help with that.
    Going to see if I can calculate the internal rate of return on my pension pot this evening...
    Glad to see I'm not the only one living the rock and roll life.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Sandpit said:

    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:
    Why do I get the feeling there's something big going to (figuratively) blow up in the face of either or both Clinton or Trump before the election?

    They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
    Julian Assanage really seems to be gunning for Clinton.
    Yes, and I think he's saving things up too - one revelation a week for October, with each more serious than the last?

    I get the feeling there's something in the Foundation from when she was SoS that will look like a huge pile of personal cash in exchange for a policy, from someone foreign and powerful.

    It's really difficult to read what's going on in the US right now, I've got a total of a tenner on Trump at about 5/1 from half way through the primaries, which I think represents value. But then again he could go down to a landslide, or could win a landslide if he gets the DNVs out. I haven't a bloody clue!!
    There is already stuff in the public that looks at best shall we say ill advised and worst exactly that. One problem is the whole thing is very complex and not easy to sum up in a simple soundbite....which appears to be what is required.

    Also, even Fox don't want Trump, so who is going run with anything...and as you say it isn't exactly hard to find dodgy things about Trumps past.
    Vote Trump in and impeach him within 3 months. The obvious solution.
    Would enough Senate Republicans vote to impeach him though?

    If the sitting President is impeached and kicked out, what is the process to determine his replacement?
    I think the Senate GOP is more anti-Trump than the House GOP
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Thank you for the pension calculations chaps.

    Anyone got any idea about the lump sum value of our healthcare costs?

    That's harder! There's also the social-care costs to be considered as well, although of course lots of people aren't entitled to full or indeed any state help with that.
    Going to see if I can calculate the internal rate of return on my pension pot this evening...
    I have access to a supercomputer cluster if you need it... ;)
    For the super computer will be a light relief from trying to figure out the Points Race in the Olympic Omnium Race.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    edited August 2016

    I am sure Momentum are going through everything they can find about OCS Group to prove that they are unfit to work with the beloved Jeremy.

    Time for another boycott, I reckon

    I hope they have never worked a Tory event or a Gary Barlow concert....
    The Google search trend of OCS+Israel will peak shortly.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,953
    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Mr. Urquhart, I believe if you get a 100 place penalty, Barack Obama makes a live broadcast telling you to get to the back of the queue.

    A 100 place penalty - will that become known as a Hamilton?
    But Hamilton is on the $10 bill. So presumably, Hamilton is on a triple-Hamilton (or given that 1+1+1= a Nelson) a Nelson Hamilton, otherwise know as a Lady Nelson. Or should it be a Lady Hamilton?
    I knew that Lewis was trying to make a name for himself in the States, but never thought that a play about him would be sold out for a year on Broadway.
  • Options
    MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651

    Thank you for the pension calculations chaps.

    Anyone got any idea about the lump sum value of our healthcare costs?

    That's harder! There's also the social-care costs to be considered as well, although of course lots of people aren't entitled to full or indeed any state help with that.
    Yes I didn't want to throw the social care provision into the mix for that reason!

    I also wonder, though this would be even harder to get hold of, to what extent the bill varies between demographic groups. Richer folk tend to live quite a lot longer so do even better on the state pension (but not in fact by much because of how discounting works) but I imagine their worst periods of health and hence demand for medical care tend to be postponed, so in that sense may be cheaper. (On the other hand if they have a longer period of being old perhaps it is really a bigger bill spread over a longer period of time, but my impression was that the period of serious illness/infirmity at the tail end of life is probably not dissimilar between demographics, just strikes later/earlier.)
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Sandpit said:

    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Mr. Urquhart, I believe if you get a 100 place penalty, Barack Obama makes a live broadcast telling you to get to the back of the queue.

    A 100 place penalty - will that become known as a Hamilton?
    But Hamilton is on the $10 bill. So presumably, Hamilton is on a triple-Hamilton (or given that 1+1+1= a Nelson) a Nelson Hamilton, otherwise know as a Lady Nelson. Or should it be a Lady Hamilton?
    I knew that Lewis was trying to make a name for himself in the States, but never thought that a play about him would be sold out for a year on Broadway.
    Indeed, who'd have thunk a rapping musical about a long-dead politician would be a hit?
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    As someone who works in the field of accident prevention, I do sincerely believe in accountability and that, in extremis, incompetence can become criminal negligence. But criminalization of errors or incompetence worries me a lot:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-37194947

    I am eager to find more details of this case - with an open mind. She may or may not deserve this sentence.

    However, there have been egregious examples of criminalization of medical errors in both the US and New Zealand that have had a terrible impact on healthcare delivery. I hope the same is not beginning to happen in the UK.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Mr. Nabavi, old stats (a while since I was at university) but the US has very high levels of psych disorders (four times the rate of psychopathology as the UK, for example).

    Some attribute that to the more individualistic nature of society, even compared to the rest of the West.

    Are you sure that's not a measure of the number of practising psychiatrists, though?
    There may be an element of that.

    There are some thoughtful posts on ADHD by this retired Child Psychiatrist on his blog on that very subject.

    http://cockroachcatcher.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/ADHD?m=0

    I think that modern life does exacerbate ADHD, which like many mental health diagnoses are on a spectrum from mild to incapacitating. The hyper stimulation of computer games is not good for my nephew. The contemplative patience building tasks of gardening and modelmaking are good for him, but he does need pills at times too.

    I don't think that he will ever find it easy to concentrate, but with practice he gets better, and better adapted to the world. He can be a charming boy as well as an exasperating one.

    The utility of such diagnoses is in the path to treatment, and often behavioural therapy is the best way. Sometimes it is used as an excuse so: "Tommy is no good at that, he has ADHD" rather than "Tommy has to work harder at that than most boys because of his ADHD".
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,034
    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Mr. Urquhart, I believe if you get a 100 place penalty, Barack Obama makes a live broadcast telling you to get to the back of the queue.

    A 100 place penalty - will that become known as a Hamilton?
    But Hamilton is on the $10 bill. So presumably, Hamilton is on a triple-Hamilton (or given that 1+1+1= a Nelson) a Nelson Hamilton, otherwise know as a Lady Nelson. Or should it be a Lady Hamilton?
    I knew that Lewis was trying to make a name for himself in the States, but never thought that a play about him would be sold out for a year on Broadway.
    Indeed, who'd have thunk a rapping musical about a long-dead politician would be a hit?
    If I ever here any part of Hamilton the musical again I will scream. My 14 year old twins seem to spend their entire life playing either Hamilton or far more obscure American musicals...

    I dread to think how much I will spend getting tickets for the musical when it starts in London...
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Mr. T, speaking of accident prevention, I heard somewhere that Roman architects, who built bridges, had to stand beneath them as the scaffolding was taken down, to ensure the architect was confident they'd stay up.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,061
    I see the Greens want their status as Labour bootlickers to be confirmed.

    Greens' Caroline Lucas proposes Labour election pact

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37188899
  • Options
    DeClareDeClare Posts: 483
    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    kle4 said:



    And yet the very premise of this piece, and the concern many have with the FTPA, is that people have the temptation. Just the possibility of it causes disruption, recriminations at lost opportunities (if we had no FTPA and May did not got for a snap election now then, somehow, lost the next election, you can bet there'd be complaints).

    The negative of binding a future parliament (except it is not really bound, since repeal will always be possible, it will just be politically more costly to try) would seem to me to be less than the positive of eliminating the possibility of partisan based scheduling of elections, whether they are likely or not.

    Yet the governing party can still call an election. It simply has to pass a vote of no confidence in itself, and as no other government can be formed, and election must be called.

    I'm also somewhat opposed to legislation that require more than a simple majority of Parliament to get things done. The two thirds majority stinks.
    It's not perfect. But having to pass a no confidence motion against itself is a much tougher proposition (because it sounds stupid) than a government just deciding it wants an election now thank you very much. And making it tougher to call an election whenever you want, which would be for political purposes, is on balance a good thing.
    I thought that a motion of 'This House has no confidence in her majesty's government' had to be put by an opposition party or at least by members who no longer take the government whip.

    Would the speaker really allow the government to put down a motion that they have no confidence in themselves just as a convenience to gain themselves an advantage?

    I know Bercow used to be a Tory but if he cares about the integrity of the House of Commons, he should ban such a contrived move unless it has the support of one of the larger opposition parties, or enough other MPs to outweigh the government majority which of course at the present time it doesn't.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,447
    kle4 said:

    I see the Greens want their status as Labour bootlickers to be confirmed.

    Greens' Caroline Lucas proposes Labour election pact

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37188899

    Very clear that this is her personal view.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,631
    kle4 said:

    I see the Greens want their status as Labour bootlickers to be confirmed.

    Greens' Caroline Lucas proposes Labour election pact

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37188899

    It was the Lib Dems with Blair and now the Greens under Corbyn. What a time to be alive.
  • Options

    .

    theakes said:

    There is very scant evidence to support a Conservative lead of 11%. If anything all the recent ACTUAL polling date suggests they are falling back. But anyway no government is going to call for two votes of no confidence in itself and expect the media and public to keep a straight face.

    Aside, of course, from all the actual polls.
    So, on one side, we've got YouGov, Mori, ICM, TNS all pointing to ~double-digit polling leads for the Tories. And "Best PM", confidence in Leader, economic credibility questions all compatible with, if anything, larger leads.

    On the other, we have - sorry, you'll have to help me out. What was your "ACTUAL polling data"?
    The main problem with the polls is their tendency to over state Labour vote share. Factor that in and 15 point leads will become the base line.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,061

    kle4 said:

    I see the Greens want their status as Labour bootlickers to be confirmed.

    Greens' Caroline Lucas proposes Labour election pact

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37188899

    Very clear that this is her personal view.
    Yes I know - but popular perception is Lucas = The Greens, I don't regard the generalization as particularly egregious as offences go.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,001
    DeClare said:

    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    kle4 said:



    And yet the very premise of this piece, and the concern many have with the FTPA, is that people have the temptation. Just the possibility of it causes disruption, recriminations at lost opportunities (if we had no FTPA and May did not got for a snap election now then, somehow, lost the next election, you can bet there'd be complaints).

    The negative of binding a future parliament (except it is not really bound, since repeal will always be possible, it will just be politically more costly to try) would seem to me to be less than the positive of eliminating the possibility of partisan based scheduling of elections, whether they are likely or not.

    Yet the governing party can still call an election. It simply has to pass a vote of no confidence in itself, and as no other government can be formed, and election must be called.

    I'm also somewhat opposed to legislation that require more than a simple majority of Parliament to get things done. The two thirds majority stinks.
    It's not perfect. But having to pass a no confidence motion against itself is a much tougher proposition (because it sounds stupid) than a government just deciding it wants an election now thank you very much. And making it tougher to call an election whenever you want, which would be for political purposes, is on balance a good thing.
    I thought that a motion of 'This House has no confidence in her majesty's government' had to be put by an opposition party or at least by members who no longer take the government whip.

    Would the speaker really allow the government to put down a motion that they have no confidence in themselves just as a convenience to gain themselves an advantage?

    I know Bercow used to be a Tory but if he cares about the integrity of the House of Commons, he should ban such a contrived move unless it has the support of one of the larger opposition parties, or enough other MPs to outweigh the government majority which of course at the present time it doesn't.
    Surely a backbench MP of any party can legitimately put down the motion. Parliament as a whole is supposed to hold the government to account, not just opposition MPs.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,447
    MaxPB said:

    kle4 said:

    I see the Greens want their status as Labour bootlickers to be confirmed.

    Greens' Caroline Lucas proposes Labour election pact

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37188899

    It was the Lib Dems with Blair and now the Greens under Corbyn. What a time to be alive.
    Greens would be mad to trust Labour on a seats pact.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956
    MTimT said:

    As someone who works in the field of accident prevention, I do sincerely believe in accountability and that, in extremis, incompetence can become criminal negligence. But criminalization of errors or incompetence worries me a lot:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-37194947

    I am eager to find more details of this case - with an open mind. She may or may not deserve this sentence.

    However, there have been egregious examples of criminalization of medical errors in both the US and New Zealand that have had a terrible impact on healthcare delivery. I hope the same is not beginning to happen in the UK.

    Bizarre. I just don't get at what point the CPS became involved...?
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,341
    edited August 2016
    Sandpit said:

    MTimT said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    PlatoSaid said:
    Why do I get the feeling there's something big going to (figuratively) blow up in the face of either or both Clinton or Trump before the election?

    They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
    Julian Assanage really seems to be gunning for Clinton.
    Yes, and I think he's saving things up too - one revelation a week for October, with each more serious than the last?

    I get the feeling there's something in the Foundation from when she was SoS that will look like a huge pile of personal cash in exchange for a policy, from someone foreign and powerful.

    It's really difficult to read what's going on in the US right now, I've got a total of a tenner on Trump at about 5/1 from half way through the primaries, which I think represents value. But then again he could go down to a landslide, or could win a landslide if he gets the DNVs out. I haven't a bloody clue!!
    There is already stuff in the public that looks at best shall we say ill advised and worst exactly that. One problem is the whole thing is very complex and not easy to sum up in a simple soundbite....which appears to be what is required.

    Also, even Fox don't want Trump, so who is going run with anything...and as you say it isn't exactly hard to find dodgy things about Trumps past.
    Vote Trump in and impeach him within 3 months. The obvious solution.
    Would enough Senate Republicans vote to impeach him though?

    If the sitting President is impeached and kicked out, what is the process to determine his replacement?
    Simple - the Vice President becomes President, until at least the next election.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956

    MaxPB said:

    kle4 said:

    I see the Greens want their status as Labour bootlickers to be confirmed.

    Greens' Caroline Lucas proposes Labour election pact

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37188899

    It was the Lib Dems with Blair and now the Greens under Corbyn. What a time to be alive.
    Greens would be mad to trust Labour on a seats pact.
    There seem to be a few too many words in that sentence

    Presumably you meant to write that anyone 'would be mad to trust Labour'
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I see the Greens want their status as Labour bootlickers to be confirmed.

    Greens' Caroline Lucas proposes Labour election pact

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37188899

    Very clear that this is her personal view.
    Yes I know - but popular perception is Lucas = The Greens, I don't regard the generalization as particularly egregious as offences go.
    Indeed. She's the only one I could name - even putting some effort in for money.
  • Options
    William_HWilliam_H Posts: 346
    RobD said:

    The Labour conference security problem has been sorted. Len McCluskey will be pissed off about that. Poor old Len.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/26/labour-security-deal-to-rescue-party-conference-ocs-group

    They probably had to pay through the nose for it.
    Well, so long as people keep challenging Corbyn for leader they won't short of cash
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,001
    Mortimer said:

    MTimT said:

    As someone who works in the field of accident prevention, I do sincerely believe in accountability and that, in extremis, incompetence can become criminal negligence. But criminalization of errors or incompetence worries me a lot:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-37194947

    I am eager to find more details of this case - with an open mind. She may or may not deserve this sentence.

    However, there have been egregious examples of criminalization of medical errors in both the US and New Zealand that have had a terrible impact on healthcare delivery. I hope the same is not beginning to happen in the UK.

    Bizarre. I just don't get at what point the CPS became involved...?
    Yes, surely it would be a civil matter?
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I see the Greens want their status as Labour bootlickers to be confirmed.

    Greens' Caroline Lucas proposes Labour election pact

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37188899

    Very clear that this is her personal view.
    Yes I know - but popular perception is Lucas = The Greens, I don't regard the generalization as particularly egregious as offences go.
    And she has very much always been a watermelon rather than a mango
  • Options
    jayfdeejayfdee Posts: 618
    I always thought OCS was "Office cleaning services", but I suppose I am outdated, and they have diversified, or maybe I am totally wrong.
    Anyway not sure this story is finished yet.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,061
    GeoffM said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I see the Greens want their status as Labour bootlickers to be confirmed.

    Greens' Caroline Lucas proposes Labour election pact

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37188899

    Very clear that this is her personal view.
    Yes I know - but popular perception is Lucas = The Greens, I don't regard the generalization as particularly egregious as offences go.
    Indeed. She's the only one I could name - even putting some effort in for money.
    Well we should all know one - Larry Sanders, the brother of Bernie Sanders.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Mortimer said:

    MTimT said:

    As someone who works in the field of accident prevention, I do sincerely believe in accountability and that, in extremis, incompetence can become criminal negligence. But criminalization of errors or incompetence worries me a lot:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-37194947

    I am eager to find more details of this case - with an open mind. She may or may not deserve this sentence.

    However, there have been egregious examples of criminalization of medical errors in both the US and New Zealand that have had a terrible impact on healthcare delivery. I hope the same is not beginning to happen in the UK.

    Bizarre. I just don't get at what point the CPS became involved...?
    From reading the case, the optician made several mistakes on top of missing the sign of brain disease. Photos were taken at the visit and were not looked at, or if looked at were not correctly interpreted. This was the evidence that the condition existed at the time of the initial examination. There was also evidence of falsifying records to try to cover up.

  • Options
    scotslassscotslass Posts: 912
    I have just seen the Labour debate in Scotland. Whatever else happens then Kezia Dugdale cannot continue as Labour leader. When her name was mentioned the audience LAUGHED ie a Labour audience laughs at the mention of their leader. Whatever trouble Corbyn is in Dugdale is n much deeper.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Conflict News
    ISIS video shows children of foreign fighters executing 5 Kurdish captives in #Raqqa - @jenanmoussa

    https://t.co/7b5NRsdJg3

    MORE: One of the child executioners is a child of a British foreign fighter - @jenanmoussa

    https://t.co/BbZrOKWWlB
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    Mr. T, speaking of accident prevention, I heard somewhere that Roman architects, who built bridges, had to stand beneath them as the scaffolding was taken down, to ensure the architect was confident they'd stay up.

    :0 Whem Aya Sofia was completed, it was taken as an act of faith to enter the building in order to pray.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,001
    scotslass said:

    I have just seen the Labour debate in Scotland. Whatever else happens then Kezia Dugdale cannot continue as Labour leader. When her name was mentioned the audience LAUGHED ie a Labour audience laughs at the mention of their leader. Whatever trouble Corbyn is in Dugdale is n much deeper.

    Isn't that just because she backs Smith?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Mr. T, if that's a Byzantine church, didn't it collapse a few times due to earthquakes?

    Anyway, I'm off for the evening.

    Qualifying tomorrow. Huzzah!
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    RobD said:

    scotslass said:

    I have just seen the Labour debate in Scotland. Whatever else happens then Kezia Dugdale cannot continue as Labour leader. When her name was mentioned the audience LAUGHED ie a Labour audience laughs at the mention of their leader. Whatever trouble Corbyn is in Dugdale is n much deeper.

    Isn't that just because she backs Smith?
    She also managed to lead Labour into 3rd place in the Scottish Parliament.

    It is amazing she has lasted so long.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    Mortimer said:

    MTimT said:

    As someone who works in the field of accident prevention, I do sincerely believe in accountability and that, in extremis, incompetence can become criminal negligence. But criminalization of errors or incompetence worries me a lot:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-37194947

    I am eager to find more details of this case - with an open mind. She may or may not deserve this sentence.

    However, there have been egregious examples of criminalization of medical errors in both the US and New Zealand that have had a terrible impact on healthcare delivery. I hope the same is not beginning to happen in the UK.

    Bizarre. I just don't get at what point the CPS became involved...?
    From reading the case, the optician made several mistakes on top of missing the sign of brain disease. Photos were taken at the visit and were not looked at, or if looked at were not correctly interpreted. This was the evidence that the condition existed at the time of the initial examination. There was also evidence of falsifying records to try to cover up.

    Falsification of records is clear indication of criminality - that's why it's important to get all the details of the case. But even a series of egregious errors is not, per se, criminal. It is more usually an indication of more systemic problems.

This discussion has been closed.