Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
MD, it was a great time, I used to get monthly pay rises, beer and cars were cheap and life was great.
If you liked eating your meal by candlelight.
Richard , a mere inconvenience, just eat before dark
Most results have been totally unexpected in recent years, so Vlad 'heterosexual' Putin has to be a possibility. If there was a book open on him, I'd fancy Noel Fielding if he was at a good price. But the smart money has to be Cambridge Analytica.
In the same vein, the local elections are likely to see a big UKIP revival in London while the Lib Dems sweep the board in the North. Meanwhile the only consolation for Labour is picking up Tunbridge Wells for the first time.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
MD, it was a great time, I used to get monthly pay rises, beer and cars were cheap and life was great.
If you liked eating your meal by candlelight.
Richard , a mere inconvenience, just eat before dark
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
I spent most of the 70s walking to school in Brussels (my father was in the FO and posted there). Any 7 year old boy walking the streets of Brussels today would find himself dragooned as a Bacha Bazi by sunset.
One of my childhood memories is of Bernard Donoughue coming to dinner at our house. I asked my father why the guest kept putting his head in his hands and he replied, "Your mother keeps mentioning Anthony Wedgewood-Benn."
Pete Wishart Verified account @PeteWishart 1h1 hour ago Vince Cable on #Marr (no SNP, of course) talking ‘hostile environment’. They were in Government when this was unleashed and Clegg was one of its main cheerleaders. Only Sarah Teather opposed.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
That's unusual now. Most parents now think like my parents do today, when they say they can't believe they let us go to and from school on our own.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
I don't have any kids, but the 'catchment' secondary is just over 7 miles away down an A road - are kids expected to walk that ?
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
Sure, there were momennts of trouble, and Seventies Britain looks a different world, but not all bad. The Yesterday channel is repeating "Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads? always one of my favourites. Comedy, but with great insight.
I recall the 70’s, since it was I was in my thirties and I recall saying at my 40th birthday party that it seemed a good to be about and what a great group of friends I had. As Foxy says, there were some bad things happening, but it was all still going to get better! As per the 60’s.
It was the 80’s when things went wrong.
I enjoyed the 80's too. My one big fear was nuclear war.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
Paywalled, not quite as sensational as the headline, trying to shore up what's left of the minority tory vote on Thursday..
This does make an important point often missed in discussions here -- the Windrush scandal goes beyond a few hundred people on a particular ship at a particular time. It potentially affects every immigrant ever, and their families. The question is not: are you here legally but rather can you lay your hands on the paperwork to prove it? Documents which you probably never had in the first place because Britain is not that sort of country.
Most people will have this record and while few might know that they do the government certainly does.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
LOL. I agree. You would have been very pleased with me then as l think l managed to break almost all of them
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
These days, lots of people would think you a bad parent, if you left your children unsupervised.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
I don't have any kids, but the 'catchment' secondary is just over 7 miles away down an A road - are kids expected to walk that ?
No of course not. But that is not the norm at least in infant and junior school. My walk was about a mile each way for senior school which is perfectly reasonable.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
MD, it was a great time, I used to get monthly pay rises, beer and cars were cheap and life was great.
If you liked eating your meal by candlelight.
Richard , a mere inconvenience, just eat before dark
In Inverness in winter that means combining your lunch with your dinner.....
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
LOL. I agree. You would have been very pleased with me then as l think l managed to break almost all of them
Strangely, I didn't, despite any number of accidents.
Given that the winning option (Trump + China + Korea, or whatever) isn't available, this looks like a market to avoid.
The person who really deserves the prize is the North Korean who designed their nuclear test facility. If the facility hadn't collapsed, we wouldn't be talking about peace now.
Has the entire test facility collapsed or just one tunnel? In any case, it has done its work. NK has demonstrated to the world it can detonate nuclear bombs. It would probably have been shuttered anyway as no longer needed, as the French did in the 90s.
From the Chinese reports, it sounds like the whole facility in the mountain got destroyed by several large explosions. More than the facility itself, it was also home to the team of scientists responsible for the NK nuclear program who are probably lost.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
MD, it was a great time, I used to get monthly pay rises, beer and cars were cheap and life was great.
If you liked eating your meal by candlelight.
Richard , a mere inconvenience, just eat before dark
In Inverness in winter that means combining your lunch with your dinner.....
Except in June, when you'd starve for a month or so.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
MD, it was a great time, I used to get monthly pay rises, beer and cars were cheap and life was great.
If you liked eating your meal by candlelight.
Richard , a mere inconvenience, just eat before dark
In Inverness in winter that means combining your lunch with your dinner.....
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
MD, it was a great time, I used to get monthly pay rises, beer and cars were cheap and life was great.
If you liked eating your meal by candlelight.
Richard , a mere inconvenience, just eat before dark
In Inverness in winter that means combining your lunch with your dinner.....
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
In the seventies more green open area's to play on,now we have a concrete jungle with the smell of cannabis in the air
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
LOL. I agree. You would have been very pleased with me then as l think l managed to break almost all of them
Strangely, I didn't, despite any number of accidents.
Most of mine were later senior school (wrists, ankles, back and skull) or university (arms, legs, fingers and ribs). Combining innate clumsiness with a degree that involved a lot of remote stream sections and cliffs was not, in retrospect, the brightest idea.
Why I have no sympathy for May or the Home Office. A letter I wrote to the Guardian just over 2 years ago.
"An Italian academic friend decided to buy a cafe bar in Didsbury and to this end gave up his job lecturing. He inherited a staff of eight or nine-the cafe's open seven days a week twelve hours a day-and off he went.
Despite a very steep learning curve and some very hard work it looked like he could make a go of it.
One Friday night after being open for just three months he was visited by EIGHT immigration officers. In front of his customers all the staff were required to show their passports.
All were in order except for a part time dishwasher who worked on occasional Friday and Saturday nights. He was a French speaking Algerian.
The next day they served him with a paper which said he'd employed someone whose work permit had run out and the Home Office would rule on his case within a month and he could expect a fine.
The only thing that might lessen the fine would be if he could direct them to someone else working illegally at another establishment. Obviously he couldn't and wouldn't
He has just received notification that his fine will be £15,000. There is no appeal and he has four weeks in which to pay. Not only is he in shock but there is every chance he won’t be able to pay".
Postscript. He managed to borrow the money but thanks in part to that debt he was forced to close nine months later.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
These days, lots of people would think you a bad parent, if you left your children unsupervised.
I agree. It shows how attitude to risk has changed over the years, and children do not get to learn to make their own risk assessments and decisions. Constant supervision retards development as well as contributes to obesity.
Going against the grain, and leaving children to play in the street, particularly in urban areas, probably does mean child neglect or worse in the modern societal context.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
These days, lots of people would think you a bad parent, if you left your children unsupervised.
I agree. It shows how attitude to risk has changed over the years, and children do not get to learn to make their own risk assessments and decisions. Constant supervision retards development as well as contributes to obesity.
Going against the grain, and leaving children to play in the street, particularly in urban areas, probably does mean child neglect or worse in the modern societal context.
15 million cars on the road in 1975 vs 37.5m now. 5000 hit and runs in London - just in London - in 2015. Road safety is simply a radically different thing now vs then.
On the 1970s... a local nursery school was started and since has provided an exceptional start for hundreds of children... focussing on behaviour, manners and reading its pupils have flourished at infant school. Well, OFSTED has just declared it inadequate, previously good, because some policies and training certificates were out of date and the wrong methods were being used in some conversations with two year olds... so experienced staff are now calling it a day and the nursery may close... only the anger and determination of the owner to keep doing what she believes works will keep it open... when did this country become a box-ticking machine where you do it the state’s way or not at all?
On the 1970s... a local nursery school was started and since has provided an exceptional start for hundreds of children... focussing on behaviour, manners and reading its pupils have flourished at infant school. Well, OFSTED has just declared it inadequate, previously good, because some policies and training certificates were out of date and the wrong methods were being used in some conversations with two year olds... so experienced staff are now calling it a day and the nursery may close... only the anger and determination of the owner to keep doing what she believes works will keep it open... when did this country become a box-ticking machine where you do it the state’s way or not at all?
It seems to me that Britain became a box-ticker’s paradise in the 1940s, possibly earlier, and has never decolonised - itself.
Britain would be amazing with radical revolution but Treasury - which has a death grip on the country - will never allow it.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
These days, lots of people would think you a bad parent, if you left your children unsupervised.
I agree. It shows how attitude to risk has changed over the years, and children do not get to learn to make their own risk assessments and decisions. Constant supervision retards development as well as contributes to obesity.
Going against the grain, and leaving children to play in the street, particularly in urban areas, probably does mean child neglect or worse in the modern societal context.
15 million cars on the road in 1975 vs 37.5m now. 5000 hit and runs in London - just in London - in 2015. Road safety is simply a radically different thing now vs then.
Yes, it is much safer. In 1979 the number of children killed or seriously injured was 12,458. By 2013 this was down to 1,980, an 84% drop.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
These days, lots of people would think you a bad parent, if you left your children unsupervised.
I agree. It shows how attitude to risk has changed over the years, and children do not get to learn to make their own risk assessments and decisions. Constant supervision retards development as well as contributes to obesity.
Going against the grain, and leaving children to play in the street, particularly in urban areas, probably does mean child neglect or worse in the modern societal context.
15 million cars on the road in 1975 vs 37.5m now. 5000 hit and runs in London - just in London - in 2015. Road safety is simply a radically different thing now vs then.
I agree with Tyndall that it’s perceptions that have changed. Even in sleepy suburban Auckland in the 80s I had to walk past the gluesniffers to get to school, and gossip about local paedophiles was the stuff of hushed lunchtime chat.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
These days, lots of people would think you a bad parent, if you left your children unsupervised.
I agree. It shows how attitude to risk has changed over the years, and children do not get to learn to make their own risk assessments and decisions. Constant supervision retards development as well as contributes to obesity.
Going against the grain, and leaving children to play in the street, particularly in urban areas, probably does mean child neglect or worse in the modern societal context.
The attitude to risk has only changed in some ways though. Lots of upper middle class children now do horse riding lessons, which would have a far higher risk than walking to school.
On the 1970s... a local nursery school was started and since has provided an exceptional start for hundreds of children... focussing on behaviour, manners and reading its pupils have flourished at infant school. Well, OFSTED has just declared it inadequate, previously good, because some policies and training certificates were out of date and the wrong methods were being used in some conversations with two year olds... so experienced staff are now calling it a day and the nursery may close... only the anger and determination of the owner to keep doing what she believes works will keep it open... when did this country become a box-ticking machine where you do it the state’s way or not at all?
It seems to me that Britain became a box-ticker’s paradise in the 1940s, possibly earlier, and has never decolonised - itself.
Britain would be amazing with radical revolution but Treasury - which has a death grip on the country - will never allow it.
Edit: devolution.
Would be interesting to see statistics for the number of pages of statute, statutory instruments, regulations etc over time... common law and equity were perfectly adequate...
How many kids who get driven to school now, do so only because their parents both work and don’t have time to walk the kids to school, rather than any perceived danger around road safety or kidnappings?
As Dr Foxy notes, the number of road casualties is massively down over the past decades.
I agree with Tyndall that it’s perceptions that have changed. Even in sleepy suburban Auckland in the 80s I had to walk past the gluesniffers to get to school, and gossip about local paedophiles was the stuff of hushed lunchtime chat.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
There is nothing subjective about the difference between 15 million and 34 million cars, nor the fact that (made-up statistic) over 75% of the modern lot and under 5% of the 15m can do over 100 mph, and that the driver of a good airbagged and seatbelted modern car is and feels virtually invulnerable, or about the story that has just popped up on bbc news that
"Four people have been taken to hospital following a hit-and-run incident in Newport.
Two women have received "potentially life changing injuries", according to a Gwent Police statement."
F1: I forgot to hedge the Force India/Haas bets, but looking at Ladbrokes (I tend to use the Ladbrokes exchange for such things because the bets are there) there are many new markets up. So I shall peruse them, and perhaps offer yet more exciting suggestions.
Some more ideas from Betfair:
Under 15.5 classified drivers (5 or more retirements) 1.75 Grosjean for points 5.0 (he starts from the back). Winning car - Mercedes 2.75 First lap leader Hamilton 5.5 Bottas 13 or lay Vettel 1.37 (it’s 2km from the start of the last straight to the line but there might be an SC).
Those look very generous odds for Hamilton to lead the first lap. Given the length of the main straight, and the essential lottery of whether he or Vettel get the best start, I'd think around 3 nearer the mark. This ought to be one of the easier tracks to pass on.
On topic, rather like the Obama Nobel, this has the potential to make the Committee look very foolish. However important those handshakes this week nothing has really changed yet and it would be all too easy to see the Korean Peninsular slop back.into cold war standoff.
If and when denucularisation and disarming occurs then the two Korean leaders will undoubtedly have earned their prize. But I would suggest it would be better to wait for that and give the prize to someone else this year. Personally I would be pushing the King of Jordan who has given so much of his country over to refugee relief from Syria.
That's a nice thought, why not?
The Nobel Committee sometimes uses the award to encourage rather than reward progress, so they might taker a punt on the Korean protagonists (and I'd think the S Korean leader deserves a part too).
F1: I forgot to hedge the Force India/Haas bets, but looking at Ladbrokes (I tend to use the Ladbrokes exchange for such things because the bets are there) there are many new markets up. So I shall peruse them, and perhaps offer yet more exciting suggestions.
Some more ideas from Betfair:
Under 15.5 classified drivers (5 or more retirements) 1.75 Grosjean for points 5.0 (he starts from the back). Winning car - Mercedes 2.75 First lap leader Hamilton 5.5 Bottas 13 or lay Vettel 1.37 (it’s 2km from the start of the last straight to the line but there might be an SC).
Those look very generous odds for Hamilton to lead the first lap. Given the length of the main straight, and the essential lottery of whether he or Vettel get the best start, I'd think around 3 nearer the mark. This ought to be one of the easier tracks to pass on.
Yes, if there’s no safety car immediately after the start, Lewis has a good chance on the run down to the line first time around.
The F2 boys somehow managed to avoid a safety car in their sprint race earlier, the weather is windy but not raining.
How many kids who get driven to school now, do so only because their parents both work and don’t have time to walk the kids to school, rather than any perceived danger around road safety or kidnappings?
As Dr Foxy notes, the number of road casualties is massively down over the past decades.
Back in the 70s there were many more households without a car. Like ours. I walked to school when it was within walking distance, when I moved school I caught a bus.
Mr. B/Mr. Sandpit, hmm. What happened in the past?
Upon consulting my own blog, it seems the lead car retained the position both times. I do think Vettel might struggle more than others might, his last start was a little iffy, and if wind is difficult he'll be the first one to discover that.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
Which is strange because it is all a matter of perception. Kids are far eafet walking to school now than they were in the 70s. Yet people perceive it as being more dangerous.
It may be so.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
These days, lots of people would think you a bad parent, if you left your children unsupervised.
I agree. It shows how attitude to risk has changed over the years, and children do not get to learn to make their own risk assessments and decisions. Constant supervision retards development as well as contributes to obesity.
Going against the grain, and leaving children to play in the street, particularly in urban areas, probably does mean child neglect or worse in the modern societal context.
15 million cars on the road in 1975 vs 37.5m now. 5000 hit and runs in London - just in London - in 2015. Road safety is simply a radically different thing now vs then.
Yes, it is much safer. In 1979 the number of children killed or seriously injured was 12,458. By 2013 this was down to 1,980, an 84% drop.
Department of Transport figures.
Well, duh, what else has declined in virtual lockstep with that fall? Ans: prevalence of children walking to school vs going by car or bus. Do you also think that cigarettes must have become much safer over the same period, because lung cancer deaths are falling?
O/T London elections, I'd rate the Conservatives chances of winning as follows:-
Bexley, Bromley 99%.
Kensington 90%.
Westminster, Hillingdon 80%.
Wandsworth 66%.
Barnet, Richmond 50%.
Kingston 40%.
Sutton 25%.
Havering ?
99% chance of retaining control, but given the myriad Residents and Ratepayers, I have no idea if they'll win a majority.
Tories by another name.
Sometimes, they can be bitterly anti-Tory, not for any ideological reason, but because they want to be in charge, or they disagree with a planning decision.
But, in terms of outlook, Havering is heavily Conservative these days.
Interesting review by Hannan, but as he was in short trousers in Peru, maybe his insight into Seventies Britain isn't great. The Sevenies was the era Britain became a consumerist society:
No. That was the Sixties. The seventies were the decade of the 3 day week, power cuts, the dead left unburied and rubbish piled in the streets. Thatcher had a mandate for what she did.
Well, duh, what else has declined in virtual lockstep with that fall? Ans: prevalence of children walking to school vs going by car or bus. Do you also think that cigarettes must have become much safer over the same period, because lung cancer deaths are falling?
Clearly false since the number of children walking to school has not dropped by 84%.
Our roads are now far safer for pedestrians than they were in the 70s in spite of all the extra traffic. Indeed every aspect of boys road safety has improved since the 70s.
Paywalled, not quite as sensational as the headline, trying to shore up what's left of the minority tory vote on Thursday..
This does make an important point often missed in discussions here -- the Windrush scandal goes beyond a few hundred people on a particular ship at a particular time. It potentially affects every immigrant ever, and their families. The question is not: are you here legally but rather can you lay your hands on the paperwork to prove it? Documents which you probably never had in the first place because Britain is not that sort of country.
Most people will have this record and while few might know that they do the government certainly does.
Yes, you'd have thought so but you'd be wrong. NI is evidence you've been here but not proof you have a right to be, and in any case, the burden of proof was on the individual not the government in this Kafka-inspired hostile environment.
But that's not really the point which is that it extends far beyond Windrush itself, as Sajid Javid (Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government) says in the Telegraph link:
Mr Javid said: “I was really concerned when I first started hearing and reading about some of the issues. It immediately impacted me. I’m a second-generation migrant. My parents came to this country from Pakistan, just like the Windrush generation.
“They came to this country after the Second World War to help rebuild it, they came from Commonwealth countries, they were asked to come in to [do] work that some people would describe as unattractive – my dad worked in a cotton mill, he worked as a bus driver.
“When I heard about the Windrush issue I thought, ‘That could be my mum ... it could be my dad ... it could be my uncle ... it could be me.’”
How many kids who get driven to school now, do so only because their parents both work and don’t have time to walk the kids to school, rather than any perceived danger around road safety or kidnappings?
As Dr Foxy notes, the number of road casualties is massively down over the past decades.
But fatty fatty bum bumness is through the roof....
O/T London elections, I'd rate the Conservatives chances of winning as follows:-
Bexley, Bromley 99%.
Kensington 90%.
Westminster, Hillingdon 80%.
Wandsworth 66%.
Barnet, Richmond 50%.
Kingston 40%.
Sutton 25%.
Havering ?
99% chance of retaining control, but given the myriad Residents and Ratepayers, I have no idea if they'll win a majority.
Tories by another name.
Sometimes, they can be bitterly anti-Tory, not for any ideological reason, but because they want to be in charge, or they disagree with a planning decision.
But, in terms of outlook, Havering is heavily Conservative these days.
Local politics is full of petty squabbles and self serving factionalism. It can be a world away from the real world of left v right political ideology.
I agree with Tyndall that it’s perceptions that have changed. Even in sleepy suburban Auckland in the 80s I had to walk past the gluesniffers to get to school, and gossip about local paedophiles was the stuff of hushed lunchtime chat.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
There is nothing subjective about the difference between 15 million and 34 million cars, nor the fact that (made-up statistic) over 75% of the modern lot and under 5% of the 15m can do over 100 mph, and that the driver of a good airbagged and seatbelted modern car is and feels virtually invulnerable, or about the story that has just popped up on bbc news that
"Four people have been taken to hospital following a hit-and-run incident in Newport.
Two women have received "potentially life changing injuries", according to a Gwent Police statement."
And yet all the statistics for road fatalities including pedestrians say you are completely wrong. The massive increase in low speed zones and the use of cameras as well as huge redesigns of roads to make them more pedestrian friendly with islands and wider pavements mean pedestrians are far safer now than they were in the past.
I agree with Tyndall that it’s perceptions that have changed. Even in sleepy suburban Auckland in the 80s I had to walk past the gluesniffers to get to school, and gossip about local paedophiles was the stuff of hushed lunchtime chat.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
There is nothing subjective about the difference between 15 million and 34 million cars, nor the fact that (made-up statistic) over 75% of the modern lot and under 5% of the 15m can do over 100 mph, and that the driver of a good airbagged and seatbelted modern car is and feels virtually invulnerable, or about the story that has just popped up on bbc news that
"Four people have been taken to hospital following a hit-and-run incident in Newport.
Two women have received "potentially life changing injuries", according to a Gwent Police statement."
And yet all the statistics for road fatalities including pedestrians say you are completely wrong. The massive increase in low speed zones and the use of cameras as well as huge redesigns of roads to make them more pedestrian friendly with islands and wider pavements mean pedestrians are far safer now than they were in the past.
Not to mention massive improvements in both primary and secondary safety features in the cars themselves, protecting both occupants and pedestrians unlucky enough to hit them.
I agree with Tyndall that it’s perceptions that have changed. Even in sleepy suburban Auckland in the 80s I had to walk past the gluesniffers to get to school, and gossip about local paedophiles was the stuff of hushed lunchtime chat.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
There is nothing subjective about the difference between 15 million and 34 million cars, nor the fact that (made-up statistic) over 75% of the modern lot and under 5% of the 15m can do over 100 mph, and that the driver of a good airbagged and seatbelted modern car is and feels virtually invulnerable, or about the story that has just popped up on bbc news that
"Four people have been taken to hospital following a hit-and-run incident in Newport.
Two women have received "potentially life changing injuries", according to a Gwent Police statement."
And yet all the statistics for road fatalities including pedestrians say you are completely wrong. The massive increase in low speed zones and the use of cameras as well as huge redesigns of roads to make them more pedestrian friendly with islands and wider pavements mean pedestrians are far safer now than they were in the past.
I'd add that motor vehicle accidents are a good deal less frequent now in urban areas, where there are lots of pedestrians, than on rural roads where pedestrians are rarer. People tend to pick up speed on country roads, visibility is often poor, and there are sudden hazards, like animals dashing across the road.
More deserving than Obama, who was nominated after just a week or so in office.
It will be hard for them to live that down. Were there no people in the world that year who had done more than a president who, no matter how awesome he might be or have been, had only been in office such a short time before nomination?
Incidentally, it seems Dad of War is going down an absolute storm. Probably won't get it myself, but it seems the Secret Ingredient for videogame excellence nowadays is to have a surrogate father in it (The Last of Us, The Witcher 3, and, apparently, God of War).
I agree with Tyndall that it’s perceptions that have changed. Even in sleepy suburban Auckland in the 80s I had to walk past the gluesniffers to get to school, and gossip about local paedophiles was the stuff of hushed lunchtime chat.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
There is nothing subjective about the difference between 15 million and 34 million cars, nor the fact that (made-up statistic) over 75% of the modern lot and under 5% of the 15m can do over 100 mph, and that the driver of a good airbagged and seatbelted modern car is and feels virtually invulnerable, or about the story that has just popped up on bbc news that
"Four people have been taken to hospital following a hit-and-run incident in Newport.
Two women have received "potentially life changing injuries", according to a Gwent Police statement."
And yet all the statistics for road fatalities including pedestrians say you are completely wrong. The massive increase in low speed zones and the use of cameras as well as huge redesigns of roads to make them more pedestrian friendly with islands and wider pavements mean pedestrians are far safer now than they were in the past.
Not to mention massive improvements in both primary and secondary safety features in the cars themselves, protecting both occupants and pedestrians unlucky enough to hit them.
And thankfully we are getting rid of all the guard rails too which hem pedestrians in like animals and simply encourage drivers to drive less safely.
Dr. Foxy, the seventies were the last decade the unions had the whip hand. Once again showing the dangers of having the far left in power (besides the terrible threat to the economy. Not to mention the Jews. And anyone who disagrees with the Word of Chairman Corbyn).
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.
Son walks to school now. Most do
No longer true. Only about 25% do now compared to 75% in the Seventies:
I am frankly astonished that the rules on acceptable walking distance have remained the same in terms of school appeals - parents blanch when they are told children over 8 are expected to be able to walk 3 miles to school, and those under that up to 2 miles.
Which is in fairness quite a distance, it is longer than I had to walk to school, which was only a little over a mile, but given how many react with shock at the actual expectation it's one of those figures I am very surprised has not been shortened - the impact if they did that must really be massive.
I agree with Tyndall that it’s perceptions that have changed. Even in sleepy suburban Auckland in the 80s I had to walk past the gluesniffers to get to school, and gossip about local paedophiles was the stuff of hushed lunchtime chat.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
There is nothing subjective about the difference between 15 million and 34 million cars, nor the fact that (made-up statistic) over 75% of the modern lot and under 5% of the 15m can do over 100 mph, and that the driver of a good airbagged and seatbelted modern car is and feels virtually invulnerable, or about the story that has just popped up on bbc news that
"Four people have been taken to hospital following a hit-and-run incident in Newport.
Two women have received "potentially life changing injuries", according to a Gwent Police statement."
And yet all the statistics for road fatalities including pedestrians say you are completely wrong. The massive increase in low speed zones and the use of cameras as well as huge redesigns of roads to make them more pedestrian friendly with islands and wider pavements mean pedestrians are far safer now than they were in the past.
Not to mention massive improvements in both primary and secondary safety features in the cars themselves, protecting both occupants and pedestrians unlucky enough to hit them.
And thankfully we are getting rid of all the guard rails too which hem pedestrians in like animals and simply encourage drivers to drive less safely.
Just like the war. Turning plough shares into swords.
Three key reasons for fewer children walking to school: 1) Societal expectations, including those of the school - many primary schools simply won't leyt children out until there is an adult to collect them. This wasn't the case 30 years ago- chdilren were simply expected to make their own way about the place. 2) Far more adults in work - and so there is less time for an accompanied walk to school: adults have to be in the car because they need to be with their children until they are handed over at 8.50 (see 1. above) and then have absolutely no slack before needing to be in work. 3) Wider car ownership - in the 70s, many children simply had no option of being driven to school, there was no car. (Interestingly car ownership has peaked and current trends are downwards).
The world has got massively safer, though, that much is not in doubt.
I agree with Tyndall that it’s perceptions that have changed. Even in sleepy suburban Auckland in the 80s I had to walk past the gluesniffers to get to school, and gossip about local paedophiles was the stuff of hushed lunchtime chat.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
There is nothing subjective about the difference between 15 million and 34 million cars, nor the fact that (made-up statistic) over 75% of the modern lot and under 5% of the 15m can do over 100 mph, and that the driver of a good airbagged and seatbelted modern car is and feels virtually invulnerable, or about the story that has just popped up on bbc news that
"Four people have been taken to hospital following a hit-and-run incident in Newport.
Two women have received "potentially life changing injuries", according to a Gwent Police statement."
And yet all the statistics for road fatalities including pedestrians say you are completely wrong. The massive increase in low speed zones and the use of cameras as well as huge redesigns of roads to make them more pedestrian friendly with islands and wider pavements mean pedestrians are far safer now than they were in the past.
Not to mention massive improvements in both primary and secondary safety features in the cars themselves, protecting both occupants and pedestrians unlucky enough to hit them.
I remember a Top Gear programme a few years ago when they compared stopping distances of a 1970s car and a 2000s car. The improvements in brake technology were astounding and made the 2000s car far safer for pedestrians.
Incidentally, it seems Dad of War is going down an absolute storm. Probably won't get it myself, but it seems the Secret Ingredient for videogame excellence nowadays is to have a surrogate father in it (The Last of Us, The Witcher 3, and, apparently, God of War).
Ha! It enables the 'protect the vulnerable' element of classic gaming without the troublesome 'rescue the girlfriend/princess' vibe, and also as the average gamer is now in their 30s, probably quite a few mums and dads who like that specific kind of story.
I'm just a little shocked Kratos is the latest character chosen for such a role - the man was madder than a box of frogs, disproportionate in all retribution, psychotic and utterly incapable of self reflection, or even any moment of reflection. He was awesome too. But where the hell did he get another kid anyway?
I had to laugh in the promos where he says things like 'My son, we fight for a higher purpose'. Yes, of course Kratos, you ripped the head of Helios off and used it as a flashlight for a higher purpose. Why exactly did the gods betray you again? Oh, yes, you couldn't stop being a murdering b*stard for 5 minutes.
I haven't played once since God of War 3, but I'll probably get it at some point.
Interesting review by Hannan, but as he was in short trousers in Peru, maybe his insight into Seventies Britain isn't great. The Sevenies was the era Britain became a consumerist society:
No. That was the Sixties. The seventies were the decade of the 3 day week, power cuts, the dead left unburied and rubbish piled in the streets. Thatcher had a mandate for what she did.
I agree with Tyndall that it’s perceptions that have changed. Even in sleepy suburban Auckland in the 80s I had to walk past the gluesniffers to get to school, and gossip about local paedophiles was the stuff of hushed lunchtime chat.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
There is nothing subjective about the difference between 15 million and 34 million cars, nor the fact that (made-up statistic) over 75% of the modern lot and under 5% of the 15m can do over 100 mph, and that the driver of a good airbagged and seatbelted modern car is and feels virtually invulnerable, or about the story that has just popped up on bbc news that
"Four people have been taken to hospital following a hit-and-run incident in Newport.
Two women have received "potentially life changing injuries", according to a Gwent Police statement."
And yet all the statistics for road fatalities including pedestrians say you are completely wrong. The massive increase in low speed zones and the use of cameras as well as huge redesigns of roads to make them more pedestrian friendly with islands and wider pavements mean pedestrians are far safer now than they were in the past.
Not to mention massive improvements in both primary and secondary safety features in the cars themselves, protecting both occupants and pedestrians unlucky enough to hit them.
And thankfully we are getting rid of all the guard rails too which hem pedestrians in like animals and simply encourage drivers to drive less safely.
On topic, rather like the Obama Nobel, this has the potential to make the Committee look very foolish. However important those handshakes this week nothing has really changed yet and it would be all too easy to see the Korean Peninsular slop back.into cold war standoff.
If and when denucularisation and disarming occurs then the two Korean leaders will undoubtedly have earned their prize. But I would suggest it would be better to wait for that and give the prize to someone else this year. Personally I would be pushing the King of Jordan who has given so much of his country over to refugee relief from Syria.
That's a nice thought, why not?
The Nobel Committee sometimes uses the award to encourage rather than reward progress, so they might taker a punt on the Korean protagonists (and I'd think the S Korean leader deserves a part too).
It's not a totally unreasonable goal, to encourage, as we say with the President of Columbia's award, but in a really really fractious and chaotic situation, a little more time is probably the best approach - it came upon so suddenly, it needs time to bed in.
How many kids who get driven to school now, do so only because their parents both work and don’t have time to walk the kids to school, rather than any perceived danger around road safety or kidnappings?
As Dr Foxy notes, the number of road casualties is massively down over the past decades.
But fatty fatty bum bumness is through the roof....
I WISH this was how obesity was discussed on the news.
Fatty fatty bum bumness is a symptom of many things, including reduced levels of physical activity (such as walking to school), fattier diets, and general not-giving-a-shit-life-is-too-hard-and-joyless-to-forego-sugar-in-favour-of-longevity. (I do not say this pejoratively - for many life'[spleasures are tragically few.)
Mr. kle4, aye, ripping off Helios' head was a Kratos highlight (I played the three main games, but not the extras like Chains of Olympus). I was a bit surprised the world's angriest man got another kid after what happened last time. Just imagine the custody interview.
"You have experience child-rearing?" "Yes. I murdered my previous children, and wife, and now wear their ashes upon my skin."
More deserving than Obama, who was nominated after just a week or so in office.
It will be hard for them to live that down. Were there no people in the world that year who had done more than a president who, no matter how awesome he might be or have been, had only been in office such a short time before nomination?
The trouble with Obama's Nobel Prize for not being George Bush is not that it was aspirational -- the peace prize is often given for advocacy rather than achievement, the Northern Ireland peace women being a local example -- or even that Obama then did a lot of unpeaceful things, but that in this modern social media age, Obama's political opponents deliberately misunderstood and used it to attack him and the prize. (And no, I wouldn't have given it to him either.)
Mr. kle4, aye, ripping off Helios' head was a Kratos highlight (I played the three main games, but not the extras like Chains of Olympus). I was a bit surprised the world's angriest man got another kid after what happened last time. Just imagine the custody interview.
"You have experience child-rearing?" "Yes. I murdered my previous children, and wife, and now wear their ashes upon my skin."
"But don't you DARE judge me for my skin ! That's illegal"
Three key reasons for fewer children walking to school: 1) Societal expectations, including those of the school - many primary schools simply won't leyt children out until there is an adult to collect them. This wasn't the case 30 years ago- chdilren were simply expected to make their own way about the place. 2) Far more adults in work - and so there is less time for an accompanied walk to school: adults have to be in the car because they need to be with their children until they are handed over at 8.50 (see 1. above) and then have absolutely no slack before needing to be in work. 3) Wider car ownership - in the 70s, many children simply had no option of being driven to school, there was no car. (Interestingly car ownership has peaked and current trends are downwards).
The world has got massively safer, though, that much is not in doubt.
4) Small local secondary schools have been merged into larger schools which for most children are too far to walk.
5) Even if there is a school within walking distance, there is a fair chance that your child was allocated a place at one further away.
More deserving than Obama, who was nominated after just a week or so in office.
It will be hard for them to live that down. Were there no people in the world that year who had done more than a president who, no matter how awesome he might be or have been, had only been in office such a short time before nomination?
The trouble with Obama's Nobel Prize for not being George Bush is not that it was aspirational -- the peace prize is often given for advocacy rather than achievement, the Northern Ireland peace women being a local example -- or even that Obama then did a lot of unpeaceful things, but that in this modern social media age, Obama's political opponents deliberately misunderstood and used it to attack him and the prize. (And no, I wouldn't have given it to him either.)
I get it is given for advocacy in part too, and that's fine, but he had been in office so short a time he didn't have much of that either. Nobody else had made a couple of nice speeches? It's the period from taking office to nomination that is the problem more than that he got it for saying nice things, or that, as a president, he also had to do some unnice things. If he'd simply been in office a year before nomination.
Why I have no sympathy for May or the Home Office. A letter I wrote to the Guardian just over 2 years ago.
"An Italian academic friend decided to buy a cafe bar in Didsbury and to this end gave up his job lecturing. He inherited a staff of eight or nine-the cafe's open seven days a week twelve hours a day-and off he went.
Despite a very steep learning curve and some very hard work it looked like he could make a go of it.
One Friday night after being open for just three months he was visited by EIGHT immigration officers. In front of his customers all the staff were required to show their passports.
All were in order except for a part time dishwasher who worked on occasional Friday and Saturday nights. He was a French speaking Algerian.
The next day they served him with a paper which said he'd employed someone whose work permit had run out and the Home Office would rule on his case within a month and he could expect a fine.
The only thing that might lessen the fine would be if he could direct them to someone else working illegally at another establishment. Obviously he couldn't and wouldn't
He has just received notification that his fine will be £15,000. There is no appeal and he has four weeks in which to pay. Not only is he in shock but there is every chance he won’t be able to pay".
Postscript. He managed to borrow the money but thanks in part to that debt he was forced to close nine months later.
No sympathy, he shouldn't have employed an illegal immigrant.
Three key reasons for fewer children walking to school: 1) Societal expectations, including those of the school - many primary schools simply won't leyt children out until there is an adult to collect them. This wasn't the case 30 years ago- chdilren were simply expected to make their own way about the place. 2) Far more adults in work - and so there is less time for an accompanied walk to school: adults have to be in the car because they need to be with their children until they are handed over at 8.50 (see 1. above) and then have absolutely no slack before needing to be in work. 3) Wider car ownership - in the 70s, many children simply had no option of being driven to school, there was no car. (Interestingly car ownership has peaked and current trends are downwards).
The world has got massively safer, though, that much is not in doubt.
4) Small local secondary schools have been merged into larger schools which for most children are too far to walk.
5) Even if there is a school within walking distance, there is a fair chance that your child was allocated a place at one further away.
When you say 'which for most children are too far to walk' are we talking legally too far for them to walk, or just that parents/children consider it too far to walk?
I agree with Tyndall that it’s perceptions that have changed. Even in sleepy suburban Auckland in the 80s I had to walk past the gluesniffers to get to school, and gossip about local paedophiles was the stuff of hushed lunchtime chat.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
There is nothing subjective about the difference between 15 million and 34 million cars, nor the fact that (made-up statistic) over 75% of the modern lot and under 5% of the 15m can do over 100 mph, and that the driver of a good airbagged and seatbelted modern car is and feels virtually invulnerable, or about the story that has just popped up on bbc news that
"Four people have been taken to hospital following a hit-and-run incident in Newport.
Two women have received "potentially life changing injuries", according to a Gwent Police statement."
And yet all the statistics for road fatalities including pedestrians say you are completely wrong. The massive increase in low speed zones and the use of cameras as well as huge redesigns of roads to make them more pedestrian friendly with islands and wider pavements mean pedestrians are far safer now than they were in the past.
Not to mention massive improvements in both primary and secondary safety features in the cars themselves, protecting both occupants and pedestrians unlucky enough to hit them.
I remember a Top Gear programme a few years ago when they compared stopping distances of a 1970s car and a 2000s car. The improvements in brake technology were astounding and made the 2000s car far safer for pedestrians.
Yep, the cars are heavier now but they have wider tyres, ABS and larger brakes. Bumpers and bonnets are now plastic rather than metal, and are deliberately shaped to minimise injuries in pedestrian impacts. Inside the modern cars there are door beams, airbags, active seat belts, deformable steering columns and no hard edges anywhere. An order of magnitude safer than ever before. Both occupants and pedestrians walk away from accidents that would have been fatal or life-changing a generation ago.
Interesting review by Hannan, but as he was in short trousers in Peru, maybe his insight into Seventies Britain isn't great. The Sevenies was the era Britain became a consumerist society:
No. That was the Sixties. The seventies were the decade of the 3 day week, power cuts, the dead left unburied and rubbish piled in the streets. Thatcher had a mandate for what she did.
Quite right. Fox sees things through rose tinted glasses. He was probably a youth in the 70s. He's come out with this nonsense before. From Hannan's piece: Gently, but unsettlingly, Saunders brings back the sheer awfulness of the 1970s: the power cuts, the strikes, the inflation, the sense of constant crisis. People understandably saw Europe as a better bet than what was happening at home. That, ultimately, is what changed between the two referendums: the pessimism had evaporated.
Though many Korean experts seem to be of the opinion that the recent events in Korea had nothing to do with President Trump.
I can easily believe that to be the case, though being the President of the USA, when the USA is such a part of the discourse of North Korea and South Korea, means they are always going to be involved at some stage, and their reaction will have an impact.
How many kids who get driven to school now, do so only because their parents both work and don’t have time to walk the kids to school, rather than any perceived danger around road safety or kidnappings?
As Dr Foxy notes, the number of road casualties is massively down over the past decades.
But fatty fatty bum bumness is through the roof....
I WISH this was how obesity was discussed on the news.
Fatty fatty bum bumness is a symptom of many things, including reduced levels of physical activity (such as walking to school), fattier diets, and general not-giving-a-shit-life-is-too-hard-and-joyless-to-forego-sugar-in-favour-of-longevity. (I do not say this pejoratively - for many life'[spleasures are tragically few.)
Obesity is due to too great an input of food.
The growth in obesity is a consequence of the increased wealth of the majority of people around the world over the last fifty years.
How many kids who get driven to school now, do so only because their parents both work and don’t have time to walk the kids to school, rather than any perceived danger around road safety or kidnappings?
As Dr Foxy notes, the number of road casualties is massively down over the past decades.
But fatty fatty bum bumness is through the roof....
I WISH this was how obesity was discussed on the news.
Fatty fatty bum bumness is a symptom of many things, including reduced levels of physical activity (such as walking to school), fattier diets, and general not-giving-a-shit-life-is-too-hard-and-joyless-to-forego-sugar-in-favour-of-longevity. (I do not say this pejoratively - for many life'[spleasures are tragically few.)
Obesity is due to too great an input of food.
The growth in obesity is a consequence of the increased wealth of the majority of people around the world over the last fifty years.
It's why I say I'm not obese, I'm prosperous. Sadly I have regained all the weight and then some I lost a few years ago.
Three key reasons for fewer children walking to school: 1) Societal expectations, including those of the school - many primary schools simply won't leyt children out until there is an adult to collect them. This wasn't the case 30 years ago- chdilren were simply expected to make their own way about the place. 2) Far more adults in work - and so there is less time for an accompanied walk to school: adults have to be in the car because they need to be with their children until they are handed over at 8.50 (see 1. above) and then have absolutely no slack before needing to be in work. 3) Wider car ownership - in the 70s, many children simply had no option of being driven to school, there was no car. (Interestingly car ownership has peaked and current trends are downwards).
The world has got massively safer, though, that much is not in doubt.
4) Small local secondary schools have been merged into larger schools which for most children are too far to walk.
5) Even if there is a school within walking distance, there is a fair chance that your child was allocated a place at one further away.
When you say 'which for most children are too far to walk' are we talking legally too far for them to walk, or just that parents/children consider it too far to walk?
What I'm really saying is I can't get on the bus to the station from about 7.30 to 9 because they are all full up with schoolchildren.
How many kids who get driven to school now, do so only because their parents both work and don’t have time to walk the kids to school, rather than any perceived danger around road safety or kidnappings?
As Dr Foxy notes, the number of road casualties is massively down over the past decades.
But fatty fatty bum bumness is through the roof....
I WISH this was how obesity was discussed on the news.
Fatty fatty bum bumness is a symptom of many things, including reduced levels of physical activity (such as walking to school), fattier diets, and general not-giving-a-shit-life-is-too-hard-and-joyless-to-forego-sugar-in-favour-of-longevity. (I do not say this pejoratively - for many life'[spleasures are tragically few.)
Obesity is due to too great an input of food.
The growth in obesity is a consequence of the increased wealth of the majority of people around the world over the last fifty years.
I seemed to remember seeing a study that suggested that caloric intake is actually slightly lower than it was 30-40 years ago, the difference is that very few people now do manual labour which requires that level of calories.
I agree with Tyndall that it’s perceptions that have changed. Even in sleepy suburban Auckland in the 80s I had to walk past the gluesniffers to get to school, and gossip about local paedophiles was the stuff of hushed lunchtime chat.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
There is nothing subjective about the difference between 15 million and 34 million cars, nor the fact that (made-up statistic) over 75% of the modern lot and under 5% of the 15m can do over 100 mph, and that the driver of a good airbagged and seatbelted modern car is and feels virtually invulnerable, or about the story that has just popped up on bbc news that
"Four people have been taken to hospital following a hit-and-run incident in Newport.
Two women have received "potentially life changing injuries", according to a Gwent Police statement."
And yet all the statistics for road fatalities including pedestrians say you are completely wrong. The massive increase in low speed zones and the use of cameras as well as huge redesigns of roads to make them more pedestrian friendly with islands and wider pavements mean pedestrians are far safer now than they were in the past.
Not to mention massive improvements in both primary and secondary safety features in the cars themselves, protecting both occupants and pedestrians unlucky enough to hit them.
I remember a Top Gear programme a few years ago when they compared stopping distances of a 1970s car and a 2000s car. The improvements in brake technology were astounding and made the 2000s car far safer for pedestrians.
How many kids who get driven to school now, do so only because their parents both work and don’t have time to walk the kids to school, rather than any perceived danger around road safety or kidnappings?
As Dr Foxy notes, the number of road casualties is massively down over the past decades.
But fatty fatty bum bumness is through the roof....
I WISH this was how obesity was discussed on the news.
Fatty fatty bum bumness is a symptom of many things, including reduced levels of physical activity (such as walking to school), fattier diets, and general not-giving-a-shit-life-is-too-hard-and-joyless-to-forego-sugar-in-favour-of-longevity. (I do not say this pejoratively - for many life'[spleasures are tragically few.)
Obesity is due to too great an input of food.
The growth in obesity is a consequence of the increased wealth of the majority of people around the world over the last fifty years.
In western nations it's usually the poor that have the highest level of obesity. I am not sure it's entirely about wealth but cheap unwholesome unhealthy fast and convenience food full of fat and sugar.
I think we often confuse more wealth in the world with people being wealthier too. There are also a lot more people in the world. And wealth is increasingly concentrated.
Not your Top Gear clip but here are the boys demonstrating how wrong the Highway Code stopping distances are:
I wonder how more normal cars would fare.
Also not the best test really, since they know in advance when to brake. If you were surprised, and had the foot on the accelerator, that's maybe another second reaction time (and another 88 feet before you start braking)
Interesting review by Hannan, but as he was in short trousers in Peru, maybe his insight into Seventies Britain isn't great. The Sevenies was the era Britain became a consumerist society:
No. That was the Sixties. The seventies were the decade of the 3 day week, power cuts, the dead left unburied and rubbish piled in the streets. Thatcher had a mandate for what she did.
Not your Top Gear clip but here are the boys demonstrating how wrong the Highway Code stopping distances are:
I wonder how more normal cars would fare.
Also not the best test really, since they know in advance when to brake. If you were surprised, and had the foot on the accelerator, that's maybe another second reaction time (and another 88 feet before you start braking)
The 240’ in the Highway Code includes 60’ ‘thinking distance’ which TG didn’t account for. The actual braking distance in the HC is 180’.
Your average car is not quite as good on the brakes as that Bentley, but a lot better than the ‘official’ HC distances.
Autocar magazine measure braking distance as part of their road tests.
Why I have no sympathy for May or the Home Office. A letter I wrote to the Guardian just over 2 years ago.
"An Italian academic friend decided to buy a cafe bar in Didsbury and to this end gave up his job lecturing. He inherited a staff of eight or nine-the cafe's open seven days a week twelve hours a day-and off he went.
Despite a very steep learning curve and some very hard work it looked like he could make a go of it.
One Friday night after being open for just three months he was visited by EIGHT immigration officers. In front of his customers all the staff were required to show their passports.
All were in order except for a part time dishwasher who worked on occasional Friday and Saturday nights. He was a French speaking Algerian.
The next day they served him with a paper which said he'd employed someone whose work permit had run out and the Home Office would rule on his case within a month and he could expect a fine.
The only thing that might lessen the fine would be if he could direct them to someone else working illegally at another establishment. Obviously he couldn't and wouldn't
He has just received notification that his fine will be £15,000. There is no appeal and he has four weeks in which to pay. Not only is he in shock but there is every chance he won’t be able to pay".
Postscript. He managed to borrow the money but thanks in part to that debt he was forced to close nine months later.
No sympathy, he shouldn't have employed an illegal immigrant.
+1 We did this before. What is it with lefties wanting to exploit illegals.
Why I have no sympathy for May or the Home Office. A letter I wrote to the Guardian just over 2 years ago.
"An Italian academic friend decided to buy a cafe bar in Didsbury and to this end gave up his job lecturing. He inherited a staff of eight or nine-the cafe's open seven days a week twelve hours a day-and off he went.
Despite a very steep learning curve and some very hard work it looked like he could make a go of it.
One Friday night after being open for just three months he was visited by EIGHT immigration officers. In front of his customers all the staff were required to show their passports.
All were in order except for a part time dishwasher who worked on occasional Friday and Saturday nights. He was a French speaking Algerian.
The next day they served him with a paper which said he'd employed someone whose work permit had run out and the Home Office would rule on his case within a month and he could expect a fine.
The only thing that might lessen the fine would be if he could direct them to someone else working illegally at another establishment. Obviously he couldn't and wouldn't
He has just received notification that his fine will be £15,000. There is no appeal and he has four weeks in which to pay. Not only is he in shock but there is every chance he won’t be able to pay".
Postscript. He managed to borrow the money but thanks in part to that debt he was forced to close nine months later.
No sympathy, he shouldn't have employed an illegal immigrant.
+1 We did this before. What is it with lefties wanting to exploit illegals.
He wasn't a leftie. He was a thrusting entrepreneur in the Thatcherite mould, who'd left a safe job to run his own business. He probably drove a white van.
Why I have no sympathy for May or the Home Office. A letter I wrote to the Guardian just over 2 years ago.
"An Italian academic friend decided to buy a cafe bar in Didsbury and to this end gave up his job lecturing. He inherited a staff of eight or nine-the cafe's open seven days a week twelve hours a day-and off he went.
Despite a very steep learning curve and some very hard work it looked like he could make a go of it.
One Friday night after being open for just three months he was visited by EIGHT immigration officers. In front of his customers all the staff were required to show their passports.
All were in order except for a part time dishwasher who worked on occasional Friday and Saturday nights. He was a French speaking Algerian.
The next day they served him with a paper which said he'd employed someone whose work permit had run out and the Home Office would rule on his case within a month and he could expect a fine.
The only thing that might lessen the fine would be if he could direct them to someone else working illegally at another establishment. Obviously he couldn't and wouldn't
He has just received notification that his fine will be £15,000. There is no appeal and he has four weeks in which to pay. Not only is he in shock but there is every chance he won’t be able to pay".
Postscript. He managed to borrow the money but thanks in part to that debt he was forced to close nine months later.
No sympathy, he shouldn't have employed an illegal immigrant.
+1 We did this before. What is it with lefties wanting to exploit illegals.
It’s also the correct way to deal with illegal immigration, by targeting employers and landlords who facilitate and benefit from the illegal underground economy. Illegals will soon choose to leave if they can’t work.
Why I have no sympathy for May or the Home Office. A letter I wrote to the Guardian just over 2 years ago.
"An Italian academic friend decided to buy a cafe bar in Didsbury and to this end gave up his job lecturing. He inherited a staff of eight or nine-the cafe's open seven days a week twelve hours a day-and off he went.
Despite a very steep learning curve and some very hard work it looked like he could make a go of it.
One Friday night after being open for just three months he was visited by EIGHT immigration officers. In front of his customers all the staff were required to show their passports.
All were in order except for a part time dishwasher who worked on occasional Friday and Saturday nights. He was a French speaking Algerian.
The next day they served him with a paper which said he'd employed someone whose work permit had run out and the Home Office would rule on his case within a month and he could expect a fine.
The only thing that might lessen the fine would be if he could direct them to someone else working illegally at another establishment. Obviously he couldn't and wouldn't
He has just received notification that his fine will be £15,000. There is no appeal and he has four weeks in which to pay. Not only is he in shock but there is every chance he won’t be able to pay".
Postscript. He managed to borrow the money but thanks in part to that debt he was forced to close nine months later.
It is against the law to employ an illegal immigrant. It is the responsibility of the employer to check this. Your friend broke the law and was punished accordingly.
Comments
https://www.redmolotov.com/catalogue/tshirts/all/i-may-be-old-best-bands-tshirt/navybluetshirt.html
In the same vein, the local elections are likely to see a big UKIP revival in London while the Lib Dems sweep the board in the North. Meanwhile the only consolation for Labour is picking up Tunbridge Wells for the first time.
The 70's were a good time to grow up, though. Probably the last decade in which children walked to and from school, and were left to their own devices.I spent most of the 70s walking to school in Brussels (my father was in the FO and posted there). Any 7 year old boy walking the streets of Brussels today would find himself dragooned as a Bacha Bazi by sunset.
One of my childhood memories is of Bernard Donoughue coming to dinner at our house. I asked my father why the guest kept putting his head in his hands and he replied, "Your mother keeps mentioning Anthony Wedgewood-Benn."
Verified account @PeteWishart
1h1 hour ago
Vince Cable on #Marr (no SNP, of course) talking ‘hostile environment’. They were in Government when this was unleashed and Clegg was one of its main cheerleaders. Only Sarah Teather opposed.
In the Seventies, walking to school and playing unsupervised outside after school was the norm, now much less so. While the numerator of kidnappings, or road deaths has decreased, the denominator has decreased more quickly.
Though, long term the risks of childhood obesity and inactivity far outweigh the risks of activity. I take the view that a child who has never broken a bone is not getting enough exercise.
https://www.gov.uk/check-national-insurance-record
"An Italian academic friend decided to buy a cafe bar in Didsbury and to this end gave up his job lecturing. He inherited a staff of eight or nine-the cafe's open seven days a week twelve hours a day-and off he went.
Despite a very steep learning curve and some very hard work it looked like he could make a go of it.
One Friday night after being open for just three months he was visited by EIGHT immigration officers. In front of his customers all the staff were required to show their passports.
All were in order except for a part time dishwasher who worked on occasional Friday and Saturday nights. He was a French speaking Algerian.
The next day they served him with a paper which said he'd employed someone whose work permit had run out and the Home Office would rule on his case within a month and he could expect a fine.
The only thing that might lessen the fine would be if he could direct them to someone else working illegally at another establishment. Obviously he couldn't and wouldn't
He has just received notification that his fine will be £15,000. There is no appeal and he has four weeks in which to pay. Not only is he in shock but there is every chance he won’t be able to pay".
Postscript. He managed to borrow the money but thanks in part to that debt he was forced to close nine months later.
Going against the grain, and leaving children to play in the street, particularly in urban areas, probably does mean child neglect or worse in the modern societal context.
Britain would be amazing with radical revolution but Treasury - which has a death grip on the country - will never allow it.
Edit: devolution.
Department of Transport figures.
When my daughter is old enough, I’m hoping to have the moral courage to make her walk.
Bexley, Bromley 99%.
Kensington 90%.
Westminster, Hillingdon 80%.
Wandsworth 66%.
Barnet, Richmond 50%.
Kingston 40%.
Sutton 25%.
As Dr Foxy notes, the number of road casualties is massively down over the past decades.
"Four people have been taken to hospital following a hit-and-run incident in Newport.
Two women have received "potentially life changing injuries", according to a Gwent Police statement."
The Nobel Committee sometimes uses the award to encourage rather than reward progress, so they might taker a punt on the Korean protagonists (and I'd think the S Korean leader deserves a part too).
The F2 boys somehow managed to avoid a safety car in their sprint race earlier, the weather is windy but not raining.
Upon consulting my own blog, it seems the lead car retained the position both times. I do think Vettel might struggle more than others might, his last start was a little iffy, and if wind is difficult he'll be the first one to discover that.
But, in terms of outlook, Havering is heavily Conservative these days.
Our roads are now far safer for pedestrians than they were in the 70s in spite of all the extra traffic. Indeed every aspect of boys road safety has improved since the 70s.
But that's not really the point which is that it extends far beyond Windrush itself, as Sajid Javid (Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government) says in the Telegraph link:
Mr Javid said: “I was really concerned when I first started hearing and reading about some of the issues. It immediately impacted me. I’m a second-generation migrant. My parents came to this country from Pakistan, just like the Windrush generation.
“They came to this country after the Second World War to help rebuild it, they came from Commonwealth countries, they were asked to come in to [do] work that some people would describe as unattractive – my dad worked in a cotton mill, he worked as a bus driver.
“When I heard about the Windrush issue I thought, ‘That could be my mum ... it could be my dad ... it could be my uncle ... it could be me.’”
Which is in fairness quite a distance, it is longer than I had to walk to school, which was only a little over a mile, but given how many react with shock at the actual expectation it's one of those figures I am very surprised has not been shortened - the impact if they did that must really be massive.
1) Societal expectations, including those of the school - many primary schools simply won't leyt children out until there is an adult to collect them. This wasn't the case 30 years ago- chdilren were simply expected to make their own way about the place.
2) Far more adults in work - and so there is less time for an accompanied walk to school: adults have to be in the car because they need to be with their children until they are handed over at 8.50 (see 1. above) and then have absolutely no slack before needing to be in work.
3) Wider car ownership - in the 70s, many children simply had no option of being driven to school, there was no car. (Interestingly car ownership has peaked and current trends are downwards).
The world has got massively safer, though, that much is not in doubt.
I'm just a little shocked Kratos is the latest character chosen for such a role - the man was madder than a box of frogs, disproportionate in all retribution, psychotic and utterly incapable of self reflection, or even any moment of reflection. He was awesome too. But where the hell did he get another kid anyway?
I had to laugh in the promos where he says things like 'My son, we fight for a higher purpose'. Yes, of course Kratos, you ripped the head of Helios off and used it as a flashlight for a higher purpose. Why exactly did the gods betray you again? Oh, yes, you couldn't stop being a murdering b*stard for 5 minutes.
I haven't played once since God of War 3, but I'll probably get it at some point.
Fatty fatty bum bumness is a symptom of many things, including reduced levels of physical activity (such as walking to school), fattier diets, and general not-giving-a-shit-life-is-too-hard-and-joyless-to-forego-sugar-in-favour-of-longevity. (I do not say this pejoratively - for many life'[spleasures are tragically few.)
"You have experience child-rearing?"
"Yes. I murdered my previous children, and wife, and now wear their ashes upon my skin."
5) Even if there is a school within walking distance, there is a fair chance that your child was allocated a place at one further away.
From Hannan's piece:
Gently, but unsettlingly, Saunders brings back the sheer awfulness of the 1970s: the power cuts, the strikes, the inflation, the sense of constant crisis. People understandably saw Europe as a better bet than what was happening at home. That, ultimately, is what changed between the two referendums: the pessimism had evaporated.
I can easily believe that to be the case, though being the President of the USA, when the USA is such a part of the discourse of North Korea and South Korea, means they are always going to be involved at some stage, and their reaction will have an impact.
Obesity is due to too great an input of food.
The growth in obesity is a consequence of the increased wealth of the majority of people around the world over the last fifty years.
So now I am out for a long long walk.
Cheerio
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWmEbbPlQ_c
I think we often confuse more wealth in the world with people being wealthier too. There are also a lot more people in the world. And wealth is increasingly concentrated.
Also not the best test really, since they know in advance when to brake. If you were surprised, and had the foot on the accelerator, that's maybe another second reaction time (and another 88 feet before you start braking)
Your average car is not quite as good on the brakes as that Bentley, but a lot better than the ‘official’ HC distances.
Autocar magazine measure braking distance as part of their road tests.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/28/local-election-hopefuls-criminal-records-revealed/
https://twitter.com/Pontifex/status/990553785415200773?s=19
http://www.iam-media.com/blog/Detail.aspx?g=93f3e795-4de3-45a9-9bd5-c55805c6aaff