Socialism usually collapses because it runs out of other people's money. Thankfully it is harder to achieve this when in opposition. But it would be amusing if this particular socialist project collapsed under the weight of its own internal contradictions.
Doubly ironic given the contradictions internal to the government.
She's a fucking awful writer. Those 27 publishers that rejected her at least have their self respect.
There are millions of readers out there that disagree with you. Still, what would they know, eh?
Having a great idea for a story does not make you a good writer. She had a brilliant idea but in terms of actual writing ability Dura_Ace is correct. As I am sure millions of parents have found out trying to read the stories out loud, technically she is a very poor writer with a very poor grasp of prose.
That said, she created a fabulous world and has helped encourage reading in millions of kids around the world so she deserves all the success she gets.
What rot you post sometimes Richard.
You don't like her books? Well, fair enough. Does that make her a poor writer? No.
She is a fine writer and has shown she can turn her hand to several genres with success. Her plots are good, her characters are credible and like real people, complex and irrational.
Sure, she doesn't write highbrow literature but she's not a 'poor writer'.
It seems one reason you like her writing must be your utter lack of basic comprehension. Where did I say I didn't like her books? I said she wrote great stories and that she deserved all the success she got because of how she had inspired people to read.
But that does not by any means make her a good writer. Her prose is stilted and generally accepted to be difficult to read aloud. Her grammar is pretty atrocious and her use of vocabulary limited. She is a great storyteller but a poor writer.
Where did I say that you said you didn't like her books? "You don't like her books?" is a question, not a statement.
Anyway this is a silly argument. We agree she's not a 'great' writer and tbh I very much doubt whether, with 500m books sold, she gives a quaffle about my or your opinions.
OT Sainsbury's was rammed, and its car park full of drivers circling as they waited for spaces to be vacated, carefully avoiding pedestrians vainly searching for trolleys because management decided to save a few quid.
OT Sainsbury's was rammed, and its car park full of drivers circling as they waited for spaces to be vacated, carefully avoiding pedestrians vainly searching for trolleys because management decided to save a few quid.
Matalan on the other hand was fairly quiet - as for poundland that was empty.......
I don't know why I feel the need to say I only needed some milk and did not fancy a trip to the local supermarket :-)
Last year it looked like nonsense designed to fire up supporters. This year it is at least possible, as well as designed to fire up supporters.
It may be dawning on some of those supporters that, having celebrated the result of the last GE, 2019 will be Corbyn's fourth year as LOTO and that Labour are still just about behind in the polls.
The reality is that yes, the EU have overreached. Cant blame them, we've allowed them to set the pace and the terms of the negotiation. They need to step back a little. Most of the EU is teetering on recession. You dislocate the fifth largest economy in a way that results in both sides actively exploring other markets while burning existing trade links in spite will be enough to turn a mild down turn into a full on recession. Germany, like always could weather pretty much any storm but less so in France and the other northern european countries who are struggling with a multitude of domestic matters.
She's a fucking awful writer. Those 27 publishers that rejected her at least have their self respect.
There are millions of readers out there that disagree with you. Still, what would they know, eh?
Having a great idea for a story does not make you a good writer. She had a brilliant idea but in terms of actual writing ability Dura_Ace is correct. As I am sure millions of parents have found out trying to read the stories out loud, technically she is a very poor writer with a very poor grasp of prose.
That said, she created a fabulous world and has helped encourage reading in millions of kids around the world so she deserves all the success she gets.
What rot you post sometimes Richard.
You don't like her books? Well, fair enough. Does that make her a poor writer? No.
She is a fine writer and has shown she can turn her hand to several genres with success. Her plots are good, her characters are credible and like real people, complex and irrational.
Sure, she doesn't write highbrow literature but she's not a 'poor writer'.
It seems one reason you like her writing must be your utter lack of basic comprehension. Where did I say I didn't like her books? I said she wrote great stories and that she deserved all the success she got because of how she had inspired people to read.
But that does not by any means make her a good writer. Her prose is stilted and generally accepted to be difficult to read aloud. Her grammar is pretty atrocious and her use of vocabulary limited. She is a great storyteller but a poor writer.
Where did I say that you said you didn't like her books? "You don't like her books?" is a question, not a statement.
Anyway this is a silly argument. We agree she's not a 'great' writer and tbh I very much doubt whether, with 500m books sold, she gives a quaffle about my or your opinions.
Happy Chirstmas!
Her books represent something that wasnt supposed to happen the perpetual demise of books and reading amongst children. These books are 'proper book', for many children these were the first real books they have read, and enjoyed. Getting them onto other stuff. Look at the explosion of young adult fiction.
She will be looked on as important to young adult fiction and the genre that The Beatles are for popular music.....
Again twitter seems entirely unrepresentative of the general public. So many FBPE types claim they will never vote for Labour 'again' and yet in poll after poll Lab remain in the 36-40 point area. I suspect some of these people never voted Labour and for those that did despite all their protestations when it comes down to it they'll justify voting Labour again because of their local centre left MP rather than the leadership. Are these voters really going to punish local pro EU MPs like Umunna, Benn and Kendall because of Corbyn? no chance.
Last year it looked like nonsense designed to fire up supporters. This year it is at least possible, as well as designed to fire up supporters.
It may be dawning on some of those supporters that, having celebrated the result of the last GE, 2019 will be Corbyn's fourth year as LOTO and that Labour are still just about behind in the polls.
Lets not forget he is facing the political equivalent of shit on a stick and he still isn't in front
It would actually be very funny, if implausible, if after both parties finally have to stop pussyfooting around in the new year at some point, that one or both suddenly see massive turnarounds, like they both drop into the mid twenties .
Illegality? Democracy was used to subvert democracy? What on earth is she on about?
One could argue that a referendum on removing the vote from black people would be using democracy to subvert democracy.
Leaving the EU? Not so much.
I presumed she was arguing that a referendum to remain would not be subverting democracy as some have indeed stated. But given they are crying about Corbyn despite not being a Labour supporter does it even matter?
The reality is that yes, the EU have overreached. Cant blame them, we've allowed them to set the pace and the terms of the negotiation. They need to step back a little. Most of the EU is teetering on recession. You dislocate the fifth largest economy in a way that results in both sides actively exploring other markets while burning existing trade links in spite will be enough to turn a mild down turn into a full on recession. Germany, like always could weather pretty much any storm but less so in France and the other northern european countries who are struggling with a multitude of domestic matters.
I do wonder how much their overreach was encouraged by assurances from Blair, Major, Clegg et al that if they made it difficult enough we'd change our mind under pressure.
The Guardian is now reporting that 'Pharmaceutical organisations working with Whitehall to maintain medicine supplies in the event of a no-deal Brexit have signed 26 “gagging orders” that bar them from revealing information to the public.
Figures show that 16 drug companies and 10 trade associations have been asked to sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) which prevent them from revealing any information related to contingency plans drawn up with the Department of Health and Social Care.'
Why all the NDA's? What has the Government got to hide
Corbyn [snip] voted and campaigned for remain.....
Did he fuck
He was there but he wasn't involved
^This.
With respect* to Jezziah there is a basic rule at play here that as long as we remember that he is under the influence of the black sleep of the Kali Ma Corbyn cult, you can trust every word he says to be unadulterated truth
The Labour Party is fucked. As deeply and as badly as the Tories are fucked. Brexit will smash the ability of both parties to pretend that they remain single parties where even if we retain FPTP neither party will have a "majority" even if on paper they do.
Time for TSE to roll out a Christmas PR thread. Perhaps PR is how the country is able to move on. We could have a German style CDU/CSU group for the Tories and a Lab/Co-op/Green group for the left.
And have permanent coalition between the centre right group and the centre left group regardless of who the people actually vote for? Genius.
Yes - that would satisfy most people. It would only be the extreme left and right wingers who would complain.
Would it really? We are living in an era where the centre is currently being pushed to the margins. If it was as popular as many of this site think it is Brexit and Corbyn’s election would not have happened. Macron also wouldn’t be in the place he is right now either.
It would actually be very funny, if implausible, if after both parties finally have to stop pussyfooting around in the new year at some point, that one or both suddenly see massive turnarounds, like they both drop into the mid twenties .
Poll leads await the Tories so long as they deliver on Brexit by 29th March. Any sort of extension will see them tank.
Every new political figure goes through a brief honeymoon where many supporters are willing to hope that the figure in question secretly agrees with them. It's something of a mystery that this has lasted so long with Jeremy, but not a mystery that it happened at all.
What is more of a mystery is why the Lib Dems aren't benefitting. There seems to be a big constituency whose worldview is far, far closer to that of the Lib Dems than to either of the other two big parties, but seem almost unaware of the existence of the party. To be honest, I have to stop and think for a bit nowadays if for some reason I want to remember who the leader of the Lib Dems is.
The Lib Dems are below the relevance threshold.
What is their USP to raise them back above it?
Well, that they're led by an enthusiastic remainer.
]I'm not a remainer personally. But clearly many people are; clearly there are many people to whom 'Remain' is a more compelling ideology than any other. You would have thought that a party which until recently got quite a lot of coverage in politics might provide a natural home for these people. But seeming not - so far, at least. Instead, remainers cling to a party led by a man who for 30 years in the upper decile of leaviest MPs in the house of commons. It's not as if mainstream remainers have much else in common with Jeremy either.
It’s because a lot of people who are Remainers aren’t exactly happy with the status quo. Many of them are concerned about the current economic settlement. The problem is, many of the establishment Remainers seem very pro status quo. There is no appeal for many in voting for people who come across as believing the world was okay until Brexit and a Trump, and whose plan is just to take us back to the year 2010.
Corbyn [snip] voted and campaigned for remain.....
Did he fuck
He was there but he wasn't involved
^This.
With respect* to Jezziah there is a basic rule at play here that as long as we remember that he is under the influence of the black sleep of the Kali Ma Corbyn cult, you can trust every word he says to be unadulterated truth
The Labour Party is fucked. As deeply and as badly as the Tories are fucked. Brexit will smash the ability of both parties to pretend that they remain single parties where even if we retain FPTP neither party will have a "majority" even if on paper they do.
Time for TSE to roll out a Christmas PR thread. Perhaps PR is how the country is able to move on. We could have a German style CDU/CSU group for the Tories and a Lab/Co-op/Green group for the left.
And have permanent coalition between the centre right group and the centre left group regardless of who the people actually vote for? Genius.
Yes - that would satisfy most people. It would only be the extreme left and right wingers who would complain.
Would it really? We are living in an era where the centre is currently being pushed to the margins. If it was as popular as many of this site think it is Brexit and Corbyn’s election would not have happened. Macron also wouldn’t be in the place he is right now either.
Centrism being popular (or rather, always being popular) is just a myth.
Mr. Andrew, that sounds reminiscent of food shortages, or fears thereof, following bad harvests in the 16th century. People, including a certain William Shakespeare, broke the law by hoarding food, increasing prices even more, and enabling them to sell the excess at higher profit.
Every new political figure goes through a brief honeymoon where many supporters are willing to hope that the figure in question secretly agrees with them. It's something of a mystery that this has lasted so long with Jeremy, but not a mystery that it happened at all.
What is more of a mystery is why the Lib Dems aren't benefitting. There seems to be a big constituency whose worldview is far, far closer to that of the Lib Dems than to either of the other two big parties, but seem almost unaware of the existence of the party. To be honest, I have to stop and think for a bit nowadays if for some reason I want to remember who the leader of the Lib Dems is.
The Lib Dems are below the relevance threshold.
What is their USP to raise them back above it?
Well, that they're led by an enthusiastic remainer.
]I'm not a remainer personally. But clearly many people are; clearly there are many people to whom 'Remain' is a more compelling ideology than any other. You would have thought that a party which until recently got quite a lot of coverage in politics might provide a natural home for these people. But seeming not - so far, at least. Instead, remainers cling to a party led by a man who for 30 years in the upper decile of leaviest MPs in the house of commons. It's not as if mainstream remainers have much else in common with Jeremy either.
It’s because a lot of people who are Remainers aren’t exactly happy with the status quo. Many of them are concerned about the current economic settlement. The problem is, many of the establishment Remainers seem very pro status quo. There is no appeal for many in voting for people who come across as believing the world was okay until Brexit and a Trump, and whose plan is just to take us back to the year 2010.
I think that is a very perceptive comment.
Many of the most ardent Remainers do indeed come across as people who believe everyone was misled by a few populist demagogues and a few liars.
In fact, it is because the centrist politicians have failed that the extremes are listened to.
She's a fucking awful writer. Those 27 publishers that rejected her at least have their self respect.
There are millions of readers out there that disagree with you. Still, what would they know, eh?
Having a great idea for a story does not make you a good writer. She had a brilliant idea but in terms of actual writing ability Dura_Ace is correct. As I am sure millions of parents have found out trying to read the stories out loud, technically she is a very poor writer with a very poor grasp of prose.
That said, she created a fabulous world and has helped encourage reading in millions of kids around the world so she deserves all the success she gets.
What rot you post sometimes Richard.
You don't like her books? Well, fair enough. Does that make her a poor writer? No.
She is a fine writer and has shown she can turn her hand to several genres with success. Her plots are good, her characters are credible and like real people, complex and irrational.
Sure, she doesn't write highbrow literature but she's not a 'poor writer'.
It seems one reason you like her writing must be your utter lack of basic comprehension. Where did I say I didn't like her books? I said she wrote great stories and that she deserved all the success she got because of how she had inspired people to read.
But that does not by any means make her a good writer. Her prose is stilted and generally accepted to be difficult to read aloud. Her grammar is pretty atrocious and her use of vocabulary limited. She is a great storyteller but a poor writer.
Where did I say that you said you didn't like her books? "You don't like her books?" is a question, not a statement.
Anyway this is a silly argument. We agree she's not a 'great' writer and tbh I very much doubt whether, with 500m books sold, she gives a quaffle about my or your opinions.
Happy Chirstmas!
Her books represent something that wasnt supposed to happen the perpetual demise of books and reading amongst children. These books are 'proper book', for many children these were the first real books they have read, and enjoyed. Getting them onto other stuff. Look at the explosion of young adult fiction.
She will be looked on as important to young adult fiction and the genre that The Beatles are for popular music.....
'Tis true indeed.
(When we steer clear of politics I end up agreeing with you - how strange?!)
Reality Check verdict: EU rules mean the UK cannot reduce VAT on goods and services below 15%, the standard rate of VAT in the EU. The standard rate of VAT in the UK is 20%, so the government could reduce it by up to 5% today if it wanted. Domestic fuel is on a special list of pre-approved goods and services that are subject to lower VAT rates and it would require the agreement of all other EU members to reduce it further.
...
Under EU rules, countries must apply a minimum standard VAT rate of 15%. They have an option of applying one or two reduced rates, no lower than 5%, to certain specified goods on a pre-approved list.
She's a fucking awful writer. Those 27 publishers that rejected her at least have their self respect.
There are millions of readers out there that disagree with you. Still, what would they know, eh?
Having a great idea for a story does not make you a good writer. She had a brilliant idea but in terms of actual writing ability Dura_Aceries out loud, technically she is a very poor writer with a very poor grasp of prose.
That said, she created a fabulous world and has helped encourage reading in millions of kids around the world so she deserves all the success she gets.
What rot you post sometimes Richard.
You don't like her books? Well, fair enough. Does that make her a poor writer? No.
She is a fine writer and has shown she can turn her hand to several genres with success. Her plots are good, her characters are credible and like real people, complex and irrational.
Sure, she doesn't write highbrow literature but she's not a 'poor writer'.
It seems one reason you like her writing must be your utter lack of basic comprehension. Where did I say I didn't like her books? I said she wrote great stories and that she deservedshe had inspired people to read.
But that does not by any means make her a good writer. Her prose is stilted and generally accepted to be difficult to read aloud. Her grammar is pretty atrocious and her use of vocabulary limited. She is a great storyteller but a poor writer.
Where did I say that you said you didn't like her books? "You don't like her books?" is a question, not a statement.
Anyway this is a silly argument. We agree she's not a 'great' writer and tbh I very much doubt whether, with 500m books sold, she gives a quaffle about my or your opinions.
Happy Chirstmas!
Her books represent something that wasnt supposed to happen the perpetual demise of books and reading amongst children. These books are 'proper book', for many children these were the first real books they have read, and enjoyed. Getting them onto other stuff. Look at the explosion of young adult fiction.
She will be looked on as important to young adult fiction and the genre that The Beatles are for popular music.....
'Tis true indeed.
(When we steer clear of politics I end up agreeing with you - how strange?!)
It is but the Christmas spirit. Normal service shall resume soon
Just back from a week in Rome. Have I missed much?
Just the fact that there is wifi in Italy!
I was kidding! I was aware that the Special One left United, that drones shut down Gatwick, Trump caused a Shutdown and Paddy died (RIP).
Just some thoughts on Rome:
Pun-tastic: Rome's public transport regularly comes under ATAC Umberto I bridge over the Tiber has left-hand running Rome's metro also has left-hand running There's a metro station named in honour of 80s singer Spagna (only kidding) Colosseum currently has a bunch of scaffolding over part of the site of the arena floor Africans selling small bracelets Bangladeshis selling selfie-sticks Eating out was a bit hit and miss - only some places had decent pasta or pizza
The reality is that yes, the EU have overreached. Cant blame them, we've allowed them to set the pace and the terms of the negotiation. They need to step back a little. Most of the EU is teetering on recession. You dislocate the fifth largest economy in a way that results in both sides actively exploring other markets while burning existing trade links in spite will be enough to turn a mild down turn into a full on recession. Germany, like always could weather pretty much any storm but less so in France and the other northern european countries who are struggling with a multitude of domestic matters.
I do wonder how much their overreach was encouraged by assurances from Blair, Major, Clegg et al that if they made it difficult enough we'd change our mind under pressure.
Corbyn [snip] voted and campaigned for remain.....
Did he fuck
He was there but he wasn't involved
^This.
With respect* to Jezziah there is a basic rule at play here that as long as we remember that he is under the influence of the black sleep of the Kali Ma Corbyn cult, you can trust every word he says to be unadulterated truth
The Labour Party is fucked. As deeply and as badly as the Tories are fucked. Brexit will smash the ability of both parties to pretend that they remain single parties where even if we retain FPTP neither party will have a "majority" even if on paper they do.
Time for TSE to roll out a Christmas PR thread. Perhaps PR is how the country is able to move on. We could have a German style CDU/CSU group for the Tories and a Lab/Co-op/Green group for the left.
And have permanent coalition between the centre right group and the centre left group regardless of who the people actually vote for? Genius.
Yes - that would satisfy most people. It would only be the extreme left and right wingers who would complain.
Would it really? We are living in an era where the centre is currently being pushed to the margins. If it was as popular as many of this site think it is Brexit and Corbyn’s election would not have happened. Macron also wouldn’t be in the place he is right now either.
Centrism being popular (or rather, always being popular) is just a myth.
FBPE twitter fully subscribe to it. I actually think that centrism could make a comeback if it recognised how Iraq and 2008 changed the game. By not looking like they want a return to the way things were, but instead looking to build a better future, they’d be in much better position to challenge the left and right.
Just back from a week in Rome. Have I missed much?
Just the fact that there is wifi in Italy!
I was kidding! I was aware that the Special One left United, that drones shut down Gatwick, Trump caused a Shutdown and Paddy died (RIP).
Just some thoughts on Rome:
Pun-tastic: Rome's public transport regularly comes under ATAC Umberto I bridge over the Tiber has left-hand running Rome's metro also has left-hand running There's a metro station named in honour of 80s singer Spagna (only kidding) Colosseum currently has a bunch of scaffolding over part of the site of the arena floor Africans selling small bracelets Bangladeshis selling selfie-sticks Eating out was a bit hit and miss - only some places had decent pasta or pizza
Hopefully no pineapple pizzas though!
Did you fly there or was it an epic train journey?
Having a great idea for a story does not make you a good writer. She had a brilliant idea but in terms of actual writing ability Dura_Aceries out loud, technically she is a very poor writer with a very poor grasp of prose.
That said, she created a fabulous world and has helped encourage reading in millions of kids around the world so she deserves all the success she gets.
What rot you post sometimes Richard.
You don't like her books? Well, fair enough. Does that make her a poor writer? No.
She is a fine writer and has shown she can turn her hand to several genres with success. Her plots are good, her characters are credible and like real people, complex and irrational.
Sure, she doesn't write highbrow literature but she's not a 'poor writer'.
It seems one reason you like her writing must be your utter lack of basic comprehension. Where did I say I didn't like her books? I said she wrote great stories and that she deservedshe had inspired people to read.
But that does not by any means make her a good writer. Her prose is stilted and generally accepted to be difficult to read aloud. Her grammar is pretty atrocious and her use of vocabulary limited. She is a great storyteller but a poor writer.
Where did I say that you said you didn't like her books? "You don't like her books?" is a question, not a statement.
Anyway this is a silly argument. We agree she's not a 'great' writer and tbh I very much doubt whether, with 500m books sold, she gives a quaffle about my or your opinions.
Happy Chirstmas!
Her books represent something that wasnt supposed to happen the perpetual demise of books and reading amongst children. These books are 'proper book', for many children these were the first real books they have read, and enjoyed. Getting them onto other stuff. Look at the explosion of young adult fiction.
She will be looked on as important to young adult fiction and the genre that The Beatles are for popular music.....
'Tis true indeed.
(When we steer clear of politics I end up agreeing with you - how strange?!)
It is but the Christmas spirit. Normal service shall resume soon
Thank goodness - all this peace and harmony doesn't seem right.
Well, that they're led by an enthusiastic remainer.
]I'm not a remainer personally. But clearly many people are; clearly there are many people to whom 'Remain' is a more compelling ideology than any other. You would have thought that a party which until recently got quite a lot of coverage in politics might provide a natural home for these people. But seeming not - so far, at least. Instead, remainers cling to a party led by a man who for 30 years in the upper decile of leaviest MPs in the house of commons. It's not as if mainstream remainers have much else in common with Jeremy either.
It’s because a lot of people who are Remainers aren’t exactly happy with the status quo. Many of them are concerned about the current economic settlement. The problem is, many of the establishment Remainers seem very pro status quo. There is no appeal for many in voting for people who come across as believing the world was okay until Brexit and a Trump, and whose plan is just to take us back to the year 2010.
I think that is a very perceptive comment.
Many of the most ardent Remainers do indeed come across as people who believe everyone was misled by a few populist demagogues and a few liars.
In fact, it is because the centrist politicians have failed that the extremes are listened to.
I agree, it is a very perceptive comment indeed.
Leave was a vote for change, any change, for people for whom society/the economy isn't working.
Remain was a vote for "everything's fine, carry on" in 2016. Most remainers talk now about setting back the clock to the way things were before the referendum, without seeming to realise that society wasn't working for a lot of people.
If they were serious about remaining, they would need to focus on how they will fix problems like housing, overcrowded classrooms (in some places where the majority of children's first language isn't English), long NHS wait lists and inability to see doctors, etc.
Most people voted leave not on some obscure point of sovereignty but in the hope that their lives would be better. Instead of pointing out how bad Brexit will be, Remainers need to focus on how to address these concerns. Because people's lives were already pretty sh*t.
Having a great idea for a story does not make you a good writer. She had a brilliant idea but in terms of actual writing ability Dura_Aceries out loud, technically she is a very poor writer with a very poor grasp of prose.
That said, she created a fabulous world and has helped encourage reading in millions of kids around the world so she deserves all the success she gets.
What rot you post sometimes Richard.
You don't like her books? Well, fair enough. Does that make her a poor writer? No.
She is a fine writer and has shown she can turn her hand to several genres with success. Her plots are good, her characters are credible and like real people, complex and irrational.
Sure, she doesn't write highbrow literature but she's not a 'poor writer'.
It seems one reason you like her writing must be your utter lack of basic comprehension. Where did I say I didn't like her books? I said she wrote great stories and that she deservedshe had inspired people to read.
But that does not by any means make her a good writer. Her prose is stilted and generally accepted to be difficult to read aloud. Her grammar is pretty atrocious and her use of vocabulary limited. She is a great storyteller but a poor writer.
Where did I say that you said you didn't like her books? "You don't like her books?" is a question, not a statement.
Anyway this is a silly argument. We agree she's not a 'great' writer and tbh I very much doubt whether, with 500m books sold, she gives a quaffle about my or your opinions.
Happy Chirstmas!
Her books rep
She will be looked on as important to young adult fiction and the genre that The Beatles are for popular music.....
'Tis true indeed.
(When we steer clear of politics I end up agreeing with you - how strange?!)
It is but the Christmas spirit. Normal service shall resume soon
Thank goodness - all this peace and harmony doesn't seem right.
Indeed - no one ever said we should keep that feeling with us all year round
Just back from a week in Rome. Have I missed much?
Just the fact that there is wifi in Italy!
I was kidding! I was aware that the Special One left United, that drones shut down Gatwick, Trump caused a Shutdown and Paddy died (RIP).
Just some thoughts on Rome:
Pun-tastic: Rome's public transport regularly comes under ATAC Umberto I bridge over the Tiber has left-hand running Rome's metro also has left-hand running There's a metro station named in honour of 80s singer Spagna (only kidding) Colosseum currently has a bunch of scaffolding over part of the site of the arena floor Africans selling small bracelets Bangladeshis selling selfie-sticks Eating out was a bit hit and miss - only some places had decent pasta or pizza
Hopefully no pineapple pizzas though!
Did you fly there or was it an epic train journey?
Flew from LHR to FCO and back. I was with my mum, you see. But I did do the airport train from Fiumicino to Termini, and parts of Metro A (Ottoviano to Termini) and Metro B (Termini to Colosseo). Oh and Tram 3 from Belli to Instruzione and Tram 8 from Instruzione to Circo Massimo. This was the first rail territory in Italy that I've captured since I did Pisa Airport - Pisa - Florence back in 2000.
Having a great idea for a story does not make you a good writer. She had a brilliant idea but in terms of actual writing ability Dura_Aceries out loud, technically she is a very poor writer with a very poor grasp of prose.
That said, she created a fabulous world and has helped encourage reading in millions of kids around the world so she deserves all the success she gets.
What rot you post sometimes Richard.
You don't like her books? Well, fair enough. Does that make her a poor writer? No.
She is a fine writer and has shown she can turn her hand to several genres with success. Her plots are good, her characters are credible and like real people, complex and irrational.
Sure, she doesn't write highbrow literature but she's not a 'poor writer'.
It seems one reason you like her writing must be your utter lack of basic comprehension. Where did I say I didn't like her books? I said she wrote great stories and that she deservedshe had inspired people to read.
But that does not by any means make her a good writer. Her prose is stilted and generally accepted to be difficult to read aloud. Her grammar is pretty atrocious and her use of vocabulary limited. She is a great storyteller but a poor writer.
Where did I say that you said you didn't like her books? "You don't like her books?" is a question, not a statement.
Anyway this is a silly argument. We agree she's not a 'great' writer and tbh I very much doubt whether, with 500m books sold, she gives a quaffle about my or your opinions.
Happy Chirstmas!
Her books rep
She will be looked on as important to young adult fiction and the genre that The Beatles are for popular music.....
'Tis true indeed.
(When we steer clear of politics I end up agreeing with you - how strange?!)
It is but the Christmas spirit. Normal service shall resume soon
Thank goodness - all this peace and harmony doesn't seem right.
Indeed - no one ever said we should keep that feeling with us all year round
Well, that they're led by an enthusiastic remainer.
]I'm not a remainer personally. But clearly many people are; clearly there are many people to whom 'Remain' is a more compelling ideology than any other. You would have thought that a party which until recently got quite a lot of coverage in politics might provide a natural home for these people. But seeming not - so far, at least. Instead, remainers cling to a party led by a man who for 30 years in the upper decile of leaviest MPs in the house of commons. It's not as if mainstream remainers have much else in common with Jeremy either.
It’s because a lot of people who are Remainers aren’t exactly happy with the status quo. Many of them are concerned about the current economic settlement. The problem is, many of the establishment Remainers seem very pro status quo. There is no appeal for many in voting for people who come across as believing the world was okay until Brexit and a Trump, and whose plan is just to take us back to the year 2010.
I think that is a very perceptive comment.
Many of the most ardent Remainers do indeed come across as people who believe everyone was misled by a few populist demagogues and a few liars.
In fact, it is because the centrist politicians have failed that the extremes are listened to.
I agree, it is a very perceptive comment indeed.
Leave was a vote for change, any change, for people for whom society/the economy isn't working.
Remain was a vote for "everything's fine, carry on" in 2016. Most remainers talk now about setting back the clock to the way things were before the referendum, without seeming to realise that society wasn't working for a lot of people.
If they were serious about remaining, they would need to focus on how they will fix problems like housing, overcrowded classrooms (in some places where the majority of children's first language isn't English), long NHS wait lists and inability to see doctors, etc.
Most people voted leave not on some obscure point of sovereignty but in the hope that their lives would be better. Instead of pointing out how bad Brexit will be, Remainers need to focus on how to address these concerns. Because people's lives were already pretty sh*t.
Great post. All points that people like Alastair Campbell don’t seem get if you follow them on twitter. Many of the establishment Democrats/Hilary supporters in the US are exactly like this as well. Constantly looking to some mythical brilliant past when everyone got along and it was all rainbows and butterflies.
Well, that they're led by an enthusiastic remainer.
It’s because a lot of people who are Remainers aren’t exactly happy with the status quo. Many of them are concerned about the current economic settlement. The problem is, many of the establishment Remainers seem very pro status quo. There is no appeal for many in voting for people who come across as believing the world was okay until Brexit and a Trump, and whose plan is just to take us back to the year 2010.
I think that is a very perceptive comment.
Many of the most ardent Remainers do indeed come across as people who believe everyone was misled by a few populist demagogues and a few liars.
In fact, it is because the centrist politicians have failed that the extremes are listened to.
I agree, it is a very perceptive comment indeed.
Leave was a vote for change, any change, for people for whom society/the economy isn't working.
Remain was a vote for "everything's fine, carry on" in 2016. Most remainers talk now about setting back the clock to the way things were before the referendum, without seeming to realise that society wasn't working for a lot of people.
If they were serious about remaining, they would need to focus on how they will fix problems like housing, overcrowded classrooms (in some places where the majority of children's first language isn't English), long NHS wait lists and inability to see doctors, etc.
Most people voted leave not on some obscure point of sovereignty but in the hope that their lives would be better. Instead of pointing out how bad Brexit will be, Remainers need to focus on how to address these concerns. Because people's lives were already pretty sh*t.
Well as a left-leaning Remainer I firmly believe we could address all those things much better by remaining in the EU and having an economic policy that focuses on improving public services, which yes, I know, will mean higher taxes.
I don't think the EU is perfect, far from it, but I don't think leaving is going to do anything to solve the sort of issues flagged up above. In fact it will probably make them worse, as the economy slows or even contracts.
Well, that they're led by an enthusiastic remainer.
It’s
I think that is a very perceptive comment.
Many of the most ardent Remainers do indeed come across as people who believe everyone was misled by a few populist demagogues and a few liars.
In fact, it is because the centrist politicians have failed that the extremes are listened to.
I agree, it is a very perceptive comment indeed.
Leave was a vote for change, any change, for people for whom society/the economy isn't working.
Remain was a vote for "everything's fine, carry on" in 2016. Most remainers talk now about setting back the clock to the way things were before the referendum, without seeming to realise that society wasn't working for a lot of people.
If they were serious about remaining, they would need to focus on how they will fix problems like housing, overcrowded classrooms (in some places where the majority of children's first language isn't English), long NHS wait lists and inability to see doctors, etc.
Most people voted leave not on some obscure point of sovereignty but in the hope that their lives would be better. Instead of pointing out how bad Brexit will be, Remainers need to focus on how to address these concerns. Because people's lives were already pretty sh*t.
Well as a left leaning Remainer I firmly believe we could fix all those things much better bt remaining in the EU and having an economic policy that focuses on improving public services which yes, I know, will mean higher taxes. I don't think the EU is perfect, far from it, but I don't think leaving is going to do anything to solve the sort of issues flagged up above. In fact it will probably make them worse, as the economy slows or even contracts.
And you might be right. But there are far too many people who think that merely remaining initself means all problems will be solved, they act like the referendum caused various things rather than being an outlet for it, for escalating them perhaps, but the outcome would not have happened without the feelings that already existed. And while you may not be of the 'the people are dumb and got tricked, but now we should listen to them again because they'll get it right this time' crowd, there are plenty who are part of it.
It’s because a lot of people who are Remainers aren’t exactly happy with the status quo. Many of them are concerned about the current economic settlement. The problem is, many of the establishment Remainers seem very pro status quo. There is no appeal for many in voting for people who come across as believing the world was okay until Brexit and a Trump, and whose plan is just to take us back to the year 2010.
I think that is a very perceptive comment.
Many of the most ardent Remainers do indeed come across as people who believe everyone was misled by a few populist demagogues and a few liars.
In fact, it is because the centrist politicians have failed that the extremes are listened to.
I agree, it is a very perceptive comment indeed.
Leave was a vote for change, any change, for people for whom society/the economy isn't working.
Remain was a vote for "everything's fine, carry on" in 2016. Most remainers talk now about setting back the clock to the way things were before the referendum, without seeming to realise that society wasn't working for a lot of people.
If they were serious about remaining, they would need to focus on how they will fix problems like housing, overcrowded classrooms (in some places where the majority of children's first language isn't English), long NHS wait lists and inability to see doctors, etc.
Most people voted leave not on some obscure point of sovereignty but in the hope that their lives would be better. Instead of pointing out how bad Brexit will be, Remainers need to focus on how to address these concerns. Because people's lives were already pretty sh*t.
Great post. All points that people like Alastair Campbell don’t seem get if you follow them on twitter. Many of the establishment Democrats/Hilary supporters in the US are exactly like this as well. Constantly looking to some mythical brilliant past when everyone got along and it was all rainbows and butterflies.
I agree with the first part of this.
In terms of your last sentence though, I can see where you're coming from but surely the ERG mob are even more guilty of "Constantly looking to some mythical brilliant past when everyone got along and it was all rainbows and butterflies. "? (Albeit their golden age is the 1950s rather than the 1990s.)
Well, that they're led by an enthusiastic remainer.
It’s because a lot of people who are Remainers aren’t exactly happy with the status quo. Many of them are concerned about the current economic settlement. The problem is, many of the establishment Remainers seem very pro status quo. There is no appeal for many in voting for people who come across as believing the world was okay until Brexit and a Trump, and whose plan is just to take us back to the year 2010.
I think that is a very perceptive comment.
Many of the most ardent Remainers do indeed come across as people who believe everyone was misled by a few populist demagogues and a few liars.
In fact, it is because the centrist politicians have failed that the extremes are listened to.
I agree, it is a very perceptive comment indeed.
Leave was a vote for change, any change, for people for whom society/the economy isn't working.
Remain was a vote for "everything's fine, carry on" in 2016. Most remainers talk now about setting back the clock to the way things were before the referendum, without seeming to realise that society wasn't working for a lot of people.
If they were serious about remaining, they would need to focus on how they will fix problems like housing, overcrowded classrooms (in some places where the majority of children's first language isn't English), long NHS wait lists and inability to see doctors, etc.
Most people voted leave not on some obscure point of sovereignty but in the hope that their lives would be better. Instead of pointing out how bad Brexit will be, Remainers need to focus on how to address these concerns. Because people's lives were already pretty sh*t.
Well as a left-leaning Remainer I firmly believe we could address all those things much better by remaining in the EU and having an economic policy that focuses on improving public services, which yes, I know, will mean higher taxes.
I don't think the EU is perfect, far from it, but I don't think leaving is going to do anything to solve the sort of issues flagged up above. In fact it will probably make them worse, as the economy slows or even contracts.
But I think we can fix it while remaining in the EU doesn't say how or what you will do to fix it. And unless you explicitly say how (and ideally show that its already in process) you aren't going to change many peoples' votes..
Mr. Andrew, that sounds reminiscent of food shortages, or fears thereof, following bad harvests in the 16th century. People, including a certain William Shakespeare, broke the law by hoarding food, increasing prices even more, and enabling them to sell the excess at higher profit.
Someone should have introduced laws to control the price of staple foods, like corn for instance.
It’s because a lot of people who are Remainers aren’t exactly happy with the status quo. Many of them are concerned about the current economic settlement. The problem is, many of the establishment Remainers seem very pro status quo. There is no appeal for many in voting for people who come across as believing the world was okay until Brexit and a Trump, and whose plan is just to take us back to the year 2010.
I think that is a very perceptive comment.
Many of the most ardent Remainers do indeed come across as people who believe everyone was misled by a few populist demagogues and a few liars.
In fact, it is because the centrist politicians have failed that the extremes are listened to.
I agree, it is a very perceptive comment indeed.
Leave was a vote for change, any change, for people for whom society/the economy isn't working.
Remain was a vote for "everything's fine, carry on" in 2016. Most remainers talk now about setting back the clock to the way things were before the referendum, without seeming to realise that society wasn't working for a lot of people.
If they were serious about remaining, they would need to focus on how they will fix problems like housing, overcrowded classrooms (in some places where the majority of children's first language isn't English), long NHS wait lists and inability to see doctors, etc.
Most people voted leave not on some obscure point of sovereignty but in the hope that their lives would be better. Instead of pointing out how bad Brexit will be, Remainers need to focus on how to address these concerns. Because people's lives were already pretty sh*t.
Great post. All points that people like Alastair Campbell don’t seem get if you follow them on twitter. Many of the establishment Democrats/Hilary supporters in the US are exactly like this as well. Constantly looking to some mythical brilliant past when everyone got along and it was all rainbows and butterflies.
I agree with the first part of this.
In terms of your last sentence though, I can see where you're coming from but surely the ERG mob are even more guilty of "Constantly looking to some mythical brilliant past when everyone got along and it was all rainbows and butterflies. "? (Albeit their golden age is the 1950s rather than the 1990s.)
Being more guilty of it doesn't make others not guilty of it of course. And the ERG are less likely to get what they want than Remainers.
@Benpointer I agree with you 100% that the ERGers are exactly like that. Which is why it’s so disappointing to see liberal Remainers (who I expect more from) do the same thing.
"Merry Christmas, my fellow pb-ers, Merry Christmas."
And from me too. Since Brexit, the old gits I meet with have tended not to mention the referendum much, but lately they've occasionally teased each other. Never too seriously, because as you say, it's only politics, not real life.
We have a laugh then go back to moaning about politics in general, the younger generation, and whatever topic takes our fancy.
Many of the most ardent Remainers do indeed come across as people who believe everyone was misled by a few populist demagogues and a few liars.
In fact, it is because the centrist politicians have failed that the extremes are listened to.
I agree, it is a very perceptive comment indeed.
Leave was a vote for change, any change, for people for whom society/the economy isn't working.
Remain was a vote for "everything's fine, carry on" in 2016. Most remainers talk now about setting back the clock to the way things were before the referendum, without seeming to realise that society wasn't working for a lot of people.
If they were serious about remaining, they would need to focus on how they will fix problems like housing, overcrowded classrooms (in some places where the majority of children's first language isn't English), long NHS wait lists and inability to see doctors, etc.
Most people voted leave not on some obscure point of sovereignty but in the hope that their lives would be better. Instead of pointing out how bad Brexit will be, Remainers need to focus on how to address these concerns. Because people's lives were already pretty sh*t.
Great post. All points that people like Alastair Campbell don’t seem get if you follow them on twitter. Many of the establishment Democrats/Hilary supporters in the US are exactly like this as well. Constantly looking to some mythical brilliant past when everyone got along and it was all rainbows and butterflies.
I agree with the first part of this.
In terms of your last sentence though, I can see where you're coming from but surely the ERG mob are even more guilty of "Constantly looking to some mythical brilliant past when everyone got along and it was all rainbows and butterflies. "? (Albeit their golden age is the 1950s rather than the 1990s.)
Being more guilty of it doesn't make others not guilty of it of course. And the ERG are less likely to get what they want than Remainers.
Hence my "I can see where you're coming from" comment.
Well, that they're led by an enthusiastic remainer.
It’s because a lot of people who are Remainers aren’t exactly happy with the status quo. Many of them are concerned about the current economic settlement. The problem is, many of the establishment Remainers seem very pro status quo. There is no appeal for many in voting for people who come across as believing the world was okay until Brexit and a Trump, and whose plan is just to take us back to the year 2010.
I think that is a very perceptive comment.
Many of the most ardent Remainers do indeed come across as people who believe everyone was misled by a few populist demagogues and a few liars.
In fact, it is because the centrist politicians have failed that the extremes are listened to.
I agree, it is a very perceptive comment indeed.
Leave was a vote for change, any change, for people for whom society/the economy isn't working.
Remain was a vote for "everything's fine, carry on" in 2016. Most remainers talk now about setting back the clock to the way things were before the referendum, without seeming to realise that society wasn't working for a lot of people.
If they were serious about remaining, they would need to focus on how they will fix problems like housing, overcrowded classrooms (in some places where the majority of children's first language isn't English), long NHS wait lists and inability to see doctors, etc.
Most people voted leave not on some obscure point of sovereignty but in the hope that their lives would be better. Instead of pointing out how bad Brexit will be, Remainers need to focus on how to address these concerns. Because people's lives were already pretty sh*t.
Well as a left-leaning Remainer I firmly believe we could address all those things much better by remaining in the EU and having an economic policy that focuses on improving public services, which yes, I know, will mean higher taxes.
I don't think the EU is perfect, far from it, but I don't think leaving is going to do anything to solve the sort of issues flagged up above. In fact it will probably make them worse, as the economy slows or even contracts.
But I think we can fix it while remaining in the EU doesn't say how or what you will do to fix it. And unless you explicitly say how (and ideally show that its already in process) you aren't going to change many peoples' votes..
Tbh I have no expectation of changing anyone's vote. Events, if anything, will do that.
@Benpointer I agree with you 100% that the ERGers are exactly like that. Which is why it’s so disappointing to see liberal Remainers (who I expect more from) do the same thing.
Well as a left-leaning Remainer I firmly believe we could address all those things much better by remaining in the EU and having an economic policy that focuses on improving public services, which yes, I know, will mean higher taxes.
I don't think the EU is perfect, far from it, but I don't think leaving is going to do anything to solve the sort of issues flagged up above. In fact it will probably make them worse, as the economy slows or even contracts.
I sympathise, but I honestly don't agree.
The fact that "Hair Fluffer" Juncker -- the man who negotiated the favourable tax arrangements for Amazon as President of Luxembourg -- is the figurehead of the EU is a telling piece of symbolism.
Everyone (bar Cameron and Orban) voted for Junker.
There is nothing more urgent than tax reform so that massively tax-avoiding companies like Amazon make a proper contribution to the Exchequer.
The EU has been on the side of the rich, and the tax avoiders, and the plutocrats for too long for us to pretend it has any real progressive or reforming agenda.
big regular Xmas knees-up last night, with all my old mates from uni and squatting days and a few wives and strays picked up on the way.
I'd say 70% of them were Left, and 90% were Remain - indeed the only Leavers were me and one other - the furthest left of all: a proper Marxist Corbynite, who knows Jeremy is a Leaver and likes it.
The trouble for Labour is that all the other Labour people at the table were Remain (as you'd expect from the stats). And at least half of them are deeply troubled/have only just realised that Corbyn is not on their side re Brexit. I think Labour will slowly shed polling points as this ever becomes clearer in the New Year.
On the upside, for everyone, once we'd had our big Brexit debate, we all breathed a sigh of relief, and went back to drinking too much, telling old stories, making insane toasts to each other, and singing lustily into the wee small hours. Because we are old friends and friendship is more important than any politics. It was a splendid evening.
Merry Christmas, my fellow pb-ers, Merry Christmas
If Corbyn were smart (yes, I know, cue howls from the gallery), he would pivot to a second referendum at the last possible point. Perhaps after a snap election that Mrs May thinks she will comfortably win, if Labour start slipping in the polls.
The question for Corbyn is what does he want more - power or his principles? He may not get to enact his exact brand of socialism with the EU acting as a restraint. But he doesn't get to enact any brand of socialism at all if he can't get near the levers of power.
At some point, pragmatism will kick in. Corbyn wants Brexit and he wants the Tories to do it so he can do what he likes after. But if he sees a remain pivot as his best way to power, surely he has to take it?
The average of the Yougov and Opinium polls quoted earlier does not imply that much is shifting psephologically . A Tory lead of 1.5% would imply six Labour gains at Tory expense with a small number also falling to the Libdems. Tories would probably fall below 310 seats with DUP support no longer sufficient to continue in office.
big regular Xmas knees-up last night, with all my old mates from uni and squatting days and a few wives and strays picked up on the way.
I'd say 70% of them were Left, and 90% were Remain - indeed the only Leavers were me and one other - the furthest left of all: a proper Marxist Corbynite, who knows Jeremy is a Leaver and likes it.
The trouble for Labour is that all the other Labour people at the table were Remain (as you'd expect from the stats). And at least half of them are deeply troubled/have only just realised that Corbyn is not on their side re Brexit. I think Labour will slowly shed polling points as this ever becomes clearer in the New Year.
On the upside, for everyone, once we'd had our big Brexit debate, we all breathed a sigh of relief, and went back to drinking too much, telling old stories, making insane toasts to each other, and singing lustily into the wee small hours. Because we are old friends and friendship is more important than any politics. It was a splendid evening.
Merry Christmas, my fellow pb-ers, Merry Christmas
If Corbyn were smart (yes, I know, cue howls from the gallery), he would pivot to a second referendum at the last possible point. Perhaps after a snap election that Mrs May thinks she will comfortably win, if Labour start slipping in the polls.
The question for Corbyn is what does he want more - power or his principles? He may not get to enact his exact brand of socialism with the EU acting as a restraint. But he doesn't get to enact any brand of socialism at all if he can't get near the levers of power.
At some point, pragmatism will kick in. Corbyn wants Brexit and he wants the Tories to do it so he can do what he likes after. But if he sees a remain pivot as his best way to power, surely he has to take it?
I think he will. He's gotten harder, more cynical, in the last 3 plus years.
Mr. 64, no, but they were enacted by Emperor Julian, to the righteous displeasure and condemnation of Ammianus Marcellinus. [Food, not electricity, of course].
The Guardian is now reporting that 'Pharmaceutical organisations working with Whitehall to maintain medicine supplies in the event of a no-deal Brexit have signed 26 “gagging orders” that bar them from revealing information to the public.
Figures show that 16 drug companies and 10 trade associations have been asked to sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) which prevent them from revealing any information related to contingency plans drawn up with the Department of Health and Social Care.'
Why all the NDA's? What has the Government got to hide
(Rhetorical question)
Price. Location (drugs are high value, low volume and easily transportable)
Mr. Cwsc, the last 'reform' the EU tried to tax Amazon more ended up shafting small and micro-businesses and forcing many of them to sign up to marketplaces, including Amazon, to handle the bureaucracy.
Well as a left-leaning Remainer I firmly believe we could address all those things much better by remaining in the EU and having an economic policy that focuses on improving public services, which yes, I know, will mean higher taxes.
I don't think the EU is perfect, far from it, but I don't think leaving is going to do anything to solve the sort of issues flagged up above. In fact it will probably make them worse, as the economy slows or even contracts.
I sympathise, but I honestly don't agree.
The fact that "Hair Fluffer" Juncker -- the man who negotiated the favourable tax arrangements for Amazon as President of Luxembourg -- is the figurehead of the EU is a telling piece of symbolism.
Everyone (bar Cameron and Orban) voted for Junker.
There is nothing more urgent than tax reform so that massively tax-avoiding companies like Amazon make a proper contribution to the Exchequer.
The EU has been on the side of the rich, and the tax avoiders, and the plutocrats for too long for us to pretend it has any real progressive or reforming agenda.
And yet, and yet... there's a lot in the Social Chapter which supports and protects ordinary people, the REACH chemical regulations are hardly aimed at supporting big business. There's much to like about the EU (imo).
Also, if an ERG-led Tory party is managing the economy after Brexit how much faith do I have in the idea that, as they try to build their Singapore-on-Thames, they will go after tax avoiding companies? Answer: none at all.
The average of the Yougov and Opinium polls quoted earlier does not imply that much is shifting psephologically . A Tory lead of 1.5% would imply six Labour gains at Tory expense with a small number also falling to the Libdems. Tories would probably fall below 310 seats with DUP support no longer sufficient to continue in office.
This is against one of the most chaotic governments in history, with a significantly unpopular prime minister.
As has been pointed out a squillion times, Labour should be polling 15-20 points ahead. It is frankly incredible that they are still behind. But then, Corbyn.
If he stays at the Labour helm, barring a Brexit Apocalypse and early GE, I think the Tories will win an overall majority in 2022, under a new leader.
If they can manage a soft Brexit, you may well be right. But the ERG and hardline Tory Remainers are doing their best to prevent a soft Brexit atm.
Mr. Cwsc, the last 'reform' the EU tried to tax Amazon more ended up shafting small and micro-businesses and forcing many of them to sign up to marketplaces, including Amazon, to handle the bureaucracy.
It honestly baffles me that anyone can consider the EU as a force for progressive reform.
I would have said that in an area I know well, science policy, the EU has been actively harmful.
As usual with the EU, the beneficiaries have been very wealthy, very powerful institutions (like a handful of premier universities or the Max Planck Society).
Poorer institutions (and poorer countries) have been ruthlessly stripped of what little they had.
The average of the Yougov and Opinium polls quoted earlier does not imply that much is shifting psephologically . A Tory lead of 1.5% would imply six Labour gains at Tory expense with a small number also falling to the Libdems. Tories would probably fall below 310 seats with DUP support no longer sufficient to continue in office.
This is against one of the most chaotic governments in history, with a significantly unpopular prime minister.
As has been pointed out a squillion times, Labour should be polling 15-20 points ahead. It is frankly incredible that they are still behind. But then, Corbyn.
If he stays at the Labour helm, barring a Brexit Apocalypse and early GE, I think the Tories will win an overall majority in 2022, under a new leader.
That is fair enough - though there has to be a good possibility that the polls are flattering the Tories somewhat as a result of Brexit having frozen out the Opposition from day to day media commentary. Election campaigns also usually benefit the Opposition somewhat in polling terms.
The average of the Yougov and Opinium polls quoted earlier does not imply that much is shifting psephologically . A Tory lead of 1.5% would imply six Labour gains at Tory expense with a small number also falling to the Libdems. Tories would probably fall below 310 seats with DUP support no longer sufficient to continue in office.
The way labour are heading under Brexiteer Corbyn is only one way and it is not government
Also, if an ERG-led Tory party is managing the economy after Brexit how much faith do I have in the idea that, as they try to build their Singapore-on-Thames, they will go after tax avoiding companies? Answer: none at all.
We may not agree about the EU, but we can certainly agree about the ERG and Rees-Mogg.
(I am OK with May's deal and would vote for it if an MP).
The average of the Yougov and Opinium polls quoted earlier does not imply that much is shifting psephologically . A Tory lead of 1.5% would imply six Labour gains at Tory expense with a small number also falling to the Libdems. Tories would probably fall below 310 seats with DUP support no longer sufficient to continue in office.
This is against one of the most chaotic governments in history, with a significantly unpopular prime minister.
As has been pointed out a squillion times, Labour should be polling 15-20 points ahead. It is frankly incredible that they are still behind. But then, Corbyn.
If he stays at the Labour helm, barring a Brexit Apocalypse and early GE, I think the Tories will win an overall majority in 2022, under a new leader.
That is fair enough - though there has to be a good possibility that the polls are flattering the Tories somewhat as a result of Brexit having frozen out the Opposition from day to day media commentary. Election campaigns also usually benefit the Opposition somewhat in polling terms.
Yes, possibly. The Tories cannot be comfortable at this situation, but even with all the reasons the opposition might not be making as much traction as they might usually, it does seem remarkable. Labour cannot assume they will always have such a positive campaign, and their position is strange to say the least.
Mr. Cwsc, larger institutions/businesses can handle the red tape and have the muscle for lobbying. Small ones have a harder time jumping through hoops and don't have the ear of the Lord High Poobah.
Of course, one can like the EU or not, but it's pretty clear one reason bigger firms/organisations like it is that they get a double advantage from it.
You make it sound like that happens in science as well as business.
Mr. 64, no. As we noted yesterday, Ammianus Marcellinus was right, and May, Miliband and the authorities of the past were wrong.
Such prices were sometimes introduced as emergency measures. They proved useless.
Energy price caps weren't being proposed to counter the effects of a shortage of energy though were they?
Those damned caps will most likely increase my dual fuel price when I renew.
The whole energy market is a fecking shitfest tbh. I spend half a day (if it goes smoothly) every year making sure we are on the cheapest deal. This means people like my mother and my father-in-law (both in their 80s, neither have internet access) subsidise me because they do not have the means or the confidence to switch. Others subsidising me include those too time poor or lacking in IT or social skills to switch.
Then I end up with a company* that, whilst charging me what MoneySavingExpert or somesuch tells me is the lowest rate, keep upping my DD and building up a pile of my money which will no doubt disappear and take me ages to recover at the point they go bust because they have undercut the market to gain unsustainable market share.
Why can't we just have a national electricity service where we all pay the same rate?
- "That would be inefficient?"
What more inefficient than having mutliple competing call centres, IT systems, switching adminstration, etc. etc?
It's madness!
(*Outfox The Market at the moment if you're interested)
The average of the Yougov and Opinium polls quoted earlier does not imply that much is shifting psephologically . A Tory lead of 1.5% would imply six Labour gains at Tory expense with a small number also falling to the Libdems. Tories would probably fall below 310 seats with DUP support no longer sufficient to continue in office.
This is against one of the most chaotic governments in history, with a significantly unpopular prime minister.
As has been pointed out a squillion times, Labour should be polling 15-20 points ahead. It is frankly incredible that they are still behind. But then, Corbyn.
If he stays at the Labour helm, barring a Brexit Apocalypse and early GE, I think the Tories will win an overall majority in 2022, under a new leader.
That is fair enough - though there has to be a good possibility that the polls are flattering the Tories somewhat as a result of Brexit having frozen out the Opposition from day to day media commentary. Election campaigns also usually benefit the Opposition somewhat in polling terms.
Yes, possibly. The Tories cannot be comfortable at this situation, but even with all the reasons the opposition might not be making as much traction as they might usually, it does seem remarkable. Labour cannot assume they will always have such a positive campaign, and their position is strange to say the least.
I think Labour will inevitably lose some votes when they finally get off their fence.
Corby's magical illusion of appearing to back Remain and Leave at the same time has been the most amazing piece of political legerdemain ....
... well, since the Great Blair managed to persuade a majority of the PLP to back a policy utterly alien to its nature and invade Iraq.
Having a great idea for a story does not make you a good writer. She had a brilliant idea but in terms of actual writing ability Dura_Aceries out loud, technically she is a very poor writer with a very poor grasp of prose.
That said, she created a fabulous world and has helped encourage reading in millions of kids around the world so she deserves all the success she gets.
What rot you post sometimes Richard.
You don't like her books? Well, fair enough. Does that make her a poor writer? No.
She is a fine writer and has shown she can turn her hand to several genres with success. Her plots are good, her characters are credible and like real people, complex and irrational.
Sure, she doesn't write highbrow literature but she's not a 'poor writer'.
It seems one reason you like her writing must be your utter lack of basic comprehension. Where did I say I didn't like her books? I said she wrote great stories and that she deservedshe had inspired people to read.
But that does not by any means make her a good writer. Her prose is stilted and generally accepted to be difficult to read aloud. Her grammar is pretty atrocious and her use of vocabulary limited. She is a great storyteller but a poor writer.
Where did I say that you said you didn't like her books? "You don't like her books?" is a question, not a statement.
Anyway this is a silly argument. We agree she's not a 'great' writer and tbh I very much doubt whether, with 500m books sold, she gives a quaffle about my or your opinions.
Happy Chirstmas!
Her books rep
She will be looked on as important to young adult fiction and the genre that The Beatles are for popular music.....
'Tis true indeed.
(When we steer clear of politics I end up agreeing with you - how strange?!)
It is but the Christmas spirit. Normal service shall resume soon
Thank goodness - all this peace and harmony doesn't seem right.
Indeed - no one ever said we should keep that feeling with us all year round
Mr. 64, no. As we noted yesterday, Ammianus Marcellinus was right, and May, Miliband and the authorities of the past were wrong.
Such prices were sometimes introduced as emergency measures. They proved useless.
Energy price caps weren't being proposed to counter the effects of a shortage of energy though were they?
Those damned caps will most likely increase my dual fuel price when I renew.
The whole energy market is a fecking shitfest tbh. I spend half a day (if it goes smoothly) every year making sure we are on the cheapest deal. This means people like my mother and my father-in-law (both in their 80s, neither have internet access) subsidise me because they do not have the means or the confidence to switch. Others subsidising me include those too time poor or lacking in IT or social skills to switch.
Then I end up with a company* that, whilst charging me what MoneySavingExpert or somesuch tells me is the lowest rate, keep upping my DD and building up a pile of my money which will no doubt disappear and take me ages to recover at the point they go bust because they have undercut the market to gain unsustainable market share.
Why can't we just have a national electricity service where we all pay the same rate?
- "That would be inefficient?"
What more inefficient than having mutliple competing call centres, IT systems, switching adminstration, etc. etc?
It's madness!
(*Outfox The Market at the moment if you're interested)
Because then you are relying on central government to invest in it and make it an efficient service.
Well as a left-leaning Remainer I firmly believe we could address all those things much better by remaining in the EU and having an economic policy that focuses on improving public services, which yes, I know, will mean higher taxes.
I don't think the EU is perfect, far from it, but I don't think leaving is going to do anything to solve the sort of issues flagged up above. In fact it will probably make them worse, as the economy slows or even contracts.
I sympathise, but I honestly don't agree.
The fact that "Hair Fluffer" Juncker -- the man who negotiated the favourable tax arrangements for Amazon as President of Luxembourg -- is the figurehead of the EU is a telling piece of symbolism.
Everyone (bar Cameron and Orban) voted for Junker.
There is nothing more urgent than tax reform so that massively tax-avoiding companies like Amazon make a proper contribution to the Exchequer.
The EU has been on the side of the rich, and the tax avoiders, and the plutocrats for too long for us to pretend it has any real progressive or reforming agenda.
And yet, and yet... there's a lot in the Social Chapter which supports and protects ordinary people, the REACH chemical regulations are hardly aimed at supporting big business. There's much to like about the EU (imo).
Also, if an ERG-led Tory party is managing the economy after Brexit how much faith do I have in the idea that, as they try to build their Singapore-on-Thames, they will go after tax avoiding companies? Answer: none at all.
I'll go further and say I'm 100% confident they would be offering the sweetheart tax-dodging deals to attract them here.
Edit - of course, rather than 'Singapore on Thames' to really piss off Juncker we could describe ourselves as 'Luxembourg with democracy and integrity.'
Mr. 64, no. As we noted yesterday, Ammianus Marcellinus was right, and May, Miliband and the authorities of the past were wrong.
Such prices were sometimes introduced as emergency measures. They proved useless.
Energy price caps weren't being proposed to counter the effects of a shortage of energy though were they?
Those damned caps will most likely increase my dual fuel price when I renew.
The whole energy market is a fecking shitfest tbh. I spend half a day (if it goes smoothly) every year making sure we are on the cheapest deal. This means people like my mother and my father-in-law (both in their 80s, neither have internet access) subsidise me because they do not have the means or the confidence to switch. Others subsidising me include those too time poor or lacking in IT or social skills to switch.
Then I end up with a company* that, whilst charging me what MoneySavingExpert or somesuch tells me is the lowest rate, keep upping my DD and building up a pile of my money which will no doubt disappear and take me ages to recover at the point they go bust because they have undercut the market to gain unsustainable market share.
Why can't we just have a national electricity service where we all pay the same rate?
- "That would be inefficient?"
What more inefficient than having mutliple competing call centres, IT systems, switching adminstration, etc. etc?
It's madness!
(*Outfox The Market at the moment if you're interested)
Because then you are relying on central government to invest in it and make it an efficient service.
Well I am willing to be convinced... What sort of efficieny improvements have we enjoyed with the current system?
Having a great idea for a story does not make you a good writer. She had a brilliant idea but in terms of actual writing ability Dura_Aceries out loud, technically she is a very poor writer with a very poor grasp of prose.
That said, she created a fabulous world and has helped encourage reading in millions of kids around the world so she deserves all the success she gets.
What rot you post sometimes Richard.
You don't like her books? Well, fair enough. Does that make her a poor writer? No.
She is a fine writer and has shown she can turn her hand to several genres with success. Her plots are good, her characters are credible and like real people, complex and irrational.
Sure, she doesn't write highbrow literature but she's not a 'poor writer'.
It seems one reason you like her writing must be your utter lack of basic comprehension. Where did I say I didn't like her books? I said she wrote great stories and that she deservedshe had inspired people to read.
But that does not by any means make her a good writer. Her prose is stilted and generally accepted to be difficult to read aloud. Her grammar is pretty atrocious and her use of vocabulary limited. She is a great storyteller but a poor writer.
Where did I say that you said you didn't like her books? "You don't like her books?" is a question, not a statement.
Anyway this is a silly argument. We agree she's not a 'great' writer and tbh I very much doubt whether, with 500m books sold, she gives a quaffle about my or your opinions.
Happy Chirstmas!
Her books rep
She will be looked on as important to young adult fiction and the genre that The Beatles are for popular music.....
'Tis true indeed.
(When we steer clear of politics I end up agreeing with you - how strange?!)
It is but the Christmas spirit. Normal service shall resume soon
Thank goodness - all this peace and harmony doesn't seem right.
Indeed - no one ever said we should keep that feeling with us all year round
The average of the Yougov and Opinium polls quoted earlier does not imply that much is shifting psephologically . A Tory lead of 1.5% would imply six Labour gains at Tory expense with a small number also falling to the Libdems. Tories would probably fall below 310 seats with DUP support no longer sufficient to continue in office.
The way labour are heading under Brexiteer Corbyn is only one way and it is not government
That view was even more widely held in April 2017 - including by myself. However, I was wrong!
The average of the Yougov and Opinium polls quoted earlier does not imply that much is shifting psephologically . A Tory lead of 1.5% would imply six Labour gains at Tory expense with a small number also falling to the Libdems. Tories would probably fall below 310 seats with DUP support no longer sufficient to continue in office.
The way labour are heading under Brexiteer Corbyn is only one way and it is not government
That view was even more widely held in April 2017 - including by myself. However, I was wrong!
Well they've not gotten into government yet, so you might not be totally wrong yet!
Mr. 64, no. As we noted yesterday, Ammianus Marcellinus was right, and May, Miliband and the authorities of the past were wrong.
Such prices were sometimes introduced as emergency measures. They proved useless.
Energy price caps weren't being proposed to counter the effects of a shortage of energy though were they?
Those damned caps will most likely increase my dual fuel price when I renew.
The whole energy market is a fecking shitfest tbh. I spend half a day (if it goes smoothly) every year making sure we are on the cheapest deal. This means people like my mother and my father-in-law (both in their 80s, neither have internet access) subsidise me because they do not have the means or the confidence to switch. Others subsidising me include those too time poor or lacking in IT or social skills to switch.
Then I end up with a company* that, whilst charging me what MoneySavingExpert or somesuch tells me is the lowest rate, keep upping my DD and building up a pile of my money which will no doubt disappear and take me ages to recover at the point they go bust because they have undercut the market to gain unsustainable market share.
Why can't we just have a national electricity service where we all pay the same rate?
- "That would be inefficient?"
What more inefficient than having mutliple competing call centres, IT systems, switching adminstration, etc. etc?
It's madness!
(*Outfox The Market at the moment if you're interested)
Because then you are relying on central government to invest in it and make it an efficient service.
Comments
"You don't like her books?" is a question, not a statement.
Anyway this is a silly argument. We agree she's not a 'great' writer and tbh I very much doubt whether, with 500m books sold, she gives a quaffle about my or your opinions.
Happy Chirstmas!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2018/12/23/britain-must-get-ready-no-deal-brexit/
I don't know why I feel the need to say I only needed some milk and did not fancy a trip to the local supermarket :-)
Edit to add... and if anyone wants more details, they're here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_value_added_tax#Zero_rate_derogation
https://twitter.com/eurasiafantasia/status/1075553906019762177
She will be looked on as important to young adult fiction and the genre that The Beatles are for popular music.....
Con 38
Lab 35
lib 10
Some remainers really do appear to have lost the plot
Con 39
Lab 39
Ukip 6
Ldem 6
Leaving the EU? Not so much.
Figures show that 16 drug companies and 10 trade associations have been asked to sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) which prevent them from revealing any information related to contingency plans drawn up with the Department of Health and Social Care.'
Why all the NDA's? What has the Government got to hide
(Rhetorical question)
Shortages > prices shoot up. With pharmaceuticals that could get very, very expensive, so hiding the details is probably a good idea.
Many of the most ardent Remainers do indeed come across as people who believe everyone was misled by a few populist demagogues and a few liars.
In fact, it is because the centrist politicians have failed that the extremes are listened to.
(When we steer clear of politics I end up agreeing with you - how strange?!)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36430504
Reality Check verdict: EU rules mean the UK cannot reduce VAT on goods and services below 15%, the standard rate of VAT in the EU. The standard rate of VAT in the UK is 20%, so the government could reduce it by up to 5% today if it wanted. Domestic fuel is on a special list of pre-approved goods and services that are subject to lower VAT rates and it would require the agreement of all other EU members to reduce it further.
...
Under EU rules, countries must apply a minimum standard VAT rate of 15%. They have an option of applying one or two reduced rates, no lower than 5%, to certain specified goods on a pre-approved list.
Just some thoughts on Rome:
Pun-tastic: Rome's public transport regularly comes under ATAC
Umberto I bridge over the Tiber has left-hand running
Rome's metro also has left-hand running
There's a metro station named in honour of 80s singer Spagna (only kidding)
Colosseum currently has a bunch of scaffolding over part of the site of the arena floor
Africans selling small bracelets
Bangladeshis selling selfie-sticks
Eating out was a bit hit and miss - only some places had decent pasta or pizza
Did you fly there or was it an epic train journey?
Leave was a vote for change, any change, for people for whom society/the economy isn't working.
Remain was a vote for "everything's fine, carry on" in 2016. Most remainers talk now about setting back the clock to the way things were before the referendum, without seeming to realise that society wasn't working for a lot of people.
If they were serious about remaining, they would need to focus on how they will fix problems like housing, overcrowded classrooms (in some places where the majority of children's first language isn't English), long NHS wait lists and inability to see doctors, etc.
Most people voted leave not on some obscure point of sovereignty but in the hope that their lives would be better. Instead of pointing out how bad Brexit will be, Remainers need to focus on how to address these concerns. Because people's lives were already pretty sh*t.
I don't think the EU is perfect, far from it, but I don't think leaving is going to do anything to solve the sort of issues flagged up above. In fact it will probably make them worse, as the economy slows or even contracts.
In terms of your last sentence though, I can see where you're coming from but surely the ERG mob are even more guilty of "Constantly looking to some mythical brilliant past when everyone got along and it was all rainbows and butterflies. "? (Albeit their golden age is the 1950s rather than the 1990s.)
Dire warnings of being poorer mean little if you're either very well-off or poor to start with.
"Merry Christmas, my fellow pb-ers, Merry Christmas."
And from me too. Since Brexit, the old gits I meet with have tended not to mention the referendum much, but lately they've occasionally teased each other. Never too seriously, because as you say, it's only politics, not real life.
We have a laugh then go back to moaning about politics in general, the younger generation, and whatever topic takes our fancy.
Such prices were sometimes introduced as emergency measures. They proved useless.
The fact that "Hair Fluffer" Juncker -- the man who negotiated the favourable tax arrangements for Amazon as President of Luxembourg -- is the figurehead of the EU is a telling piece of symbolism.
Everyone (bar Cameron and Orban) voted for Junker.
There is nothing more urgent than tax reform so that massively tax-avoiding companies like Amazon make a proper contribution to the Exchequer.
The EU has been on the side of the rich, and the tax avoiders, and the plutocrats for too long for us to pretend it has any real progressive or reforming agenda.
The question for Corbyn is what does he want more - power or his principles? He may not get to enact his exact brand of socialism with the EU acting as a restraint. But he doesn't get to enact any brand of socialism at all if he can't get near the levers of power.
At some point, pragmatism will kick in. Corbyn wants Brexit and he wants the Tories to do it so he can do what he likes after. But if he sees a remain pivot as his best way to power, surely he has to take it?
Also, if an ERG-led Tory party is managing the economy after Brexit how much faith do I have in the idea that, as they try to build their Singapore-on-Thames, they will go after tax avoiding companies? Answer: none at all.
I would have said that in an area I know well, science policy, the EU has been actively harmful.
As usual with the EU, the beneficiaries have been very wealthy, very powerful institutions (like a handful of premier universities or the Max Planck Society).
Poorer institutions (and poorer countries) have been ruthlessly stripped of what little they had.
Although they will shortly be eclipsed in awfulness when the ECB bankrupts itself hosting this Hundred version of hit and giggle.
(I am OK with May's deal and would vote for it if an MP).
Of course, one can like the EU or not, but it's pretty clear one reason bigger firms/organisations like it is that they get a double advantage from it.
You make it sound like that happens in science as well as business.
Then I end up with a company* that, whilst charging me what MoneySavingExpert or somesuch tells me is the lowest rate, keep upping my DD and building up a pile of my money which will no doubt disappear and take me ages to recover at the point they go bust because they have undercut the market to gain unsustainable market share.
Why can't we just have a national electricity service where we all pay the same rate?
- "That would be inefficient?"
What more inefficient than having mutliple competing call centres, IT systems, switching adminstration, etc. etc?
It's madness!
(*Outfox The Market at the moment if you're interested)
Corby's magical illusion of appearing to back Remain and Leave at the same time has been the most amazing piece of political legerdemain ....
... well, since the Great Blair managed to persuade a majority of the PLP to back a policy utterly alien to its nature and invade Iraq.
(only kidding!)
Edit - of course, rather than 'Singapore on Thames' to really piss off Juncker we could describe ourselves as 'Luxembourg with democracy and integrity.'
Anyone know if their status will change post Brexit and will it depend on what the UK territory does?