> @Sandpit said: > > @Theuniondivvie said: > > > > @MarqueeMark said: > > > > @Theuniondivvie said: > > > > Boris claimed that Brexit would give £350m a week to the NHS, and he's been the subject of loads of thread headers. > > > > > > > > He undersold it. The deal for the NHS that May announced was W-A-Y more: > > > > > > > > "I can tell you that what I'm announcing will mean that in 2023-24 there will be about £600m a week, more in cash, going into the NHS. > > > > > > > > "That will be through the Brexit dividend. The fact that we're no longer sending vast amounts of money every year to the EU once we leave the EU." > > > > > > > > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44495598 > > > > > > & the band played believe it if you like. > > > > > > 'It means the £114bn budget will rise by an average of 3.4% annually - but that is still less than the 3.7% average rise the NHS has had since 1948.' > > > > More significantly, over the next ten years the Baby boomers reach retirement age, the oldest are 73 already. As I have posted before, the expansion of the UK population over the next decade is almost exclusively of the elderly, with consequent demand on the NHS. A need for ramped up spending on health, social care and pensions is built into our demographics. > > > > https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/978302412363624448 > > > > What happened from 1998 to about 2004? There’s way fewer teenagers in 2016 than there should be!
Men were too busy knocking one out over photographs of the sainted Tony Blair to have anything left to get anyone pregnant?
> @edmundintokyo said: > > @noneoftheabove said: > > It surprises me how many people/politicians would veto a soft Brexit in the hope of a referendum. > > > > How confident are they that they would win a referendum? > > Even if they win how confident are they that remain would be the settled answer to the question for the next 10-20 years? > > > > If they have doubts about those, and understand that a no-deal Brexit is a level of risk far above soft Brexit they are being very irresponsible. > > > > If they dont have doubts then they are making the same miscalculations the ERG made last year. > > It depends on the circumstances but I'd say winning a referendum would be maybe 60%, and that remaining the answer for 10 years would be 95%, and 20 years 85%. If the referendum is Deal vs Remain then they only have upside compared to just Deal, except for reducing the likelihood of rejoin. But it's hard to rejoin fast anyhow, since the whole EU has to ratify an accession treaty, so there's not much of a loss there. > > On the other side you have to count the possibility of somebody blundering into No Deal, which is probably something like 10%, which is definitely cause to be very afraid. However the bit after the deal is also quite fraught so even if you pass it there's a reasonable chance you end up with a Car Crash outcome at the end of the transition period. > > Just looking at that and I can see why a rational Remainer might go either way. But then when you look at the *political* situation, Remainers would hate them if they voted the thing through while Leavers will accuse them of betrayal no matter what they do, so it's a pretty simple calculation for opposition MPs unless their seats are highly leavey.
I think you significantly underestimate the probability of brexit losing a second referendum but winning a general election through either the Conservatives or the Brexit party.
On the last paragraph, it is not so simple, there is a significant part of the population, probably as big as each of the extreme remain and leave factions who just want this over with so we can address other issues.
> What happened from 1998 to about 2004? There’s way fewer teenagers in 2016 than there should be!
Gen X not having kids - all me me me me me.
And I’ve just realised that’s my generation - who are mostly reproducing now, at least a decade later in age than the previous generation. All but a couple of my social circle were over 35 when they married, and for a variety of reasons are more likely to have one child than two or more.
> @Sandpit said: > > What happened from 1998 to about 2004? There’s way fewer teenagers in 2016 than there should be! > > > > Gen X not having kids - all me me me me me. > > And I’ve just realised that’s my generation - who are mostly reproducing now, at least a decade later in age than the previous generation. All but a couple of my social circle were over 35 when they married, and for a variety of reasons are more likely to have one child than two or more. > > Quite amazing to see it illustrated so starkly.
Yes, it's probably a combination of factors and actually the chart might be more illustrative of quite high birth rates either side of those ages.
> It surprises me how many people/politicians would veto a soft Brexit in the hope of a referendum.
>
> How confident are they that they would win a referendum?
> Even if they win how confident are they that remain would be the settled answer to the question for the next 10-20 years?
>
> If they have doubts about those, and understand that a no-deal Brexit is a level of risk far above soft Brexit they are being very irresponsible.
>
> If they dont have doubts then they are making the same miscalculations the ERG made last year.
Brexit has offered a masterclass in how to act on miscalculations. Even Farage, who's made fewer mistakes than most - largely because he's had fewer decisions to make than most - shut up shop too early and had to launch an entirely new party in order to mitigate the risk of Brexit being reversed.
I’m not sure I would characterise any of that as a mistake. Farage didn’t like the internal politics of UKIP, he wasn’t going to continue leading it forever. And after the referendum the Conservatives promised they would follow through and so grabbed the Kipper vote. I’m not sure there was much he could do but wait until the Tories made the inevitable fatal error and capitalise on it. Clearly plenty of thought went into TBP.
> @DavidL said: > In other news our massive investment in wind power is today (and yesterday) producing 0.51% of our energy needs. We've even had to stick a block of coal into the boiler. > https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ > > It's a good example of the limitations of renewable energy.
We could aim to produce an excess of wind energy and then we can convert the excess to gas, store that for windless weeks and use for heating and cooking so that we don't have to replace everyone's central heating and cooker.
Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues.
I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself.
Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes.
> @Pulpstar said: > Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues.
I really don't understand why the new rules only apply to middle distance runners. If testosterone gives an advantage (and surely it does when you remember the all conquering East German athletes with their manly physiques) then it cannot be limited to a small category of events. Shot putters?
It also seems a somewhat arbitrary and unsatisfactory way of defining what is a woman for athletic events. I do think some sort of definition is necessary if you are going to have such a class of competition but I am far from convinced that this is the answer.
> @MarqueeMark said: > Was that the argument you were making against Boris' bus slogan? No, thought not....
No it wasn't, it was that an unreliable, amoral twat with an interesting relationship with the truth (& one with whom you will no doubt make a moral accommodation if he leads you to Brexutopia) is often the subject of thread headers.
> @tlg86 said: > > @Sandpit said: > > > What happened from 1998 to about 2004? There’s way fewer teenagers in 2016 than there should be! > > > > > > > > Gen X not having kids - all me me me me me. > > > > And I’ve just realised that’s my generation - who are mostly reproducing now, at least a decade later in age than the previous generation. All but a couple of my social circle were over 35 when they married, and for a variety of reasons are more likely to have one child than two or more. > > > > Quite amazing to see it illustrated so starkly. > > Yes, it's probably a combination of factors and actually the chart might be more illustrative of quite high birth rates either side of those ages.
I think it's quite easily rationalised as an echo of the impact of WW2 and the postwar baby boom on previous generations rather than telling you too much about Gen X breeding capabilities. FWIW I am Gen X and had 3 kids by the time I was 37 so don't blame me, I am doing my bit for the species.
> @OblitusSumMe said: > > @DavidL said: > > In other news our massive investment in wind power is today (and yesterday) producing 0.51% of our energy needs. We've even had to stick a block of coal into the boiler. > > https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ > > > > It's a good example of the limitations of renewable energy. > > We could aim to produce an excess of wind energy and then we can convert the excess to gas, store that for windless weeks and use for heating and cooking so that we don't have to replace everyone's central heating and cooker.
Are you thinking about the wrong kind of wind, perhaps?
I would certainly agree that efficient storage of energy is the absolute key to reliance on renewable but unreliable sources.
> @Sandpit said: > Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues. > > I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself. > > Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes.
Precisely, it's because noones got the balls to go against the 'trans women are women' argument in sport. She is undoubtedly a victim.
> @DavidL said: > > @FeersumEnjineeya said: > > > @DavidL said: > > > In other news our massive investment in wind power is today (and yesterday) producing 0.51% of our energy needs. We've even had to stick a block of coal into the boiler. > > > https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ > > > > > > It's a good example of the limitations of renewable energy. > > > > While solar power is currently generating 11.03% of our power needs. It's a good example of the way in which the two forms of renewable energy complement one another. > > I am staggered by how much of our energy is coming from solar these days. I am almost suspicious that it is an estimate rather than measured and in fairness Gridwatch itself points that out indicating that there should be a bigger dip in demand at midday if it was accurate. > > Even if that is the case at the margins the quantity of solar energy produced in this damp and slightly dismal (on average) Isle is remarkable and surprisingly cost effective. It will be fascinating to see how high it can get this summer.
Coal usage is down 40% year on year.
CCGT is there to meet demand otherwise without resort to coal, which should be all but gone by next year (save for periods of exceptional demand).
> @OnlyLivingBoy said: > > @tlg86 said: > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > What happened from 1998 to about 2004? There’s way fewer teenagers in 2016 than there should be! > > > > > > > > > > > > Gen X not having kids - all me me me me me. > > > > > > And I’ve just realised that’s my generation - who are mostly reproducing now, at least a decade later in age than the previous generation. All but a couple of my social circle were over 35 when they married, and for a variety of reasons are more likely to have one child than two or more. > > > > > > Quite amazing to see it illustrated so starkly. > > > > Yes, it's probably a combination of factors and actually the chart might be more illustrative of quite high birth rates either side of those ages. > > I think it's quite easily rationalised as an echo of the impact of WW2 and the postwar baby boom on previous generations rather than telling you too much about Gen X breeding capabilities. FWIW I am Gen X and had 3 kids by the time I was 37 so don't blame me, I am doing my bit for the species.
> @Ishmael_Z said: > > @MarqueeMark said: > > @Theuniondivvie said: > > Boris claimed that Brexit would give £350m a week to the NHS, and he's been the subject of loads of thread headers. > > > > He undersold it. The deal for the NHS that May announced was W-A-Y more: > > > > "I can tell you that what I'm announcing will mean that in 2023-24 there will be about £600m a week, more in cash, going into the NHS. > > > > "That will be through the Brexit dividend. The fact that we're no longer sending vast amounts of money every year to the EU once we leave the EU." > > > > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44495598 > > If you are reduced to advancing arguments as embarrassing as that, it really is time to give in to your inner Remainer. If I said to you that I propose to give you £1m out of my winnings on the 2023 Cheltenham Gold Cup, would you view that as evidence that I must be the world's most amazing tipster?
No - but if it was out of selling the racecourse for a hundred million quid for a new town development.... Which is a somewhat nearer analogy than your embarrassing argument.
> @TheWhiteRabbit said: > > @DavidL said: > > > @FeersumEnjineeya said: > > > > @DavidL said: > > > > In other news our massive investment in wind power is today (and yesterday) producing 0.51% of our energy needs. We've even had to stick a block of coal into the boiler. > > > > https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ > > > > > > > > It's a good example of the limitations of renewable energy. > > > > > > While solar power is currently generating 11.03% of our power needs. It's a good example of the way in which the two forms of renewable energy complement one another. > > > > I am staggered by how much of our energy is coming from solar these days. I am almost suspicious that it is an estimate rather than measured and in fairness Gridwatch itself points that out indicating that there should be a bigger dip in demand at midday if it was accurate. > > > > Even if that is the case at the margins the quantity of solar energy produced in this damp and slightly dismal (on average) Isle is remarkable and surprisingly cost effective. It will be fascinating to see how high it can get this summer. > > Coal usage is down 40% year on year. > > CCGT is there to meet demand otherwise without resort to coal, which should be all but gone by next year (save for periods of exceptional demand).
I think that we are pretty much there. Coal is pretty much zero these days except where there is no wind. I very much hope that we can increase our domestic production of renewables and reduce our very heavy reliance on imported gas.
> @Sandpit said: > Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues. > > I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself. > > Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes.
Anti-doping is really easy to understand. Cheating = taking drugs.
But this seems to mean she has to take drugs to be allowed to compete. That's contrarywise.
> @Sandpit said: > Julian Assange gets bail:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48118908 > > > > Bizarre. Just bizarre. > > Err, the story says he got a year inside for breaching bail, and was taken down to the cells today.
They've changed the story. Weird. The original BBC story said he had got bail.
> @DavidL said: > > @Sandpit said: > > Julian Assange gets bail:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48118908 > > > > > > > > Bizarre. Just bizarre. > > > > Err, the story says he got a year inside for breaching bail, and was taken down to the cells today. > > They've changed the story. Weird. The original BBC story said he had got bail.
That doesn't make sense. How can you be sentenced to bail?
> @tlg86 said: > > @OnlyLivingBoy said: > > > @tlg86 said: > > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > > What happened from 1998 to about 2004? There’s way fewer teenagers in 2016 than there should be! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gen X not having kids - all me me me me me. > > > > > > > > And I’ve just realised that’s my generation - who are mostly reproducing now, at least a decade later in age than the previous generation. All but a couple of my social circle were over 35 when they married, and for a variety of reasons are more likely to have one child than two or more. > > > > > > > > Quite amazing to see it illustrated so starkly. > > > > > > Yes, it's probably a combination of factors and actually the chart might be more illustrative of quite high birth rates either side of those ages. > > > > I think it's quite easily rationalised as an echo of the impact of WW2 and the postwar baby boom on previous generations rather than telling you too much about Gen X breeding capabilities. FWIW I am Gen X and had 3 kids by the time I was 37 so don't blame me, I am doing my bit for the species. > > If not the planet.
I know we are very bad. But a stable human population requires some people to have >2 kids. Also, I have seen Idiocracy!
> Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues.
>
> I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself.
>
> Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes.
Precisely, it's because noones got the balls to go against the 'trans women are women' argument in sport.
She is undoubtedly a victim.
Not sure I understand your position. Even if you completely forget transgenderism, a significant amount of people are born with intersex traits. So it seems like you need a precise definition of gender for sports which can account for that. Even going by chromosones or ovaries vs. testicles may not be sufficient. See, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foekje_Dillema . And since the reason for separating by sex in sports in the first place, is because men perform better than women, picking criteria directly related to that performance difference seems like the most sensible way to go.
> @williamglenn said: > > @DavidL said: > > > @Sandpit said: > > > Julian Assange gets bail:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48118908 > > > > > > > > > > > > Bizarre. Just bizarre. > > > > > > Err, the story says he got a year inside for breaching bail, and was taken down to the cells today. > > > > They've changed the story. Weird. The original BBC story said he had got bail. > > That doesn't make sense. How can you be sentenced to bail?
he was sentenced to custody for breaching bail. Which makes a WHOLE load more sense.
> @rottenborough said: > Jezza picking the right targets with locals tomorrow.
Is anybody listening though? I used to enjoy PMQs but I have all but given up. Unfocused questions from someone unable to respond to the non answers that he receives. Pointless.
> @Pulpstar said: > > @Sandpit said: > > Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues. > > > > I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself. > > > > Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes. > > Precisely, it's because noones got the balls to go against the 'trans women are women' argument in sport. > She is undoubtedly a victim.
I don't have a problem with the rules as they will apply to transgender athletes. Previously I hugely underestimated the effect of hormones that a trans-woman receives on muscle mass, which is very significant.
As CAS recognised, the rules do however discriminate against Semenya and people in her position. But I'm not sure how you could address that.
> @OblitusSumMe said: > > @Sandpit said: > > Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues. > > > > I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself. > > > > Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes. > > Anti-doping is really easy to understand. Cheating = taking drugs. > > But this seems to mean she has to take drugs to be allowed to compete. That's contrarywise.
Forcing someone to take medicines for a non medical reason purely to earn a living makes me very uncomfortable. What next? Forced Botox to sell make up?
> @Theuniondivvie said: > The Don showing his legendary eye for details. >
To be fair, that's an old trick which many news sites fall foul of - you can change your display name once retweeted. I see they've upgraded to a Bernie2020 icon as well.
Those above who were wondering why there was a shortage of teenagers between 1998 and 2004, the answer is simple: because there was a shortage of people to give birth to them between 1983 and 1989. The reason for that is because less people started being born from about 1964 onwards.
I hate using US terms for cohorts because they don't strictly map on to UK experience, particularly wrt lifespan changes due to the formation of the NHS (spoilers: far less dead children), but that war has been lost. So using terms that you are familiar with:
There are far fewer Generation X people than Baby Boomers. They were fewer of them and they were less likely to have kids anyway, so there were fewer people born to them. This led to fears in the 90s that there would be an age imbalance and this was one of the things that underpinned the immigration boom from 1997 onwards. This led to an increase in children being born (immigrants are younger and hence more fecund) and this was noticed (one of my favourite stats is that this was noticed when they began to run out of neonatal intensive care units in Brighton. Medical statistics, people: your taxes at work) and those children will start voting at the next GE.
> I think you significantly underestimate the probability of brexit losing a second referendum but winning a general election through either the Conservatives or the Brexit party.
I doubt either of those parties will run on brexit without a referendum, and if they do it's highly unlikely that they'd win. There are voters who would be really into it but most of them are sick of it.
With a referendum they then have to win the referendum, which is hard to see in this imaginary world where it's already been defeated.
More likely the Tories would survive, and not want to touch brexit again.
> On the last paragraph, it is not so simple, there is a significant part of the population, probably as big as each of the extreme remain and leave factions who just want this over with so we can address other issues.
I'm sure there are lots of voters who would like the whole thing to be done and go away, but there's no path to making that happen. If you vote through the deal, you then have at least two, but probably more, years of contentious negotiations, including settling problems that have been deliberately postponed because they're too difficult. And like I say may still end up with a car crash at the end of them.
> @dixiedean said: > > @OblitusSumMe said: > > > @Sandpit said: > > > Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues. > > > > > > I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself. > > > > > > Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes. > > > > Anti-doping is really easy to understand. Cheating = taking drugs. > > > > But this seems to mean she has to take drugs to be allowed to compete. That's contrarywise. > > Forcing someone to take medicines for a non medical reason purely to earn a living makes me very uncomfortable. > What next? Forced Botox to sell make up?
Yes, I think we should be uncomfortable.
However the very real risk is that otherwise, the effective elevation of people in Semenya's position to advanced female athletes could have all sorts of unintended consequences.
> @Tissue_Price said: > > @Theuniondivvie said: > > The Don showing his legendary eye for details. > > > > To be fair, that's an old trick which many news sites fall foul of - you can change your display name once retweeted. I see they've upgraded to a Bernie2020 icon as well.
I hate using US terms for cohorts because they don't strictly map on to UK experience, particularly wrt lifespan changes due to the formation of the NHS (spoilers: far less dead children), but that war has been lost. So using terms that you are familiar with:
Is it just the name "baby boomer" you're talking about, or is there a more fundamental misalignment between the two countries' generational cohorts?
> "If Leavers will not vote Labour if it opposes Brexit, why should Remainers vote Labour if it supports Brexit? Perhaps I have the wrong end of the stick but as I understand it Labour is only committing to a referendum on a horrible Tory Brexit. So if it fought and won a general election on a pro-Brexit ticket it would implement its own form of lovely Brexit without a referendum. That is a policy I can't support, and it has SFA to do with my views on Corbyn (which I would characterise as scepticism rather than outright hostility)."
*
OK, but I'm reading things differently. I am almost certain that come that GE (if it is before Brexit, which it surely will be) the Labour policy will be re-negotiate plus referendum. Therefore the fortunes of Corbyn and Ref2 are inextricably linked. Corbyn as PM is the route to Ref2, and Ref2 is the route to Corbyn as PM. Or put another way -
If you want Ref2 you must swallow Corbyn as PM. And if you want Corbyn as PM you must swallow Ref2.
It's the Socialism/Remain double. Even better, if you're wary of the socialism you can take comfort that EU membership will water it down.
On PMQs TM is going through the motions and cannot survive much longer.
As you've said in the past, she's not a quitter. I doubt she'll go of her own volition before we Brexit, and I don't see any signs that the party's pathetic cowardice wrt removing her has changed.
> @Stereotomy said: > On PMQs TM is going through the motions and cannot survive much longer. > > As you've said in the past, she's not a quitter. I doubt she'll go of her own volition before we Brexit, and I don't see any signs that the party's pathetic cowardice wrt removing her has changed.
TM is not a quitter but I expect circumstances will overwhelm her in the next few weeks
> On PMQs TM is going through the motions and cannot survive much longer.
>
> As you've said in the past, she's not a quitter. I doubt she'll go of her own volition before we Brexit, and I don't see any signs that the party's pathetic cowardice wrt removing her has changed.
TM is not a quitter but I expect circumstances will overwhelm her in the next few weeks
It really would be a May-style worst-of-both-worlds to have dug her heels, hung on this long, run down the clock, and only then pass the baton to Boris or a maniac Leaver.
It is difficult to envisage a more serious example of this offence. The maximum sentence for this offence is 12 months. You do not have the benefit of a plea of guilty. You have made a written apology today, the first recognition that you regret you actions.
In my judgment, the seriousness of your offence, having taken into account the mitigation merits a sentence near the maximum.
I don’t agree with Keir Starmer on much but I do agree he would be a good leader for Change UK. He is one of the few Labour MPs who knows what they want from Brexit. He always seemed very out of place in a Corbyn led Marxist Labour Party.
I think local issues are unlikely to play much of a role in the local elections myself. The only real area of interest is how big Tory losses are and who benefits.
I hate using US terms for cohorts because they don't strictly map on to UK experience, particularly wrt lifespan changes due to the formation of the NHS (spoilers: far less dead children), but that war has been lost. So using terms that you are familiar with:
Is it just the name "baby boomer" you're talking about, or is there a more fundamental misalignment between the two countries' generational cohorts?
There is. As a rough rule of thumb, the US had one baby boom, as US soldiers came back from WW2 and fathered more children faster. This also happened in the UK but due to the formation of the NHS, the enforcement of compulsory child vaccination and various legislation changes regarding elf&safety meant that there was a second, smaller UK boom in the latter 50s due to the higher probability of newborns living to grow up. As a result the cohorts don't exactly line up. The UK immigrant baby boom of the Noughties will also be overlooked unless we invent a word for it.
We tend to overlook the impact of the NHS and concurrent improvements in epidemiology but the current state of play regarding health (low infant mortality, low maternal death in childbirth, lack of lethal diseases) is historically highly unusual. We are spoilt rotten...
> @AmpfieldAndy said: > I don’t agree with Keir Starmer on much but I do agree he would be a good leader for Change UK. He is one of the few Labour MPs who knows what they want from Brexit. He always seemed very out of place in a Corbyn led Marxist Labour Party. > > I think local issues are unlikely to play much of a role in the local elections myself. The only real area of interest is how big Tory losses are and who benefits.
Umunna has a head start over Starmer in CUK and remember most Labour members are more sympathetic to the Starmer line on Brexit than Corbyn's
They're protesting a fundraiser that JW3 is holding for http://garintzabar.org/ . Looks like a peaceful protest, so I don't really see what the problem is.
> @kinabalu said: > > @OnlyLivingBoy said: > > > "If Leavers will not vote Labour if it opposes Brexit, why should Remainers vote Labour if it supports Brexit? Perhaps I have the wrong end of the stick but as I understand it Labour is only committing to a referendum on a horrible Tory Brexit. So if it fought and won a general election on a pro-Brexit ticket it would implement its own form of lovely Brexit without a referendum. That is a policy I can't support, and it has SFA to do with my views on Corbyn (which I would characterise as scepticism rather than outright hostility)." > > * > > OK, but I'm reading things differently. I am almost certain that come that GE (if it is before Brexit, which it surely will be) the Labour policy will be re-negotiate plus referendum. Therefore the fortunes of Corbyn and Ref2 are inextricably linked. Corbyn as PM is the route to Ref2, and Ref2 is the route to Corbyn as PM. Or put another way - > > If you want Ref2 you must swallow Corbyn as PM. And if you want Corbyn as PM you must swallow Ref2. > > It's the Socialism/Remain double. Even better, if you're wary of the socialism you can take comfort that EU membership will water it down.
You might be right but if that was the case Labour could have signalled that by making it clear that a referendum would be held regardless. The fact they chose not to suggests to me that the Brexity instincts of Milne and Corbyn will prevail. You are basically betting that Labour is trying to mislead its Leaver voters by not promising a referendum now which they will in fact deliver later, but it seems more likely to me that it is people like you who are being misled if you believe Labour's policy will change later on when many signals are to the contrary. To put it another way, Labour must be lying to someone, so it is hard to believe them when they say "trust me". Btw I agree that only a Labour government will deliver Ref2, but I think the best way to ensure that they do is to deliver a message in the Euros that they have more to fear from pissing off Remainers than Leavers. Also, I have been a Labour member since 92 and so I am personally not at all wary of socialism, although I am sceptical that Corbyn is the person to deliver it.
I hate using US terms for cohorts because they don't strictly map on to UK experience, particularly wrt lifespan changes due to the formation of the NHS (spoilers: far less dead children), but that war has been lost. So using terms that you are familiar with:
Is it just the name "baby boomer" you're talking about, or is there a more fundamental misalignment between the two countries' generational cohorts?
There is. As a rough rule of thumb, the US had one baby boom, as US soldiers came back from WW2 and fathered more children faster. This also happened in the UK but due to the formation of the NHS, the enforcement of compulsory child vaccination and various legislation changes regarding elf&safety meant that there was a second, smaller UK boom in the latter 50s due to the higher probability of newborns living to grow up. As a result the cohorts don't exactly line up. The UK immigrant baby boom of the Noughties will also be overlooked unless we invent a word for it.
We tend to overlook the impact of the NHS and concurrent improvements in epidemiology but the current state of play regarding health (low infant mortality, low maternal death in childbirth, lack of lethal diseases) is historically highly unusual. We are spoilt rotten...
But the names are usually associated with the life experiences and personality traits of the cohort members rather than population changes, right? Even if "baby boomer" does actually directly relate to the latter, I think in general that's no really what people care about, and I don't think any of the other names (Silent Generation, Gen X, etc.) have that association at all.
Gerard Batten launches the UKIP European elections campaign dismissing Farage's new Brexit Party as 'Torylite' and promising to campaign to Leave the EU with No Deal and just trade on WTO terms and be a party for all ages and backgrounds
Its a shame that there's no market on the Peterborough recall petition, I reckon it will break the 10% threshold. In my opinion 12% will vote to recall...... Looking forward to the byelection if it happens
> @swing_voter said: > Its a shame that there's no market on the Peterborough recall petition, I reckon it will break the 10% threshold. In my opinion 12% will vote to recall...... Looking forward to the byelection if it happens
I imagine that if France were still occupying territory conquered in war more than fifty years ago as Israel is doing in the West Bank that there would be protests against any fund-raising to support recruits to the French Foreign Legion.
Poppy-selling annually ignites controversy to give an actually existing example.
It's only anti-Semitic if the criticism is because they are Jews, rather than because of what they are doing, regardless of whether they are Jews. This doesn't seem to be an exceptional protest.
> @HYUFD said: > > @AmpfieldAndy said: > > I don’t agree with Keir Starmer on much but I do agree he would be a good leader for Change UK. He is one of the few Labour MPs who knows what they want from Brexit. He always seemed very out of place in a Corbyn led Marxist Labour Party. > > > > I think local issues are unlikely to play much of a role in the local elections myself. The only real area of interest is how big Tory losses are and who benefits. > > Umunna has a head start over Starmer in CUK and remember most Labour members are more sympathetic to the Starmer line on Brexit than Corbyn's
I don’t disagree but Umunna has taken a more back seat role in CUK that I would have expected so I wonder how strongly he is committed to it. His first priority is, having jumped ship, how he can get himself re-elected because he has no chance in Streatham.
Corbyn has got the party machine so tightly controlled that he can afford to ignore party members as long as he has Momentum and McCluskey’s support - which he obviously does.
I hate using US terms for cohorts because they don't strictly map on to UK experience, particularly wrt lifespan changes due to the formation of the NHS (spoilers: far less dead children), but that war has been lost. So using terms that you are familiar with:
Is it just the name "baby boomer" you're talking about, or is there a more fundamental misalignment between the two countries' generational cohorts?
There is. As a rough rule of thumb, the US had one baby boom, as US soldiers came back from WW2 and fathered more children faster. This also happened in the UK but due to the formation of the NHS, the enforcement of compulsory child vaccination and various legislation changes regarding elf&safety meant that there was a second, smaller UK boom in the latter 50s due to the higher probability of newborns living to grow up. As a result the cohorts don't exactly line up. The UK immigrant baby boom of the Noughties will also be overlooked unless we invent a word for it.
We tend to overlook the impact of the NHS and concurrent improvements in epidemiology but the current state of play regarding health (low infant mortality, low maternal death in childbirth, lack of lethal diseases) is historically highly unusual. We are spoilt rotten...
But the names are usually associated with the life experiences and personality traits of the cohort members rather than population changes, right? Even if "baby boomer" does actually directly relate to the latter, I think in general that's no really what people care about, and I don't think any of the other names (Silent Generation, Gen X, etc.) have that association at all.
Fair point but if you disconnect the terms from a specific cohort then it becomes difficult to use them when describing cohort effects. So if you change the meaning of "baby boomer" from "somebody born between 1945 and 1964" to "somebody with a paid-off mortgage more likely to vote Con/Brexit than the others" then it becomes less useful when explaining why there were fewer teenagers in the 90s.
Which is why I prefer not to use them when describing cohort effects.
Which is where I came in.
Having closed the loop I will now put the tablet down, finish my lunch and go back to my desk...
> @brokenwheel said: > > @noneoftheabove said: > > > It surprises me how many people/politicians would veto a soft Brexit in the hope of a referendum. > > > > > > How confident are they that they would win a referendum? > > > Even if they win how confident are they that remain would be the settled answer to the question for the next 10-20 years? > > > > > > If they have doubts about those, and understand that a no-deal Brexit is a level of risk far above soft Brexit they are being very irresponsible. > > > > > > If they dont have doubts then they are making the same miscalculations the ERG made last year. > > > > Brexit has offered a masterclass in how to act on miscalculations. Even Farage, who's made fewer mistakes than most - largely because he's had fewer decisions to make than most - shut up shop too early and had to launch an entirely new party in order to mitigate the risk of Brexit being reversed. > > I’m not sure I would characterise any of that as a mistake. Farage didn’t like the internal politics of UKIP, he wasn’t going to continue leading it forever. And after the referendum the Conservatives promised they would follow through and so grabbed the Kipper vote. I’m not sure there was much he could do but wait until the Tories made the inevitable fatal error and capitalise on it. Clearly plenty of thought went into TBP.
I can certainly understand Farage wanting to take some time off after 2016, and his dislike of UKIP's internal politics. All the same, by absenting himself and, by extension UKIP or any other UKIP-like party, from the field since 2016 (or 2017 at the latest: the decline in UKIP's share didn't occur until the 2017GE), he unbalanced the playing field and allowed Remain forces within the EU, the government and parliament to become much stronger relative to Leave forces than would otherwise have been the case.
Its a shame that there's no market on the Peterborough recall petition, I reckon it will break the 10% threshold. In my opinion 12% will vote to recall...... Looking forward to the byelection if it happens
Anecdata: my not-particularly-political parents live in the next door constituency, and the recall petition has apparently been quite the local topic of discussion. Con, Lab and LD have all been supporting the recall of Ms Onasanya.
Hopefully the good people of Peterborough will decide they wish to be represented in Parliament by a person of good standing.
They're protesting a fundraiser that JW3 is holding for http://garintzabar.org/ . Looks like a peaceful protest, so I don't really see what the problem is.
In case you’re wondering what heinous crime we have committed, we are showing an Israeli film, that a partner organisation has now purchased all the tickets to, and has resold them at a mark up to raise money for the Israeli Scouts association.....
.....The Jewish Agency bought all the tickets out for the film and resold them as a fundraiser for the Tzofim, the Israeli Scouts in the UK, not the IDF.”
I heard a labour MP Laura Pidcock being interviewed about the local elections.The letters 'T' and 'G' disappeared altogether. 'Voting' became 'vo-ing'. 'Important' became 'impor-ant' 'Party' became 'par-y' 'Suffering became 'sufferin'
I like regional accents but this is just an affectation and an ugly one. Why would an MP want to appear to be stupid? Could it be she thinks it'll make her more approachable?
> @AmpfieldAndy said: > > @HYUFD said: > > > @AmpfieldAndy said: > > > I don’t agree with Keir Starmer on much but I do agree he would be a good leader for Change UK. He is one of the few Labour MPs who knows what they want from Brexit. He always seemed very out of place in a Corbyn led Marxist Labour Party. > > > > > > I think local issues are unlikely to play much of a role in the local elections myself. The only real area of interest is how big Tory losses are and who benefits. > > > > Umunna has a head start over Starmer in CUK and remember most Labour members are more sympathetic to the Starmer line on Brexit than Corbyn's > > I don’t disagree but Umunna has taken a more back seat role in CUK that I would have expected so I wonder how strongly he is committed to it. His first priority is, having jumped ship, how he can get himself re-elected because he has no chance in Streatham. > > Corbyn has got the party machine so tightly controlled that he can afford to ignore party members as long as he has Momentum and McCluskey’s support - which he obviously does.
Streatham is overwhelmingly Remain and Momentum about to deselect a black Assembly member, Umunna has a chance
"You might be right but if that was the case Labour could have signalled that by making it clear that a referendum would be held regardless. The fact they chose not to suggests to me that the Brexity instincts of Milne and Corbyn will prevail. You are basically betting that Labour is trying to mislead its Leaver voters by not promising a referendum now which they will in fact deliver later, but it seems more likely to me that it is people like you who are being misled if you believe Labour's policy will change later on when many signals are to the contrary. To put it another way, Labour must be lying to someone, so it is hard to believe them when they say "trust me".
Btw I agree that only a Labour government will deliver Ref2, but I think the best way to ensure that they do is to deliver a message in the Euros that they have more to fear from pissing off Remainers than Leavers. Also, I have been a Labour member since 92 and so I am personally not at all wary of socialism, although I am sceptical that Corbyn is the person to deliver it."
*
And of course YOU may be right. But I'm not seeing this as a matter of lying to either of us.
IMO, come the election, what they will do is a dispassionate calculation of the expected net impact (on seats) of making the Ref2 commitment. If the answer is material and positive they will go for it. If not, they won't. I think the number one priority is winning power and all else is secondary to that. So they won't do the calculation now because it would be premature and would lock them in. And the benefit (a boost in the Locals and the Euros) does not justify it.
The reason I'm confident they will ultimately be making the commitment if there is a GE is my sense is that public opinion is turning against Brexit. I'm also confident that they will not collude with the Tories to pass anything in this parliament, which means that the GE will come before the dirty deed.
I defer to your 1992, hats off, my membership is not even a year old yet. My approach to Jeremy comes more or less from Stephen Stills - If you can't be with the one you love, Love the one you're with.
> @Roger said: > > I heard a labour MP Laura Pidcock being interviewed about the local elections.The letters 'T' and 'G' disappeared altogether. 'Voting' became 'vo-ing'. 'Important' became 'impor-ant' 'Party' became 'par-y' 'Suffering became 'sufferin' > > I like regional accents but this is just an affectation and an ugly one. Why would an MP want to appear to be stupid? Could it be she thinks it'll make her more approachable? > > > > > >
> I heard a labour MP Laura Pidcock being interviewed about the local elections.The letters 'T' and 'G' disappeared altogether. 'Voting' became 'vo-ing'. 'Important' became 'impor-ant' 'Party' became 'par-y' 'Suffering became 'sufferin'
>
> I like regional accents but this is just an affectation and an ugly one. Why would an MP want to appear to be stupid? Could it be she thinks it'll make her more approachable?
In other news our massive investment in wind power is today (and yesterday) producing 0.51% of our energy needs. We've even had to stick a block of coal into the boiler.
> @Roger said: > > I heard a labour MP Laura Pidcock being interviewed about the local elections.The letters 'T' and 'G' disappeared altogether. 'Voting' became 'vo-ing'. 'Important' became 'impor-ant' 'Party' became 'par-y' 'Suffering became 'sufferin' > > I like regional accents but this is just an affectation and an ugly one. Why would an MP want to appear to be stupid? Could it be she thinks it'll make her more approachable? > > "I like regional accents" is the "some of my best friends are black" of the English class system. Personally, I always add about 10pts to somebody's IQ if they are in public life and don't speak the usual deathly dull RP, because I know they must have had to overcome a certain amount of snobbery and prejudice to get where they have.
> "If Leavers will not vote Labour if it opposes Brexit, why should Remainers vote Labour if it supports Brexit? Perhaps I have the wrong end of the stick but as I understand it Labour is only committing to a referendum on a horrible Tory Brexit. So if it fought and won a general election on a pro-Brexit ticket it would implement its own form of lovely Brexit without a referendum. That is a policy I can't support, and it has SFA to do with my views on Corbyn (which I would characterise as scepticism rather than outright hostility)."
*
OK, but I'm reading things differently. I am almost certain that come that GE (if it is before Brexit, which it surely will be) the Labour policy will be re-negotiate plus referendum. Therefore the fortunes of Corbyn and Ref2 are inextricably linked. Corbyn as PM is the route to Ref2, and Ref2 is the route to Corbyn as PM. Or put another way -
If you want Ref2 you must swallow Corbyn as PM. And if you want Corbyn as PM you must swallow Ref2.
It's the Socialism/Remain double. Even better, if you're wary of the socialism you can take comfort that EU membership will water it down.
> > It surprises me how many people/politicians would veto a soft Brexit in the hope of a referendum.
>
> >
>
> > How confident are they that they would win a referendum?
>
> > Even if they win how confident are they that remain would be the settled answer to the question for the next 10-20 years?
>
> >
>
> > If they have doubts about those, and understand that a no-deal Brexit is a level of risk far above soft Brexit they are being very irresponsible.
>
> >
>
> > If they dont have doubts then they are making the same miscalculations the ERG made last year.
>
>
>
> Brexit has offered a masterclass in how to act on miscalculations. Even Farage, who's made fewer mistakes than most - largely because he's had fewer decisions to make than most - shut up shop too early and had to launch an entirely new party in order to mitigate the risk of Brexit being reversed.
>
> I’m not sure I would characterise any of that as a mistake. Farage didn’t like the internal politics of UKIP, he wasn’t going to continue leading it forever. And after the referendum the Conservatives promised they would follow through and so grabbed the Kipper vote. I’m not sure there was much he could do but wait until the Tories made the inevitable fatal error and capitalise on it. Clearly plenty of thought went into TBP.
I can certainly understand Farage wanting to take some time off after 2016, and his dislike of UKIP's internal politics. All the same, by absenting himself and, by extension UKIP or any other UKIP-like party, from the field since 2016 (or 2017 at the latest: the decline in UKIP's share didn't occur until the 2017GE), he unbalanced the playing field and allowed Remain forces within the EU, the government and parliament to become much stronger relative to Leave forces than would otherwise have been the case.
Remain voices within the EU, government, Parliament and the media have always been much stronger. No real change there. But it wouldn’t matter if the odds were only slightly less stacked, it doesn’t change parliamentary arithmetic.
I admit the last couple of years have been depressing but I recognise it served a purpose. Most leavers now see the truth; everyone will try and screw you out of what you want, Tories included. Perfect time for Farage to white knight.
> @Roger said: > > I heard a labour MP Laura Pidcock being interviewed about the local elections.The letters 'T' and 'G' disappeared altogether. 'Voting' became 'vo-ing'. 'Important' became 'impor-ant' 'Party' became 'par-y' 'Suffering became 'sufferin' > > I like regional accents but this is just an affectation and an ugly one. Why would an MP want to appear to be stupid? Could it be she thinks it'll make her more approachable? > > > > > >
Surely not. All of our politicians have been making a blatant show of their stupidity and are more unpopular than ever.
> @sarissa said: > In other news our massive investment in wind power is today (and yesterday) producing 0.51% of our energy needs. We've even had to stick a block of coal into the boiler. > > https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ > > > > It's a good example of the limitations of renewable energy. > > Remind me again- when is the Hunterston B8 reactor finally going to come back on line after its extended shut down?
Comments
> > @Theuniondivvie said:
>
> > > @MarqueeMark said:
>
> > > @Theuniondivvie said:
>
> > > Boris claimed that Brexit would give £350m a week to the NHS, and he's been the subject of loads of thread headers.
>
> > >
>
> > > He undersold it. The deal for the NHS that May announced was W-A-Y more:
>
> > >
>
> > > "I can tell you that what I'm announcing will mean that in 2023-24 there will be about £600m a week, more in cash, going into the NHS.
>
> > >
>
> > > "That will be through the Brexit dividend. The fact that we're no longer sending vast amounts of money every year to the EU once we leave the EU."
>
> > >
>
> > > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44495598
>
> >
>
> > & the band played believe it if you like.
>
> >
>
> > 'It means the £114bn budget will rise by an average of 3.4% annually - but that is still less than the 3.7% average rise the NHS has had since 1948.'
>
>
>
> More significantly, over the next ten years the Baby boomers reach retirement age, the oldest are 73 already. As I have posted before, the expansion of the UK population over the next decade is almost exclusively of the elderly, with consequent demand on the NHS. A need for ramped up spending on health, social care and pensions is built into our demographics.
>
>
>
> https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/978302412363624448
>
>
>
> What happened from 1998 to about 2004? There’s way fewer teenagers in 2016 than there should be!
Men were too busy knocking one out over photographs of the sainted Tony Blair to have anything left to get anyone pregnant?
> > @noneoftheabove said:
> > It surprises me how many people/politicians would veto a soft Brexit in the hope of a referendum.
> >
> > How confident are they that they would win a referendum?
> > Even if they win how confident are they that remain would be the settled answer to the question for the next 10-20 years?
> >
> > If they have doubts about those, and understand that a no-deal Brexit is a level of risk far above soft Brexit they are being very irresponsible.
> >
> > If they dont have doubts then they are making the same miscalculations the ERG made last year.
>
> It depends on the circumstances but I'd say winning a referendum would be maybe 60%, and that remaining the answer for 10 years would be 95%, and 20 years 85%. If the referendum is Deal vs Remain then they only have upside compared to just Deal, except for reducing the likelihood of rejoin. But it's hard to rejoin fast anyhow, since the whole EU has to ratify an accession treaty, so there's not much of a loss there.
>
> On the other side you have to count the possibility of somebody blundering into No Deal, which is probably something like 10%, which is definitely cause to be very afraid. However the bit after the deal is also quite fraught so even if you pass it there's a reasonable chance you end up with a Car Crash outcome at the end of the transition period.
>
> Just looking at that and I can see why a rational Remainer might go either way. But then when you look at the *political* situation, Remainers would hate them if they voted the thing through while Leavers will accuse them of betrayal no matter what they do, so it's a pretty simple calculation for opposition MPs unless their seats are highly leavey.
I think you significantly underestimate the probability of brexit losing a second referendum but winning a general election through either the Conservatives or the Brexit party.
On the last paragraph, it is not so simple, there is a significant part of the population, probably as big as each of the extreme remain and leave factions who just want this over with so we can address other issues.
Quite amazing to see it illustrated so starkly.
> > What happened from 1998 to about 2004? There’s way fewer teenagers in 2016 than there should be!
>
>
>
> Gen X not having kids - all me me me me me.
>
> And I’ve just realised that’s my generation - who are mostly reproducing now, at least a decade later in age than the previous generation. All but a couple of my social circle were over 35 when they married, and for a variety of reasons are more likely to have one child than two or more.
>
> Quite amazing to see it illustrated so starkly.
Yes, it's probably a combination of factors and actually the chart might be more illustrative of quite high birth rates either side of those ages.
> In other news our massive investment in wind power is today (and yesterday) producing 0.51% of our energy needs. We've even had to stick a block of coal into the boiler.
> https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
>
> It's a good example of the limitations of renewable energy.
We could aim to produce an excess of wind energy and then we can convert the excess to gas, store that for windless weeks and use for heating and cooking so that we don't have to replace everyone's central heating and cooker.
Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes.
> Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues.
I really don't understand why the new rules only apply to middle distance runners. If testosterone gives an advantage (and surely it does when you remember the all conquering East German athletes with their manly physiques) then it cannot be limited to a small category of events. Shot putters?
It also seems a somewhat arbitrary and unsatisfactory way of defining what is a woman for athletic events. I do think some sort of definition is necessary if you are going to have such a class of competition but I am far from convinced that this is the answer.
> Was that the argument you were making against Boris' bus slogan? No, thought not....
No it wasn't, it was that an unreliable, amoral twat with an interesting relationship with the truth (& one with whom you will no doubt make a moral accommodation if he leads you to Brexutopia) is often the subject of thread headers.
> > @Sandpit said:
> > > What happened from 1998 to about 2004? There’s way fewer teenagers in 2016 than there should be!
> >
> >
> >
> > Gen X not having kids - all me me me me me.
> >
> > And I’ve just realised that’s my generation - who are mostly reproducing now, at least a decade later in age than the previous generation. All but a couple of my social circle were over 35 when they married, and for a variety of reasons are more likely to have one child than two or more.
> >
> > Quite amazing to see it illustrated so starkly.
>
> Yes, it's probably a combination of factors and actually the chart might be more illustrative of quite high birth rates either side of those ages.
I think it's quite easily rationalised as an echo of the impact of WW2 and the postwar baby boom on previous generations rather than telling you too much about Gen X breeding capabilities. FWIW I am Gen X and had 3 kids by the time I was 37 so don't blame me, I am doing my bit for the species.
> > @DavidL said:
> > In other news our massive investment in wind power is today (and yesterday) producing 0.51% of our energy needs. We've even had to stick a block of coal into the boiler.
> > https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
> >
> > It's a good example of the limitations of renewable energy.
>
> We could aim to produce an excess of wind energy and then we can convert the excess to gas, store that for windless weeks and use for heating and cooking so that we don't have to replace everyone's central heating and cooker.
Are you thinking about the wrong kind of wind, perhaps?
I would certainly agree that efficient storage of energy is the absolute key to reliance on renewable but unreliable sources.
> Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues.
>
> I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself.
>
> Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes.
Precisely, it's because noones got the balls to go against the 'trans women are women' argument in sport.
She is undoubtedly a victim.
> > @FeersumEnjineeya said:
> > > @DavidL said:
> > > In other news our massive investment in wind power is today (and yesterday) producing 0.51% of our energy needs. We've even had to stick a block of coal into the boiler.
> > > https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
> > >
> > > It's a good example of the limitations of renewable energy.
> >
> > While solar power is currently generating 11.03% of our power needs. It's a good example of the way in which the two forms of renewable energy complement one another.
>
> I am staggered by how much of our energy is coming from solar these days. I am almost suspicious that it is an estimate rather than measured and in fairness Gridwatch itself points that out indicating that there should be a bigger dip in demand at midday if it was accurate.
>
> Even if that is the case at the margins the quantity of solar energy produced in this damp and slightly dismal (on average) Isle is remarkable and surprisingly cost effective. It will be fascinating to see how high it can get this summer.
Coal usage is down 40% year on year.
CCGT is there to meet demand otherwise without resort to coal, which should be all but gone by next year (save for periods of exceptional demand).
Bizarre. Just bizarre.
> > @tlg86 said:
> > > @Sandpit said:
> > > > What happened from 1998 to about 2004? There’s way fewer teenagers in 2016 than there should be!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Gen X not having kids - all me me me me me.
> > >
> > > And I’ve just realised that’s my generation - who are mostly reproducing now, at least a decade later in age than the previous generation. All but a couple of my social circle were over 35 when they married, and for a variety of reasons are more likely to have one child than two or more.
> > >
> > > Quite amazing to see it illustrated so starkly.
> >
> > Yes, it's probably a combination of factors and actually the chart might be more illustrative of quite high birth rates either side of those ages.
>
> I think it's quite easily rationalised as an echo of the impact of WW2 and the postwar baby boom on previous generations rather than telling you too much about Gen X breeding capabilities. FWIW I am Gen X and had 3 kids by the time I was 37 so don't blame me, I am doing my bit for the species.
If not the planet.
> > @MarqueeMark said:
> > @Theuniondivvie said:
> > Boris claimed that Brexit would give £350m a week to the NHS, and he's been the subject of loads of thread headers.
> >
> > He undersold it. The deal for the NHS that May announced was W-A-Y more:
> >
> > "I can tell you that what I'm announcing will mean that in 2023-24 there will be about £600m a week, more in cash, going into the NHS.
> >
> > "That will be through the Brexit dividend. The fact that we're no longer sending vast amounts of money every year to the EU once we leave the EU."
> >
> > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44495598
>
> If you are reduced to advancing arguments as embarrassing as that, it really is time to give in to your inner Remainer. If I said to you that I propose to give you £1m out of my winnings on the 2023 Cheltenham Gold Cup, would you view that as evidence that I must be the world's most amazing tipster?
No - but if it was out of selling the racecourse for a hundred million quid for a new town development.... Which is a somewhat nearer analogy than your embarrassing argument.
> > @DavidL said:
> > > @FeersumEnjineeya said:
> > > > @DavidL said:
> > > > In other news our massive investment in wind power is today (and yesterday) producing 0.51% of our energy needs. We've even had to stick a block of coal into the boiler.
> > > > https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
> > > >
> > > > It's a good example of the limitations of renewable energy.
> > >
> > > While solar power is currently generating 11.03% of our power needs. It's a good example of the way in which the two forms of renewable energy complement one another.
> >
> > I am staggered by how much of our energy is coming from solar these days. I am almost suspicious that it is an estimate rather than measured and in fairness Gridwatch itself points that out indicating that there should be a bigger dip in demand at midday if it was accurate.
> >
> > Even if that is the case at the margins the quantity of solar energy produced in this damp and slightly dismal (on average) Isle is remarkable and surprisingly cost effective. It will be fascinating to see how high it can get this summer.
>
> Coal usage is down 40% year on year.
>
> CCGT is there to meet demand otherwise without resort to coal, which should be all but gone by next year (save for periods of exceptional demand).
I think that we are pretty much there. Coal is pretty much zero these days except where there is no wind. I very much hope that we can increase our domestic production of renewables and reduce our very heavy reliance on imported gas.
> Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues.
>
> I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself.
>
> Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes.
Anti-doping is really easy to understand. Cheating = taking drugs.
But this seems to mean she has to take drugs to be allowed to compete. That's contrarywise.
> Julian Assange gets bail:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48118908
>
>
>
> Bizarre. Just bizarre.
>
> Err, the story says he got a year inside for breaching bail, and was taken down to the cells today.
They've changed the story. Weird. The original BBC story said he had got bail.
> > @Sandpit said:
> > Julian Assange gets bail:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48118908
> >
> >
> >
> > Bizarre. Just bizarre.
> >
> > Err, the story says he got a year inside for breaching bail, and was taken down to the cells today.
>
> They've changed the story. Weird. The original BBC story said he had got bail.
That doesn't make sense. How can you be sentenced to bail?
> > @OnlyLivingBoy said:
> > > @tlg86 said:
> > > > @Sandpit said:
> > > > > What happened from 1998 to about 2004? There’s way fewer teenagers in 2016 than there should be!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Gen X not having kids - all me me me me me.
> > > >
> > > > And I’ve just realised that’s my generation - who are mostly reproducing now, at least a decade later in age than the previous generation. All but a couple of my social circle were over 35 when they married, and for a variety of reasons are more likely to have one child than two or more.
> > > >
> > > > Quite amazing to see it illustrated so starkly.
> > >
> > > Yes, it's probably a combination of factors and actually the chart might be more illustrative of quite high birth rates either side of those ages.
> >
> > I think it's quite easily rationalised as an echo of the impact of WW2 and the postwar baby boom on previous generations rather than telling you too much about Gen X breeding capabilities. FWIW I am Gen X and had 3 kids by the time I was 37 so don't blame me, I am doing my bit for the species.
>
> If not the planet.
I know we are very bad. But a stable human population requires some people to have >2 kids. Also, I have seen Idiocracy!
Surely no judge will ever think about considering maybe possibly giving him bail, ever again?
> > @DavidL said:
> > > @Sandpit said:
> > > Julian Assange gets bail:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48118908
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Bizarre. Just bizarre.
> > >
> > > Err, the story says he got a year inside for breaching bail, and was taken down to the cells today.
> >
> > They've changed the story. Weird. The original BBC story said he had got bail.
>
> That doesn't make sense. How can you be sentenced to bail?
he was sentenced to custody for breaching bail. Which makes a WHOLE load more sense.
> Jezza picking the right targets with locals tomorrow.
Is anybody listening though? I used to enjoy PMQs but I have all but given up. Unfocused questions from someone unable to respond to the non answers that he receives. Pointless.
> > @Sandpit said:
> > Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues.
> >
> > I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself.
> >
> > Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes.
>
> Precisely, it's because noones got the balls to go against the 'trans women are women' argument in sport.
> She is undoubtedly a victim.
I don't have a problem with the rules as they will apply to transgender athletes. Previously I hugely underestimated the effect of hormones that a trans-woman receives on muscle mass, which is very significant.
As CAS recognised, the rules do however discriminate against Semenya and people in her position. But I'm not sure how you could address that.
> > @Sandpit said:
> > Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues.
> >
> > I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself.
> >
> > Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes.
>
> Anti-doping is really easy to understand. Cheating = taking drugs.
>
> But this seems to mean she has to take drugs to be allowed to compete. That's contrarywise.
Forcing someone to take medicines for a non medical reason purely to earn a living makes me very uncomfortable.
What next? Forced Botox to sell make up?
https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1123534023593267200
> The Don showing his legendary eye for details.
>
To be fair, that's an old trick which many news sites fall foul of - you can change your display name once retweeted. I see they've upgraded to a Bernie2020 icon as well.
I hate using US terms for cohorts because they don't strictly map on to UK experience, particularly wrt lifespan changes due to the formation of the NHS (spoilers: far less dead children), but that war has been lost. So using terms that you are familiar with:
There are far fewer Generation X people than Baby Boomers. They were fewer of them and they were less likely to have kids anyway, so there were fewer people born to them. This led to fears in the 90s that there would be an age imbalance and this was one of the things that underpinned the immigration boom from 1997 onwards. This led to an increase in children being born (immigrants are younger and hence more fecund) and this was noticed (one of my favourite stats is that this was noticed when they began to run out of neonatal intensive care units in Brighton. Medical statistics, people: your taxes at work) and those children will start voting at the next GE.
So there y'go.
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/sentencing-remarks-assange-010519.pdf
Short version: 'both barrels'.
Then there's this:
https://twitter.com/jamesrbuk/status/1123540459962490882
> I think you significantly underestimate the probability of brexit losing a second referendum but winning a general election through either the Conservatives or the Brexit party.
I doubt either of those parties will run on brexit without a referendum, and if they do it's highly unlikely that they'd win. There are voters who would be really into it but most of them are sick of it.
With a referendum they then have to win the referendum, which is hard to see in this imaginary world where it's already been defeated.
More likely the Tories would survive, and not want to touch brexit again.
> On the last paragraph, it is not so simple, there is a significant part of the population, probably as big as each of the extreme remain and leave factions who just want this over with so we can address other issues.
I'm sure there are lots of voters who would like the whole thing to be done and go away, but there's no path to making that happen. If you vote through the deal, you then have at least two, but probably more, years of contentious negotiations, including settling problems that have been deliberately postponed because they're too difficult. And like I say may still end up with a car crash at the end of them.
https://twitter.com/TheNewEuropean/status/1123546876094107649
> Julian Assange gets bail:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48118908
>
>
>
> Bizarre. Just bizarre.
>
> Err, the story says he got a year inside for breaching bail, and was taken down to the cells today.
>
> Sentencing remarks. Maximum penalty was 52 weeks. He got 50.
>
> https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/sentencing-remarks-assange-010519.pdf
>
> Short version: 'both barrels'.
>
> Then there's this:
>
> https://twitter.com/jamesrbuk/status/1123540459962490882
What do you need to do to get the full 52?
> > @OblitusSumMe said:
> > > @Sandpit said:
> > > Off topic - The Semenya outcome is complete horseshit. Decided that way because of transgender athletic issues.
> > >
> > > I feel very sorry for Caster Semenya - she is who she has always been, and hasn’t sought to change herself.
> > >
> > > Sadly she’s found herself caught up in a much wider debate, and one that threatens the entire existence of women’s elite sport. I’m not sure the rulemakers had much option, to avoid a much bigger controversy that would have pitched the athletics authorities against the vast majority of their elite athletes.
> >
> > Anti-doping is really easy to understand. Cheating = taking drugs.
> >
> > But this seems to mean she has to take drugs to be allowed to compete. That's contrarywise.
>
> Forcing someone to take medicines for a non medical reason purely to earn a living makes me very uncomfortable.
> What next? Forced Botox to sell make up?
Yes, I think we should be uncomfortable.
However the very real risk is that otherwise, the effective elevation of people in Semenya's position to advanced female athletes could have all sorts of unintended consequences.
> > @Theuniondivvie said:
> > The Don showing his legendary eye for details.
> >
>
> To be fair, that's an old trick which many news sites fall foul of - you can change your display name once retweeted. I see they've upgraded to a Bernie2020 icon as well.
I never understood why you should be able to.
> > @CarlottaVance said:
> > Julian Assange gets bail:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48118908
> >
> >
> >
> > Bizarre. Just bizarre.
> >
> > Err, the story says he got a year inside for breaching bail, and was taken down to the cells today.
> >
> > Sentencing remarks. Maximum penalty was 52 weeks. He got 50.
> >
> > https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/sentencing-remarks-assange-010519.pdf
> >
> > Short version: 'both barrels'.
> >
> > Then there's this:
> >
> > https://twitter.com/jamesrbuk/status/1123540459962490882
>
> What do you need to do to get the full 52?
It's probably 2 weeks off for the apology (an interesting part of the summary as I wan't aware it existed)
> On PMQs TM is going through the motions and cannot survive much longer.
>
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1123551087808655364
> "If Leavers will not vote Labour if it opposes Brexit, why should Remainers vote Labour if it supports Brexit? Perhaps I have the wrong end of the stick but as I understand it Labour is only committing to a referendum on a horrible Tory Brexit. So if it fought and won a general election on a pro-Brexit ticket it would implement its own form of lovely Brexit without a referendum. That is a policy I can't support, and it has SFA to do with my views on Corbyn (which I would characterise as scepticism rather than outright hostility)."
*
OK, but I'm reading things differently. I am almost certain that come that GE (if it is before Brexit, which it surely will be) the Labour policy will be re-negotiate plus referendum. Therefore the fortunes of Corbyn and Ref2 are inextricably linked. Corbyn as PM is the route to Ref2, and Ref2 is the route to Corbyn as PM. Or put another way -
If you want Ref2 you must swallow Corbyn as PM. And if you want Corbyn as PM you must swallow Ref2.
It's the Socialism/Remain double. Even better, if you're wary of the socialism you can take comfort that EU membership will water it down.
> On PMQs TM is going through the motions and cannot survive much longer.
>
> As you've said in the past, she's not a quitter. I doubt she'll go of her own volition before we Brexit, and I don't see any signs that the party's pathetic cowardice wrt removing her has changed.
TM is not a quitter but I expect circumstances will overwhelm her in the next few weeks
https://twitter.com/GoonerProf/status/1123472102424829953
> Is the next GE going to be about who has pissed off their supporters the least?
aren't all?
In my judgment, the seriousness of your offence, having taken into account the mitigation merits a sentence near the maximum.
The sentence is imprisonment for 50 weeks.
I think local issues are unlikely to play much of a role in the local elections myself. The only real area of interest is how big Tory losses are and who benefits.
> Kinder, gentler politics:
>
> https://twitter.com/GoonerProf/status/1123472102424829953
How many are Labour councillors?
> The irrelevance of PMQs is fully on show as mps leave the chamber before the conclusion
That four course lunch wont eat itself you know.
We tend to overlook the impact of the NHS and concurrent improvements in epidemiology but the current state of play regarding health (low infant mortality, low maternal death in childbirth, lack of lethal diseases) is historically highly unusual. We are spoilt rotten...
> Kinder, gentler politics:
>
> https://twitter.com/GoonerProf/status/1123472102424829953
Nice people.
> I don’t agree with Keir Starmer on much but I do agree he would be a good leader for Change UK. He is one of the few Labour MPs who knows what they want from Brexit. He always seemed very out of place in a Corbyn led Marxist Labour Party.
>
> I think local issues are unlikely to play much of a role in the local elections myself. The only real area of interest is how big Tory losses are and who benefits.
Umunna has a head start over Starmer in CUK and remember most Labour members are more sympathetic to the Starmer line on Brexit than Corbyn's
> > @OnlyLivingBoy said:
>
> > "If Leavers will not vote Labour if it opposes Brexit, why should Remainers vote Labour if it supports Brexit? Perhaps I have the wrong end of the stick but as I understand it Labour is only committing to a referendum on a horrible Tory Brexit. So if it fought and won a general election on a pro-Brexit ticket it would implement its own form of lovely Brexit without a referendum. That is a policy I can't support, and it has SFA to do with my views on Corbyn (which I would characterise as scepticism rather than outright hostility)."
>
> *
>
> OK, but I'm reading things differently. I am almost certain that come that GE (if it is before Brexit, which it surely will be) the Labour policy will be re-negotiate plus referendum. Therefore the fortunes of Corbyn and Ref2 are inextricably linked. Corbyn as PM is the route to Ref2, and Ref2 is the route to Corbyn as PM. Or put another way -
>
> If you want Ref2 you must swallow Corbyn as PM. And if you want Corbyn as PM you must swallow Ref2.
>
> It's the Socialism/Remain double. Even better, if you're wary of the socialism you can take comfort that EU membership will water it down.
You might be right but if that was the case Labour could have signalled that by making it clear that a referendum would be held regardless. The fact they chose not to suggests to me that the Brexity instincts of Milne and Corbyn will prevail. You are basically betting that Labour is trying to mislead its Leaver voters by not promising a referendum now which they will in fact deliver later, but it seems more likely to me that it is people like you who are being misled if you believe Labour's policy will change later on when many signals are to the contrary. To put it another way, Labour must be lying to someone, so it is hard to believe them when they say "trust me".
Btw I agree that only a Labour government will deliver Ref2, but I think the best way to ensure that they do is to deliver a message in the Euros that they have more to fear from pissing off Remainers than Leavers. Also, I have been a Labour member since 92 and so I am personally not at all wary of socialism, although I am sceptical that Corbyn is the person to deliver it.
> https://twitter.com/isaby/status/1123555305567211520
Failing to "commit" any news? New word?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48118829
> > @Scott_P said:
> > https://twitter.com/isaby/status/1123555305567211520
>
> Failing to "commit" any news? New word?
Nothing on a topic no-one wants to talk about due to the very local elections taking place tomorrow. Hardly a surprise.
https://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1123524616503353344?s=20
> Its a shame that there's no market on the Peterborough recall petition, I reckon it will break the 10% threshold. In my opinion 12% will vote to recall...... Looking forward to the byelection if it happens
As will be Farage
> Kinder, gentler politics:
>
> https://twitter.com/GoonerProf/status/1123472102424829953
>
>
>
> They're protesting a fundraiser that JW3 is holding for http://garintzabar.org/ . Looks like a peaceful protest, so I don't really see what the problem is.
I imagine that if France were still occupying territory conquered in war more than fifty years ago as Israel is doing in the West Bank that there would be protests against any fund-raising to support recruits to the French Foreign Legion.
Poppy-selling annually ignites controversy to give an actually existing example.
It's only anti-Semitic if the criticism is because they are Jews, rather than because of what they are doing, regardless of whether they are Jews. This doesn't seem to be an exceptional protest.
> > @AmpfieldAndy said:
> > I don’t agree with Keir Starmer on much but I do agree he would be a good leader for Change UK. He is one of the few Labour MPs who knows what they want from Brexit. He always seemed very out of place in a Corbyn led Marxist Labour Party.
> >
> > I think local issues are unlikely to play much of a role in the local elections myself. The only real area of interest is how big Tory losses are and who benefits.
>
> Umunna has a head start over Starmer in CUK and remember most Labour members are more sympathetic to the Starmer line on Brexit than Corbyn's
I don’t disagree but Umunna has taken a more back seat role in CUK that I would have expected so I wonder how strongly he is committed to it. His first priority is, having jumped ship, how he can get himself re-elected because he has no chance in Streatham.
Corbyn has got the party machine so tightly controlled that he can afford to ignore party members as long as he has Momentum and McCluskey’s support - which he obviously does.
Which is why I prefer not to use them when describing cohort effects.
Which is where I came in.
Having closed the loop I will now put the tablet down, finish my lunch and go back to my desk...
> Julian Assange gets bail:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48118908
>
>
>
> Bizarre. Just bizarre.
>
> That article says he’s been sentenced to 50 weeks inside for breach of bail?
It does now. The original story misreported that he had been given bail again.
> > @noneoftheabove said:
>
> > It surprises me how many people/politicians would veto a soft Brexit in the hope of a referendum.
>
> >
>
> > How confident are they that they would win a referendum?
>
> > Even if they win how confident are they that remain would be the settled answer to the question for the next 10-20 years?
>
> >
>
> > If they have doubts about those, and understand that a no-deal Brexit is a level of risk far above soft Brexit they are being very irresponsible.
>
> >
>
> > If they dont have doubts then they are making the same miscalculations the ERG made last year.
>
>
>
> Brexit has offered a masterclass in how to act on miscalculations. Even Farage, who's made fewer mistakes than most - largely because he's had fewer decisions to make than most - shut up shop too early and had to launch an entirely new party in order to mitigate the risk of Brexit being reversed.
>
> I’m not sure I would characterise any of that as a mistake. Farage didn’t like the internal politics of UKIP, he wasn’t going to continue leading it forever. And after the referendum the Conservatives promised they would follow through and so grabbed the Kipper vote. I’m not sure there was much he could do but wait until the Tories made the inevitable fatal error and capitalise on it. Clearly plenty of thought went into TBP.
I can certainly understand Farage wanting to take some time off after 2016, and his dislike of UKIP's internal politics. All the same, by absenting himself and, by extension UKIP or any other UKIP-like party, from the field since 2016 (or 2017 at the latest: the decline in UKIP's share didn't occur until the 2017GE), he unbalanced the playing field and allowed Remain forces within the EU, the government and parliament to become much stronger relative to Leave forces than would otherwise have been the case.
> https://twitter.com/jrmaidment/status/1123551638776631298
With hindsight, awarding a contract to a company with no ferries to not run any services was a master stroke.
> https://twitter.com/kevverage/status/1123556059384373249
Of course, Ian Blackford and the SNP aren’t blinded by ideology at all, are they ?? Pots and kettles.
Hopefully the good people of Peterborough will decide they wish to be represented in Parliament by a person of good standing.
https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/bds-activists-plan-jw3-protest-over-israeli-film-showing/
In case you’re wondering what heinous crime we have committed, we are showing an Israeli film, that a partner organisation has now purchased all the tickets to, and has resold them at a mark up to raise money for the Israeli Scouts association.....
.....The Jewish Agency bought all the tickets out for the film and resold them as a fundraiser for the Tzofim, the Israeli Scouts in the UK, not the IDF.”
I like regional accents but this is just an affectation and an ugly one. Why would an MP want to appear to be stupid? Could it be she thinks it'll make her more approachable?
> > @HYUFD said:
> > > @AmpfieldAndy said:
> > > I don’t agree with Keir Starmer on much but I do agree he would be a good leader for Change UK. He is one of the few Labour MPs who knows what they want from Brexit. He always seemed very out of place in a Corbyn led Marxist Labour Party.
> > >
> > > I think local issues are unlikely to play much of a role in the local elections myself. The only real area of interest is how big Tory losses are and who benefits.
> >
> > Umunna has a head start over Starmer in CUK and remember most Labour members are more sympathetic to the Starmer line on Brexit than Corbyn's
>
> I don’t disagree but Umunna has taken a more back seat role in CUK that I would have expected so I wonder how strongly he is committed to it. His first priority is, having jumped ship, how he can get himself re-elected because he has no chance in Streatham.
>
> Corbyn has got the party machine so tightly controlled that he can afford to ignore party members as long as he has Momentum and McCluskey’s support - which he obviously does.
Streatham is overwhelmingly Remain and Momentum about to deselect a black Assembly member, Umunna has a chance
"You might be right but if that was the case Labour could have signalled that by making it clear that a referendum would be held regardless. The fact they chose not to suggests to me that the Brexity instincts of Milne and Corbyn will prevail. You are basically betting that Labour is trying to mislead its Leaver voters by not promising a referendum now which they will in fact deliver later, but it seems more likely to me that it is people like you who are being misled if you believe Labour's policy will change later on when many signals are to the contrary. To put it another way, Labour must be lying to someone, so it is hard to believe them when they say "trust me".
Btw I agree that only a Labour government will deliver Ref2, but I think the best way to ensure that they do is to deliver a message in the Euros that they have more to fear from pissing off Remainers than Leavers. Also, I have been a Labour member since 92 and so I am personally not at all wary of socialism, although I am sceptical that Corbyn is the person to deliver it."
*
And of course YOU may be right. But I'm not seeing this as a matter of lying to either of us.
IMO, come the election, what they will do is a dispassionate calculation of the expected net impact (on seats) of making the Ref2 commitment. If the answer is material and positive they will go for it. If not, they won't. I think the number one priority is winning power and all else is secondary to that. So they won't do the calculation now because it would be premature and would lock them in. And the benefit (a boost in the Locals and the Euros) does not justify it.
The reason I'm confident they will ultimately be making the commitment if there is a GE is my sense is that public opinion is turning against Brexit. I'm also confident that they will not collude with the Tories to pass anything in this parliament, which means that the GE will come before the dirty deed.
I defer to your 1992, hats off, my membership is not even a year old yet. My approach to Jeremy comes more or less from Stephen Stills - If you can't be with the one you love, Love the one you're with.
>
> I heard a labour MP Laura Pidcock being interviewed about the local elections.The letters 'T' and 'G' disappeared altogether. 'Voting' became 'vo-ing'. 'Important' became 'impor-ant' 'Party' became 'par-y' 'Suffering became 'sufferin'
>
> I like regional accents but this is just an affectation and an ugly one. Why would an MP want to appear to be stupid? Could it be she thinks it'll make her more approachable?
>
>
>
>
>
>
As someone from the north east, may I say:
Roger - get to fuck.
>
> I heard a labour MP Laura Pidcock being interviewed about the local elections.The letters 'T' and 'G' disappeared altogether. 'Voting' became 'vo-ing'. 'Important' became 'impor-ant' 'Party' became 'par-y' 'Suffering became 'sufferin'
>
> I like regional accents but this is just an affectation and an ugly one. Why would an MP want to appear to be stupid? Could it be she thinks it'll make her more approachable?
>
>
"I like regional accents" is the "some of my best friends are black" of the English class system. Personally, I always add about 10pts to somebody's IQ if they are in public life and don't speak the usual deathly dull RP, because I know they must have had to overcome a certain amount of snobbery and prejudice to get where they have.
I admit the last couple of years have been depressing but I recognise it served a purpose. Most leavers now see the truth; everyone will try and screw you out of what you want, Tories included. Perfect time for Farage to white knight.
>
> I heard a labour MP Laura Pidcock being interviewed about the local elections.The letters 'T' and 'G' disappeared altogether. 'Voting' became 'vo-ing'. 'Important' became 'impor-ant' 'Party' became 'par-y' 'Suffering became 'sufferin'
>
> I like regional accents but this is just an affectation and an ugly one. Why would an MP want to appear to be stupid? Could it be she thinks it'll make her more approachable?
>
>
>
>
>
>
Surely not. All of our politicians have been making a blatant show of their stupidity and are more unpopular than ever.
> In other news our massive investment in wind power is today (and yesterday) producing 0.51% of our energy needs. We've even had to stick a block of coal into the boiler.
>
> https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
>
>
>
> It's a good example of the limitations of renewable energy.
>
> Remind me again- when is the Hunterston B8 reactor finally going to come back on line after its extended shut down?
Here's the very latest news: https://www.neimagazine.com/news/newsoutage-extended-again-for-uk-hunterston-npp-7177616
Not sure what your point is though.