A line which I think was very effective and we'll hear more from Sanders and Warren was that their opponents were using Republican taking points. Also expecting lefty candidates to start characterising Biden as "no we can't" (have any of them done this yet?), since that's a neat way to suggest that they're the ones carrying forward the sense of hope and optimism that many Dems still associate with Obama, not Biden.
I walked past an ad for a halloumi burger today. From Burger King. The world is changing.
How odd! I ate my first ever BG halloumi burger yesterday. It was rubbish.
As a vegetarian I sometimes consider going vegan so that people will stop offering me halloumi.
I like halloumi. Great in Caesar salad. Although they always forget to put the Caesar in. So it should be just salad. But I dunno. Food. It's complicated.
I prefer tofu to halloumi, and I’m not even vegetarian.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
That's rubbish. I've been a vegetarian for over 30 years and am in great health. Particularly compared to the people I see ordering from McDonald's in motorway service stations. Destroying the planet to provide 7 billion people with a meat heavy western diet is the real threat.
A line which I think was very effective and we'll hear more from Sanders and Warren was that their opponents were using Republican taking points. Also expecting lefty candidates to start characterising Biden as "no we can't" (have any of them done this yet?), since that's a neat way to suggest that they're the ones carrying forward the sense of hope and optimism that many Dems still associate with Obama, not Biden.
If they wish to win the election, as opposed to the nomination, it’s not a great line.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
That's rubbish. I've been a vegetarian for over 30 years and am in great health. Particularly compared to the people I see ordering from McDonald's in motorway service stations. Destroying the planet to provide 7 billion people with a meat heavy western diet is the real threat.
A line which I think was very effective and we'll hear more from Sanders and Warren was that their opponents were using Republican taking points. Also expecting lefty candidates to start characterising Biden as "no we can't" (have any of them done this yet?), since that's a neat way to suggest that they're the ones carrying forward the sense of hope and optimism that many Dems still associate with Obama, not Biden.
If they wish to win the election, as opposed to the nomination, it’s not a great line.
Well obviously it's not a line they'd keep using in the presidential election. That wouldn't make sense at all
I know it's half joking, but I half believe it. She is absurdly rich. Even richer is Guardian columnist Marina Hyde, who recently and casually phoned an architect friend of mine and said "oh, Zak, I've stupidly bought another house, do you think you could do it up?"
The latest house - one of several - is worth at least £5m.
I am surprised your architect friend Zak is so indiscreet with his client's projects.
A line which I think was very effective and we'll hear more from Sanders and Warren was that their opponents were using Republican taking points. Also expecting lefty candidates to start characterising Biden as "no we can't" (have any of them done this yet?), since that's a neat way to suggest that they're the ones carrying forward the sense of hope and optimism that many Dems still associate with Obama, not Biden.
If they wish to win the election, as opposed to the nomination, it’s not a great line.
Well obviously it's not a line they'd keep using in the presidential election. That wouldn't make sense at all
Smacks of Corbynism’s “you’re just a Tory”. How’s that working our for Labour ?
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
Total nonsense.
I love a good steak, but 99% of meat products are pure junk. Just asking for cancer.
I'll agree there are a lot of unhealthy meat products about. And a lot of unhealthy non meat ones. But as a general principle, meats, including organ meats, bone marrow, animal fats, bone broths, fish oils etc. are some of the most (absorbable) nutrient dense foods you can eat, which is why they've been sought out by humans for eons.
You should know this coming from the nation of the mighty haggis.
FPTP will be the Tory saviour if the swing from Labour to Tory tomorrow is bigger than the swing from Tory to LD
Though of course any Labour to Tory swing tomorrow will benefit the Tories as there are more Labour Tory marginal seats than Tory LD marginal seats
On the latest Yougov the Tories would gain 41 Labour seats, while only losing 13 seats to the LDs and at most about 10 to the SNP
And leaving aside the current political meltdown, the history of snap elections is not encouraging for governments. 2017, 1974, 1970 …..
And the Tories would either have to say they were seeking a mandate for no deal, which would lose them their remain supporters, or that they believed the EU would offer a better deal, which is scarcely credible and would lead to accusations of imminent betrayal from BXP etc and might well be ruled out publicly by the EU during the campaign.
I can only think of 1966 as being a really successful snap election. I don't really count the Thatcher or Blair elections after 4 years as a snap election as they co-ordinated Government spending increases and tax cuts strategically to coincide with an election in that year.
1970 was not a snap election either in that it took place in year 5 of the 1966 Parliament.
That is true. I think the union problems and lack of giveaway budget in 1970 did for Wilson. It was an impressive achievement for the Tories to overturn a pretty big majority as they did and to obtain a working majority that could theoretically last a full five year parliament. Shame for Heath and the country it ended as it did! Wilson was probably a more gifted operator and politician than Heath to be fair.
In those days the ULster Unionists still took the Tory Whip. Without them , Heath's majority would only have been 15.
Indeed, the early 1970s was as chaotic politically as it is today! The same problems: Europe & NI are shaking the establishment to the core. As a perspective do you think the problems were worse then or now? Certainly, In NI and even the mainland the problems were greater in that people were being maimed and killed. In contrast I think Europe is a much bigger problem now than it was then as we gained an economic advantage in joining the EEC and even on the least pessimistic analysis we will lose be executing Brexit.
A line which I think was very effective and we'll hear more from Sanders and Warren was that their opponents were using Republican taking points. Also expecting lefty candidates to start characterising Biden as "no we can't" (have any of them done this yet?), since that's a neat way to suggest that they're the ones carrying forward the sense of hope and optimism that many Dems still associate with Obama, not Biden.
If they wish to win the election, as opposed to the nomination, it’s not a great line.
Well obviously it's not a line they'd keep using in the presidential election. That wouldn't make sense at all
Smacks of Corbynism. How’s that working our for Labour ?
I walked past an ad for a halloumi burger today. From Burger King. The world is changing.
How odd! I ate my first ever BG halloumi burger yesterday. It was rubbish.
As a vegetarian I sometimes consider going vegan so that people will stop offering me halloumi.
I like halloumi. Great in Caesar salad. Although they always forget to put the Caesar in. So it should be just salad. But I dunno. Food. It's complicated.
Caesar salad is too often served without anchovies, and/or other key ingredients. I therefore almost never order it. Halloumi is not a correct ingredient in caesar salad.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
Total nonsense.
I love a good steak, but 99% of meat products are pure junk. Just asking for cancer.
I'll agree there are a lot of unhealthy meat products about. And a lot of unhealthy non meat ones. But as a general principle, meats, including organ meats, bone marrow, animal fats, bone broths, fish oils etc. are some of the most (absorbable) nutrient dense foods you can eat, which is why they've been sought out by humans for eons.
You should know this coming from the nation of the mighty haggis.
I remember being 14 and debating with other 14 year olds online who used pseudoscience to justify their weird defensiveness about other people's dietary choices. I think most of them grew out of it though. Do you think you will at some point?
A line which I think was very effective and we'll hear more from Sanders and Warren was that their opponents were using Republican taking points. Also expecting lefty candidates to start characterising Biden as "no we can't" (have any of them done this yet?), since that's a neat way to suggest that they're the ones carrying forward the sense of hope and optimism that many Dems still associate with Obama, not Biden.
If they wish to win the election, as opposed to the nomination, it’s not a great line.
Well obviously it's not a line they'd keep using in the presidential election. That wouldn't make sense at all
Smacks of Corbynism. How’s that working our for Labour ?
How does it snack of Corbynism?
Disparaging your intra-party opponents as Tories. If you exclude a significant section of the party, you tend to sabotage your chances of a majority in the general election.
I know it's half joking, but I half believe it. She is absurdly rich. Even richer is Guardian columnist Marina Hyde, who recently and casually phoned an architect friend of mine and said "oh, Zak, I've stupidly bought another house, do you think you could do it up?"
The latest house - one of several - is worth at least £5m.
I am surprised your architect friend Zak is so indiscreet with his client's projects.
Not his real name; she deserves the publicity. A screaming hypocrite. She also dated Piers Morgan. Pff!
It won't completely [just as illegal alcohol and tobacco aren't 100% off the streets] but it will largely, most people will buy it legally just as most people buy their tobacco and alcohol legally.
Reducing the demand of customers for illegal drugs will reduce the supply of illegal drugs and associated criminal offences.
Just because a solution is only better and not perfect doesn't mean it shouldn't be used.
But we're currently in a situation where people openly smoke weed on the streets. There could not be much less severity in the consequences of illegal cannabis use, so why would anyone pay more for the nice fuzzy feeling of being legal? The people who ended up purchasing legal cannabis would be more likely to be new consumers giving it a bash.
I do think there should be a lot more medical use of cannabis, including oil with the psychoactive compounds - I know someone who used this successfully to treat her leukemia and continues to need it to stay healthy. However I am not convinced how blanket legalisation will help. But I'm open to the idea.
Some people openly smoke weed on the streets, some people openly drink alcohol on the streets too. However the vast majority of people buy their alcohol legally not from criminals.
Yes, but the history of alcohol becoming part of our lifestyles in a legal fashion has evolved over centuries and has involved huge crackdowns on unlicensed and untaxed brewing and distilling operations.
So we have crackdowns on unlicensed and untaxed drug operations, which will be simpler to do as it won't be a major portion of the country using them anymore because there is no longer a requirement if you want to get drugs from illegal sources.
There is history here with alcohol and organised crime in America under prohibition. Prohibition was a boon for organised crime and allowed the Mafia to flourish, legalisation led to alcohol going back to mainstream sources as it will if we legalise drugs.
Which is not hypothetical it can be seen in other nations where it has been done. Not only that but legalisation leads to a reduction in underage consumption as licensed and regulated dispensaries check ID whereas drug dealers don't.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
I can easily see how one could enjoy a perfectly nutritious and interesting diet without meat and fish. It's not my choice, but if one day I developed a weird allergy to eating animals and had to do without for the rest of my life, I think I'd adapt quite well.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
I know it's half joking, but I half believe it. She is absurdly rich. Even richer is Guardian columnist Marina Hyde, who recently and casually phoned an architect friend of mine and said "oh, Zak, I've stupidly bought another house, do you think you could do it up?"
The latest house - one of several - is worth at least £5m.
I am surprised your architect friend Zak is so indiscreet with his client's projects.
Not his real name; she deserves the publicity. A screaming hypocrite. She also dated Piers Morgan. Pff!
Surely for that, anyone deserves some degree of sympathy ?
Compulsory reading for the Westminster Bubble. Never mind proroguing parliament, imagine if England had her democracy permanently set aside and she was ruled directly from, say, Paris, Edinburgh or Dublin?
Good Friday Agreement binned, a hard border and Direct Rule. How far does this have to go before Westminster realises it’s in a hole and needs to stop digging?
Madrid imposed direct rule on Catalonia when it tried to declare independence after an independence referendum was refused and direct rule is still in place, with Catalan nationalists in exile
Sounds almost as though you approve.
Do you plan to impose direct rule on Scotland and exile Scottish nationalists? Sounds right up the Tories’ street.
I nominate George Osborne to be Governor General based in Glasgow to impose and implement direct rule ably assisted by TSE, am sure they will do a grand job!
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
Total nonsense.
I love a good steak, but 99% of meat products are pure junk. Just asking for cancer.
I'll agree there are a lot of unhealthy meat products about. And a lot of unhealthy non meat ones. But as a general principle, meats, including organ meats, bone marrow, animal fats, bone broths, fish oils etc. are some of the most (absorbable) nutrient dense foods you can eat, which is why they've been sought out by humans for eons.
You should know this coming from the nation of the mighty haggis.
I remember being 14 and debating with other 14 year olds online who used pseudoscience to justify their weird defensiveness about other people's dietary choices. I think most of them grew out of it though. Do you think you will at some point?
Non 'pseudo' science was telling everyone just 30 years ago to avoid fats and that carbohydrates were a good substitute. We have now realised that was rot, and there are healthy fats, and sugar is the real enemy. If the most current prevailing scientific opinion can change so radically in such a short space of time, how can it be relied upon to dictate what is and is not healthy? The *only* real test of the value of a foodstuff to human health is the test of time.
I think the most likely outcome of any GE is a Labour minority Government.
If it's a Brexit election with No Deal threatened I think Remainer tactical voting will deliver a majority for LAB/LD/SNP.
But I also have a strong sense that Brexit in some form WILL be delivered. We cannot pretend that the 2016 Referendum did not happen. I wish we could but we can't.
I know it's half joking, but I half believe it. She is absurdly rich. Even richer is Guardian columnist Marina Hyde, who recently and casually phoned an architect friend of mine and said "oh, Zak, I've stupidly bought another house, do you think you could do it up?"
The latest house - one of several - is worth at least £5m.
I am surprised your architect friend Zak is so indiscreet with his client's projects.
Not his real name; she deserves the publicity. A screaming hypocrite. She also dated Piers Morgan. Pff!
Surely for that, anyone deserves some degree of sympathy ?
Not if you do it willingly and happily. Especially not if, like her, you then try and bury any reports of this grisly liaison.
Not so different. I’m just old enough to know it was pretty offensive even back then.
And why else the determined efforts to bury it ?
I would imagine determined efforts to bury it were made because it is shocking and wrong by today's standards and Reagan knew that and didn't want it to be associated with him.
FPTP will be the Tory saviour if the swing from Labour to Tory tomorrow is bigger than the swing from Tory to LD
How many people who voted Labour last time are now intending to vote for the Tories? What have the Tories done to persuade people of their competence, compassion, even common sense?
Only 5% of 2017 Labour voters now back the Tories, true but with 21% of 2017 Labour voters now voting LD, 11% backing the Greens and 7% voting Brexit Party, Labour are only retaining 54% of their 2017 vote currently.
With the Tories now retaining 69% of their 2017 vote thanks to Boris, there is a clear Labour to Tory swing overall
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
Total nonsense.
I love a good steak, but 99% of meat products are pure junk. Just asking for cancer.
I'll agree there are a lot of unhealthy meat products about. And a lot of unhealthy non meat ones. But as a general principle, meats, including organ meats, bone marrow, animal fats, bone broths, fish oils etc. are some of the most (absorbable) nutrient dense foods you can eat, which is why they've been sought out by humans for eons.
You should know this coming from the nation of the mighty haggis.
I remember being 14 and debating with other 14 year olds online who used pseudoscience to justify their weird defensiveness about other people's dietary choices. I think most of them grew out of it though. Do you think you will at some point?
Non 'pseudo' science was telling everyone just 30 years ago to avoid fats and that carbohydrates were a good substitute. We have now realised that was rot, and there are healthy fats, and sugar is the real enemy. If the most current prevailing scientific opinion can change so radically in such a short space of time, how can it be relied upon to dictate what is and is not healthy? The *only* real test of the value of a foodstuff to human health is the test of time.
Agree on health and diet fads. I am old enough to remember when margarine was the "healthy" alternative to butter, and we were all advised to avoid potatoes of ANY KIND. And we were told this by real doctors.
As for the test of time, surely it makes sense to look around the world and see who lives the longest and the healthiest lives, and copy what they eat and do?
On that basis the ideal life is a combo of life in Iceland, Japan and parts of Italy/Greece. In other words: eat lots of fish, drink a fair amount, walk around quite fast, and don't worry about your diet.
It won't completely [just as illegal alcohol and tobacco aren't 100% off the streets] but it will largely, most people will buy it legally just as most people buy their tobacco and alcohol legally.
Reducing the demand of customers for illegal drugs will reduce the supply of illegal drugs and associated criminal offences.
Just because a solution is only better and not perfect doesn't mean it shouldn't be used.
But we're currently in a situation where people openly smoke weed on the streets. There could not be much less severity in the consequences of illegal cannabis use, so why would anyone pay more for the nice fuzzy feeling of being legal? The people who ended up purchasing legal cannabis would be more likely to be new consumers giving it a bash.
I do think there should be a lot more medical use of cannabis, including oil with the psychoactive compounds - I know someone who used this successfully to treat her leukemia and continues to need it to stay healthy. However I am not convinced how blanket legalisation will help. But I'm open to the idea.
Some people openly smoke weed on the streets, some people openly drink alcohol on the streets too. However the vast majority of people buy their alcohol legally not from criminals.
Yes, but the history of alcohol becoming part of our lifestyles in a legal fashion has evolved over centuries and has involved huge crackdowns on unlicensed and untaxed brewing and distilling operations.
So we have crackdowns on unlicensed and untaxed drug operations, which will be simpler to do as it won't be a major portion of the country using them anymore because there is no longer a requirement if you want to get drugs from illegal sources.
There is history here with alcohol and organised crime in America under prohibition. Prohibition was a boon for organised crime and allowed the Mafia to flourish, legalisation led to alcohol going back to mainstream sources as it will if we legalise drugs.
Which is not hypothetical it can be seen in other nations where it has been done. Not only that but legalisation leads to a reduction in underage consumption as licensed and regulated dispensaries check ID whereas drug dealers don't.
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
FPTP will be the Tory saviour if the swing from Labour to Tory tomorrow is bigger than the swing from Tory to LD
How many people who voted Labour last time are now intending to vote for the Tories? What have the Tories done to persuade people of their competence, compassion, even common sense?
Only 5% of 2017 Labour voters now back the Tories, true but with 21% of 2017 Labour voters now voting LD, 11% backing the Greens and 7% voting Brexit Party Labour are only retaining 54% of their 2017 vote currently.
With the Tories now retaining 69% of their 2017 vote thanks to Boris, there is a clear Labour to Tory swing overall
I think the most likely outcome of any GE is a Labour minority Government.
If it's a Brexit election with No Deal threatened I think Remainer tactical voting will deliver a majority for LAB/LD/SNP.
But I also have a strong sense that Brexit in some form WILL be delivered. We cannot pretend that the 2016 Referendum did not happen. I wish we could but we can't.
Why do you think this outcome is likely (LAD/LD/SNP) [I agree BTW].
I know it's half joking, but I half believe it. She is absurdly rich. Even richer is Guardian columnist Marina Hyde, who recently and casually phoned an architect friend of mine and said "oh, Zak, I've stupidly bought another house, do you think you could do it up?"
The latest house - one of several - is worth at least £5m.
I am surprised your architect friend Zak is so indiscreet with his client's projects.
He probably knew that his pal would be adopting a pseudonym and and a totally hard-to-identify persona when he blabbed it out on the internet, therefore putting everyone off the scent.
FPTP will be the Tory saviour if the swing from Labour to Tory tomorrow is bigger than the swing from Tory to LD
How many people who voted Labour last time are now intending to vote for the Tories? What have the Tories done to persuade people of their competence, compassion, even common sense?
Only 5% of 2017 Labour voters now back the Tories, true but with 21% of 2017 Labour voters now voting LD, 11% backing the Greens and 7% voting Brexit Party Labour are only retaining 54% of their 2017 vote currently.
With the Tories now retaining 69% of their 2017 vote thanks to Boris, there is a clear Labour to Tory swing overall
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
Total nonsense.
I love a good steak, but 99% of meat products are pure junk. Just asking for cancer.
I'll agree there are a lot of unhealthy meat products about. And a lot of unhealthy non meat ones. But as a general principle, meats, including organ meats, bone marrow, animal fats, bone broths, fish oils etc. are some of the most (absorbable) nutrient dense foods you can eat, which is why they've been sought out by humans for eons.
You should know this coming from the nation of the mighty haggis.
I remember being 14 and debating with other 14 year olds online who used pseudoscience to justify their weird defensiveness about other people's dietary choices. I think most of them grew out of it though. Do you think you will at some point?
Non 'pseudo' science was telling everyone just 30 years ago to avoid fats and that carbohydrates were a good substitute. We have now realised that was rot, and there are healthy fats, and sugar is the real enemy. If the most current prevailing scientific opinion can change so radically in such a short space of time, how can it be relied upon to dictate what is and is not healthy? The *only* real test of the value of a foodstuff to human health is the test of time.
Agree on health and diet fads. I am old enough to remember when margarine was the "healthy" alternative to butter, and we were all advised to avoid potatoes of ANY KIND. And we were told this by real doctors.
As for the test of time, surely it makes sense to look around the world and see who lives the longest and the healthiest lives, and copy what they eat and do?
On that basis the ideal life is a combo of life in Iceland, Japan and parts of Italy/Greece. In other words: eat lots of fish, drink a fair amount, walk around quite fast, and don't worry about your diet.
This principle is what the Weston A Price foundation advocates, though Weston A Price made a study of finding those precise peoples, on the cusp of when modernity was destroying many of their healthy traditions. None of the races celebrated for longevity were vegetarian. But those that were, revered animal products like butter (India's sacred cow) because clearly they believed it was important to their health.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
Total nonsense.
I love a good steak, but 99% of meat products are pure junk. Just asking for cancer.
I'll agree there are a lot of unhealthy meat products about. And a lot of unhealthy non meat
You should know this coming from the nation of the mighty haggis.
I remember being 14 and debating with other 14 year olds online who used pseudoscience to justify their weird defensiveness about other people's dietary choices. I think most of them grew out of it though. Do you think you will at some point?
Non 'pseuest of time.
Agree on health and diet fads. I am old enough to remember when margarine was the "healthy" alternative to butter, and we were all advised to avoid potatoes of ANY KIND. And we were told this by real doctors.
As for the test of time, surely it makes sense to look around the world and see who lives the longest and the healthiest lives, and copy what they eat and do?
On that basis the ideal life is a combo of life in Iceland, Japan and parts of Italy/Greece. In other words: eat lots of fish, drink a fair amount, walk around quite fast, and don't worry about your diet.
This principle is what the Weston A Price foundation advocates, though Weston A Price made a study of finding those precise peoples, on the cusp of when modernity was destroying many of their healthy traditions. None of the races celebrated for longevity were vegetarian. But those that were, revered animal products like butter (India's sacred cow) because clearly they believed it was important to their health.
I heartily concur that meat is an important part of a healthy human diet, but should be taken sparingly, and with due ceremony. Eat fish, veg and salad the rest of the time.
When you have meat, make it a fabulous, well-hung rib eye, or a glorious rack of milk fed lamb. With a stout walk before, and good wine to go with = a long life.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
Total nonsense.
I love a good steak, but 99% of meat products are pure junk. Just asking for cancer.
I'll agree there are a lot of unhealthy meat products about. And a lot of unhealthy non meat ones. But as a general principle, meats, including organ meats, bone marrow, animal fats, bone broths, fish oils etc. are some of the most (absorbable) nutrient dense foods you can eat, which is why they've been sought out by humans for eons.
You should know this coming from the nation of the mighty haggis.
I remember being 14 and debating with other 14 year olds online who used pseudoscience to justify their weird defensiveness about other people's dietary choices. I think most of them grew out of it though. Do you think you will at some point?
Non 'pseudo' science was telling everyone just 30 years ago to avoid fats and that carbohydrates were a good substitute. We have now realised that was rot, and there are healthy fats, and sugar is the real enemy. If the most current prevailing scientific opinion can change so radically in such a short space of time, how can it be relied upon to dictate what is and is not healthy? The *only* real test of the value of a foodstuff to human health is the test of time.
There's actually nothing wrong with eating refined sugar: just because it wasn't around in the Palaeolithic, this doesn't imply that it should be avoided at all costs.
The almighty obesity crisis is the product of bad eating habits and lack of exercise, rooted in various other causes. Except when eaten by certain people with serious underlying health conditions, treats like chocolate biscuits, rich pastries and cream cakes are all absolutely harmless in and of themselves.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
I can easily see how one could enjoy a perfectly nutritious and interesting diet without meat and fish. It's not my choice, but if one day I developed a weird allergy to eating animals and had to do without for the rest of my life, I think I'd adapt quite well.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
To some extent, having these dietary choices is easier in a wealthy society. In some places in the world, people cannot afford to turn away any food they can get their hands on.
Having said that, western diets are far too protein heavy and the portion sizes too large. As always a good mix is best.
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
I have always suspected that the way to destroy the drugs trade is to get the government to run a nationalised version. That usually wrecks the market
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, I agree with all that - it's a sensible plan... but I thought you were a libertarian?
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, I agree with all that - it's a sensible plan... but I thought you were a libertarian?
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
I can easily see how one could enjoy a perfectly nutritious and interesting diet without meat and fish. It's not my choice, but if one day I developed a weird allergy to eating animals and had to do without for the rest of my life, I think I'd adapt quite well.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
To some extent, having these dietary choices is easier in a wealthy society. In some places in the world, people cannot afford to turn away any food they can get their hands on.
Having said that, western diets are far too protein heavy and the portion sizes too large. As always a good mix is best.
Increasingly less the case, though.
One of the great unsung achievements of humanity is the conquest of hunger. When was the last major famine, anywhere on earth?
Exactly. It's difficult to remember. They are rare, and, these days, normally caused by very unusual and extreme events, such as war, and even then they are limited in scale.
When I was growing up the images of starving, swollen bellied kids in Africa/Asia were ubiquitous. Now they have largely disappeared. This is a marvellous thing.
Why do you think this outcome is likely (LAD/LD/SNP) [I agree BTW].
I have always been happy with a soft Brexit
I think soft Brexit will be the ultimate outcome.
Why the Remainer majority under FPTP? Because compared to Leavers they are more likely to vote and are a bit smarter - hence will vote a bit smarter and more tactically.
But all hypo since I expect BJohnson to pass the WA in 2020 without recourse to an election.
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, I agree with all that - it's a sensible plan... but I thought you were a libertarian?
What's illiberal about what I suggested?
Er, regulating and taxing? Not that I'm against it but then I'm not a libertarian.
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, our government should act like Narco-lords. Send our henchmen to drive rivals out of business, form a monopoly and extract the maximum income out of our addicted consumers. Think of it as being like the Opium wars, but in the safer context of aiming at our own young and socially excluded rather than those of a foreign country.
Why do you think this outcome is likely (LAD/LD/SNP) [I agree BTW].
I have always been happy with a soft Brexit
I think soft Brexit will be the ultimate outcome.
Why the Remainer majority under FPTP? Because compared to Leavers they are more likely to vote and are a bit smarter - hence will vote a bit smarter and more tactically.
But all hypo since I expect BJohnson to pass the WA in 2020 without recourse to an election.
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, our government should act like Narco-lords. Send our henchmen to drive rivals out of business, form a monopoly and extract the maximum income out of our addicted consumers. Think of it as being like the Opium wars, but in the safer context of aiming at our own young and socially excluded rather than those of a foreign country.
It's what we already do with two major drugs Foxy.
Compulsory reading for the Westminster Bubble. Never mind proroguing parliament, imagine if England had her democracy permanently set aside and she was ruled directly from, say, Paris, Edinburgh or Dublin?
Good Friday Agreement binned, a hard border and Direct Rule. How far does this have to go before Westminster realises it’s in a hole and needs to stop digging?
Madrid imposed direct rule on Catalonia when it tried to declare independence after an independence referendum was refused and direct rule is still in place, with Catalan nationalists in exile
Sounds almost as though you approve.
Do you plan to impose direct rule on Scotland and exile Scottish nationalists? Sounds right up the Tories’ street.
I nominate George Osborne to be Governor General based in Glasgow to impose and implement direct rule ably assisted by TSE, am sure they will do a grand job!
I’d like to think you were joking, but I know you’re not.
Good decision...there is more dead wood that needs to go. They need to hire some players who have only just retired and have real insight into the modern game.
Am sick and tired of the likes of Botham having no idea what really are the tactics in modern T20 and ODIs.
Why do you think this outcome is likely (LAD/LD/SNP) [I agree BTW].
I have always been happy with a soft Brexit
I think soft Brexit will be the ultimate outcome.
Why the Remainer majority under FPTP? Because compared to Leavers they are more likely to vote and are a bit smarter - hence will vote a bit smarter and more tactically.
But all hypo since I expect BJohnson to pass the WA in 2020 without recourse to an election.
I know! Niche view!
Fascinating. How is he going to do that?!
Anything could happen once the currency and stock markets start to 'take back control'.
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, I agree with all that - it's a sensible plan... but I thought you were a libertarian?
What's illiberal about what I suggested?
Er, regulating and taxing? Not that I'm against it but then I'm not a libertarian.
I'm a libertarian not an anarchist. I would like what people here call libertarian pirate island, hence the profile picture, but not absolute anarchy.
Taxes are a necessary evil and taxes on stuff the government wants to reduce or prevent [alcohol abuse, tobacco, drugs, petrol, gambling etc] are preferable IMO than taxing stuff that we should be wanting to encourage like working or hiring people [income taxes, NI].
Regulations should be minimal but not zero. The most relevant regulation IMO that should be encouraged is Challenge 25 - let adults buy what they want to buy but no reason for children to be able to buy.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
I can easily see how one could enjoy a perfectly nutritious and interesting diet without meat and fish. It's not my choice, but if one day I developed a weird allergy to eating animals and had to do without for the rest of my life, I think I'd adapt quite well.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
To some extent, having these dietary choices is easier in a wealthy society. In some places in the world, people cannot afford to turn away any food they can get their hands on.
Having said that, western diets are far too protein heavy and the portion sizes too large. As always a good mix is best.
Increasingly less the case, though.
One of the great unsung achievements of humanity is the conquest of hunger. When was the last major famine, anywhere on earth?
Exactly. It's difficult to remember. They are rare, and, these days, normally caused by very unusual and extreme events, such as war, and even then they are limited in scale.
When I was growing up the images of starving, swollen bellied kids in Africa/Asia were ubiquitous. Now they have largely disappeared. This is a marvellous thing.
Until 2017, worldwide deaths from famine had been falling dramatically. The World Peace Foundation reported that from the 1870s to the 1970s, great famines killed an average of 928,000 people a year.[18] Since 1980, annual deaths had dropped to an average of 75,000, less than 10% of what they had been until the 1970s. That reduction was achieved despite the approximately 150,000 lives lost in the 2011 Somalia famine. Yet in 2017, the UN officially declared famine had returned to Africa, with about 20 million people at risk of death from starvation in Nigeria, in South Sudan, in Yemen, and in Somalia.[19] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, our government should act like Narco-lords. Send our henchmen to drive rivals out of business, form a monopoly and extract the maximum income out of our addicted consumers. Think of it as being like the Opium wars, but in the safer context of aiming at our own young and socially excluded rather than those of a foreign country.
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, our government should act like Narco-lords. Send our henchmen to drive rivals out of business, form a monopoly and extract the maximum income out of our addicted consumers. Think of it as being like the Opium wars, but in the safer context of aiming at our own young and socially excluded rather than those of a foreign country.
It's what we already do with two major drugs Foxy.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
I can easily see how one could enjoy a perfectly nutritious and interesting diet without meat and fish. It's not my choice, but if one day I developed a weird allergy to eating animals and had to do without for the rest of my life, I think I'd adapt quite well.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
To some extent, having these dietary choices is easier in a wealthy society. In some places in the world, people cannot afford to turn away any food they can get their hands on.
Having said that, western diets are far too protein heavy and the portion sizes too large. As always a good mix is best.
Increasingly less the case, though.
One of the great unsung achievements of humanity is the conquest of hunger. When was the last major famine, anywhere on earth?
Exactly. It's difficult to remember. They are rare, and, these days, normally caused by very unusual and extreme events, such as war, and even then they are limited in scale.
When I was growing up the images of starving, swollen bellied kids in Africa/Asia were ubiquitous. Now they have largely disappeared. This is a marvellous thing.
I agree and it is a good thing that famine is a lot rarer. I was merely making the point that not everyone can choose precisely what they want to eat.
There is a TEDx video on how much better the world is becoming. It makes compelling watching
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, our government should act like Narco-lords. Send our henchmen to drive rivals out of business, form a monopoly and extract the maximum income out of our addicted consumers. Think of it as being like the Opium wars, but in the safer context of aiming at our own young and socially excluded rather than those of a foreign country.
It's what we already do with two major drugs Foxy.
Three wrongs don’t make a right.
Getting drugs out of the hands of knive-wielding gangsters and into the hands of licensed corporate distributers is a right on its own basis.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
I can easily see how one could enjoy a perfectly nutritious and interesting diet without meat and fish. It's not my choice, but if one day I developed a weird allergy to eating animals and had to do without for the rest of my life, I think I'd adapt quite well.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
To some extent, having these dietary choices is easier in a wealthy society. In some places in the world, people cannot afford to turn away any food they can get their hands on.
Having said that, western diets are far too protein heavy and the portion sizes too large. As always a good mix is best.
Increasingly less the case, though.
One of the great unsung achievements of humanity is the conquest of hunger. When was the last major famine, anywhere on earth?
Exactly. It's difficult to remember. They are rare, and, these days, normally caused by very unusual and extreme events, such as war, and even then they are limited in scale.
When I was growing up the images of starving, swollen bellied kids in Africa/Asia were ubiquitous. Now they have largely disappeared. This is a marvellous thing.
Until 2017, worldwide deaths from famine had been falling dramatically. The World Peace Foundation reported that from the 1870s to the 1970s, great famines killed an average of 928,000 people a year.[18] Since 1980, annual deaths had dropped to an average of 75,000, less than 10% of what they had been until the 1970s. That reduction was achieved despite the approximately 150,000 lives lost in the 2011 Somalia famine. Yet in 2017, the UN officially declared famine had returned to Africa, with about 20 million people at risk of death from starvation in Nigeria, in South Sudan, in Yemen, and in Somalia.[19] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine
This list of historical famines is fascinating, in a macabre way. Millions die in Russia, China, India, as you might expect.
But there are some intriguing anomalies. There was a famine in the English Midlands in 1728? And why was there a famine in Morocco caused by French refuelling laws?
The best of them all has to be the Canadian Caribou Famine of 1950, which killed..... 60 people.
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, our government should act like Narco-lords. Send our henchmen to drive rivals out of business, form a monopoly and extract the maximum income out of our addicted consumers. Think of it as being like the Opium wars, but in the safer context of aiming at our own young and socially excluded rather than those of a foreign country.
It's what we already do with two major drugs Foxy.
Three wrongs don’t make a right.
Some regions of the Uk make their citizens pay more than others for the cheapest of these drugs.
Compulsory reading for the Westminster Bubble. Never mind proroguing parliament, imagine if England had her democracy permanently set aside and she was ruled directly from, say, Paris, Edinburgh or Dublin?
Good Friday Agreement binned, a hard border and Direct Rule. How far does this have to go before Westminster realises it’s in a hole and needs to stop digging?
Madrid imposed direct rule on Catalonia when it tried to declare independence after an independence referendum was refused and direct rule is still in place, with Catalan nationalists in exile
Sounds almost as though you approve.
Do you plan to impose direct rule on Scotland and exile Scottish nationalists? Sounds right up the Tories’ street.
I nominate George Osborne to be Governor General based in Glasgow to impose and implement direct rule ably assisted by TSE, am sure they will do a grand job!
I’d like to think you were joking, but I know you’re not.
Anyone who is going to change the world, whatever prejudices they have will be superseded by desire to build coalitions to get from A to B. Corbyn and the cult around him don’t have this.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
I can easily see how one could enjoy a perfectly nutritious and interesting diet without meat and fish. It's not my choice, but if one day I developed a weird allergy to eating animals and had to do without for the rest of my life, I think I'd adapt quite well.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
To some extent, having these dietary choices is easier in a wealthy society. In some places in the world, people cannot afford to turn away any food they can get their hands on.
Having said that, western diets are far too protein heavy and the portion sizes too large. As always a good mix is best.
Increasingly less the case, though.
One of the great unsung achievements of humanity is the conquest of hunger. When was the last major famine, anywhere on earth?
Exactly. It's difficult to remember. They are rare, and, these days, normally caused by very unusual and extreme events, such as war, and even then they are limited in scale.
When I was growing up the images of starving, swollen bellied kids in Africa/Asia were ubiquitous. Now they have largely disappeared. This is a marvellous thing.
Obesity is now a problem in some developing countries apparently.
Does anyone know whether or not they start counting the votes at 10pm tomorrow in Brecon & Radnorshire?
No one seems to know. All constituencies counted overnight at the last GE. Except the Northumberland ones. Which seems to have been due to tide times on Holy Island!
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
That's rubbish. I've been a vegetarian for over 30 years and am in great health. Particularly compared to the people I see ordering from McDonald's in motorway service stations. Destroying the planet to provide 7 billion people with a meat heavy western diet is the real threat.
Of course It is rubbish. There is good evidence that vegans, vegetarians, and fellow travellers like pescatorian s and flexitarians all have longer healthier lives usually by several years and most significantly in men.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
That's rubbish. I've been a vegetarian for over 30 years and am in great health. Particularly compared to the people I see ordering from McDonald's in motorway service stations. Destroying the planet to provide 7 billion people with a meat heavy western diet is the real threat.
Of course It is rubbish. There is good evidence that vegans, vegetarians, and fellow travellers like pescatorian s and flexitarians all have longer healthier lives usually by several years and most significantly in men.
Partly this is from other associated health behaviours, but a plant based diet is a healthy one both for the individual and for the planet.
It is virtually impossible to separate out the behaviours from the diet. Westerners who eat a veggie diet are going to be more health conscious, exercise more, smoke less, blah blah.
The best bet is to trust your taste buds and your genes. We have evolved to eat meat in a mixed, omnivorous diet, along with plenty of exercise and socialising. Do that.
Does anyone know whether or not they start counting the votes at 10pm tomorrow in Brecon & Radnorshire?
No one seems to know. All constituencies counted overnight at the last GE. Except the Northumberland ones. Which seems to have been due to tide times on Holy Island!
yes SKY News are from there from midnight nothing showing on BBC schedules yet but probably news channel will be there
Does anyone know whether or not they start counting the votes at 10pm tomorrow in Brecon & Radnorshire?
No one seems to know. All constituencies counted overnight at the last GE. Except the Northumberland ones. Which seems to have been due to tide times on Holy Island!
yes SKY News are from there from midnight nothing showing on BBC schedules yet but probably news channel will be there
Does anyone know whether or not they start counting the votes at 10pm tomorrow in Brecon & Radnorshire?
No one seems to know. All constituencies counted overnight at the last GE. Except the Northumberland ones. Which seems to have been due to tide times on Holy Island!
Yes its an overnight count. Best bet is around 3 am
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, our government should act like Narco-lords. Send our henchmen to drive rivals out of business, form a monopoly and extract the maximum income out of our addicted consumers. Think of it as being like the Opium wars, but in the safer context of aiming at our own young and socially excluded rather than those of a foreign country.
It's what we already do with two major drugs Foxy.
There is increasing interest in finally eradicating smoking.
And while certain sections of society, notably middle class women, have an increasing problem with alcohol induced damage, the young are drinking less and less. Indeed one of the strongest growth markets at the moment is low alcohol beer. Of these, I find the Heineken and Nanny State the best, though also Adnams Ghost Ship.
Does anyone know whether or not they start counting the votes at 10pm tomorrow in Brecon & Radnorshire?
No one seems to know. All constituencies counted overnight at the last GE. Except the Northumberland ones. Which seems to have been due to tide times on Holy Island!
yes SKY News are from there from midnight nothing showing on BBC schedules yet but probably news channel will be there
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
That's rubbish. I've been a vegetarian for over 30 years and am in great health. Particularly compared to the people I see ordering from McDonald's in motorway service stations. Destroying the planet to provide 7 billion people with a meat heavy western diet is the real threat.
Of course It is rubbish. There is good evidence that vegans, vegetarians, and fellow travellers like pescatorian s and flexitarians all have longer healthier lives usually by several years and most significantly in men.
Well yes, that's what I was thinking too, instead of criminalising 'sins' like class c drug use and perhaps prostitution, legalise, regulate, and tax hard, but this would have to be accompanied by massive action against those who continue to operate outside the law, so it is not free money, and may initially cost more.
No it won't cost more.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
Yes, our government should act like Narco-lords. Send our henchmen to drive rivals out of business, form a monopoly and extract the maximum income out of our addicted consumers. Think of it as being like the Opium wars, but in the safer context of aiming at our own young and socially excluded rather than those of a foreign country.
It's what we already do with two major drugs Foxy.
There is increasing interest in finally eradicating smoking.
And while certain sections of society, notably middle class women, have an increasing problem with alcohol induced damage, the young are drinking less and less. Indeed one of the strongest growth markets at the moment is low alcohol beer. Of these, I find the Heineken and Nanny State the best, though also Adnams Ghost Ship.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
I can easily see how one could enjoy a perfectly nutritious and interesting diet without meat and fish. It's not my choice, but if one day I developed a weird allergy to eating animals and had to do without for the rest of my life, I think I'd adapt quite well.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
To some extent, having these dietary choices is easier in a wealthy society. In some places in the world, people cannot afford to turn away any food they can get their hands on.
Having said that, western diets are far too protein heavy and the portion sizes too large. As always a good mix is best.
Increasingly less the case, though.
One of the great unsung achievements of humanity is the conquest of hunger. When was the last major famine, anywhere on earth?
Exactly. It's difficult to remember. They are rare, and, these days, normally caused by very unusual and extreme events, such as war, and even then they are limited in scale.
When I was growing up the images of starving, swollen bellied kids in Africa/Asia were ubiquitous. Now they have largely disappeared. This is a marvellous thing.
Until 2017, worldwide deaths from famine had been falling dramatically. The World Peace Foundation reported that from the 1870s to the 1970s, great famines killed an average of 928,000 people a year.[18] Since 1980, annual deaths had dropped to an average of 75,000, less than 10% of what they had been until the 1970s. That reduction was achieved despite the approximately 150,000 lives lost in the 2011 Somalia famine. Yet in 2017, the UN officially declared famine had returned to Africa, with about 20 million people at risk of death from starvation in Nigeria, in South Sudan, in Yemen, and in Somalia.[19] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine
This list of historical famines is fascinating, in a macabre way. Millions die in Russia, China, India, as you might expect.
But there are some intriguing anomalies. There was a famine in the English Midlands in 1728? And why was there a famine in Morocco caused by French refuelling laws?
The best of them all has to be the Canadian Caribou Famine of 1950, which killed..... 60 people.
It's very sad but it has an undeniable bathos.
The mega famines were caused by politics, usually of the Left looking at those figures.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
I can easily see how one could enjoy a perfectly nutritious and interesting diet without meat and fish. It's not my choice, but if one day I developed a weird allergy to eating animals and had to do without for the rest of my life, I think I'd adapt quite well.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
To some extent, having these dietary choices is easier in a wealthy society. In some places in the world, people cannot afford to turn away any food they can get their hands on.
Having said that, western diets are far too protein heavy and the portion sizes too large. As always a good mix is best.
Increasingly less the case, though.
One of the great unsung achievements of humanity is the conquest of hunger. When was the last major famine, anywhere on earth?
Exactly. It's difficult to remember. They are rare, and, these days, normally caused by very unusual and extreme events, such as war, and even then they are limited in scale.
When I was growing up the images of starving, swollen bellied kids in Africa/Asia were ubiquitous. Now they have largely disappeared. This is a marvellous thing.
But there are some intriguing anomalies. There was a famine in the English Midlands in 1728? And why was there a famine in Morocco caused by French refuelling laws?
The best of them all has to be the Canadian Caribou Famine of 1950, which killed..... 60 people.
It's very sad but it has an undeniable bathos.
The mega famines were caused by politics, usually of the Left looking at those figures.
The Chinese famines are still quite staggering in scale. 50-100m in the 20th century? Jesus. You can see why the Chinese still feel grateful to have no freedom - but plenty of food.
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
I can easily see how one could enjoy a perfectly nutritious and interesting diet without meat and fish. It's not my choice, but if one day I developed a weird allergy to eating animals and had to do without for the rest of my life, I think I'd adapt quite well.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
To some extent, having these dietary choices is easier in a wealthy society. In some places in the world, people cannot afford to turn away any food they can get their hands on.
Having said that, western diets are far too protein heavy and the portion sizes too large. As always a good mix is best.
Increasingly less the case, though.
One of the great unsung achievements of humanity is the conquest of hunger. When was the last major famine, anywhere on earth?
Exactly. It's difficult to remember. They are rare, and, these days, normally caused by very unusual and extreme events, such as war, and even then they are limited in scale.
When I was growing up the images of starving, swollen bellied kids in Africa/Asia were ubiquitous. Now they have largely disappeared. This is a marvellous thing.
Until 2017, worldwide deaths from famine had been falling dramatically. The World Peace Foundation reported that from the 1870s to the 1970s, great famines killed an average of 928,000 people a year.[18] Since 1980, annual deaths had dropped to an average of 75,000, less than 10% of what they had been until the 1970s. That reduction was achieved despite the approximately 150,000 lives lost in the 2011 Somalia famine. Yet in 2017, the UN officially declared famine
This list of historical famines is fascinating, in a macabre way. Millions die in Russia, China, India, as you might expect.
But there are some intriguing anomalies. There was a famine in the English Midlands in 1728? And why was there a famine in Morocco caused by French refuelling laws?
The best of them all has to be the Canadian Caribou Famine of 1950, which killed..... 60 people.
It's very sad but it has an undeniable bathos.
The mega famines were caused by politics, usually of the Left looking at those figures.
Though British policy had a role in a number of them in Bengal, Tamil Nadu and of course Ireland. A significant role even in the more contemporary ones in Yemen, and going back a little further, Biafra.
Partly this is from other associated health behaviours, but a plant based diet is a healthy one both for the individual and for the planet.
I thought that vitamin B12 was only obtainable from animal sources?
Correct, but easily available synthetically now. Historically vegan cultures probably survived due to insect contamination!
Insects are probably the best protein source, but not my favourite!
IIRC Sainsbury's tried selling insects recently! Maybe it was a meat substitute for a No Deal Brexit?! Not sure if they still do. Maybe with No Deal on the table - Insects will be served on it!
Vegetarianism and its more debilitating brother veganism are a huge threat to human health.
I can easily see how one could enjoy a perfectly nutritious and interesting diet without meat and fish. It's not my choice, but if one day I developed a weird allergy to eating animals and had to do without for the rest of my life, I think I'd adapt quite well.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
To some extent, having these dietary choices is easier in a wealthy society. In some places in the world, people cannot afford to turn away any food they can get their hands on.
Having said that, western diets are far too protein heavy and the portion sizes too large. As always a good mix is best.
Increasingly less the case, though.
One of the great unsung achievements of humanity is the conquest of hunger. When was the last major famine, anywhere on earth?
Exactly. It's difficult to remember. They are rare, and, these days, normally caused by very unusual and extreme events, such as war, and even then they are limited in scale.
When I was growing up the images of starving, swollen bellied kids in Africa/Asia were ubiquitous. Now they have largely disappeared. This is a marvellous thing.
But there are some intriguing anomalies. There was a famine in the English Midlands in 1728? And why was there a famine in Morocco caused by French refuelling laws?
The best of them all has to be the Canadian Caribou Famine of 1950, which killed..... 60 people.
It's very sad but it has an undeniable bathos.
The mega famines were caused by politics, usually of the Left looking at those figures.
The Chinese famines are still quite staggering in scale. 50-100m in the 20th century? Jesus. You can see why the Chinese still feel grateful to have no freedom - but plenty of food.
Yes, the folk memory of those times must be deep rooted and staggeringly awful.
Comments
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/whats-on/food-drink-news/square-pie-grand-central-closed-14260512
I love a good steak, but 99% of meat products are pure junk. Just asking for cancer.
You should know this coming from the nation of the mighty haggis.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/ronald-reagans-racist-conversation-richard-nixon/595102/
Wonder if he knew he was being recorded ?
But can you get "Boris de Pfeffel's Incredibly Trick Hairstyle"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAHTdgogL9k
There is history here with alcohol and organised crime in America under prohibition. Prohibition was a boon for organised crime and allowed the Mafia to flourish, legalisation led to alcohol going back to mainstream sources as it will if we legalise drugs.
Which is not hypothetical it can be seen in other nations where it has been done. Not only that but legalisation leads to a reduction in underage consumption as licensed and regulated dispensaries check ID whereas drug dealers don't.
Full-on veganism, on the other hand, must be bloody miserable.
And why else the determined efforts to bury it ?
But I also have a strong sense that Brexit in some form WILL be delivered. We cannot pretend that the 2016 Referendum did not happen. I wish we could but we can't.
With the Tories now retaining 69% of their 2017 vote thanks to Boris, there is a clear Labour to Tory swing overall
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/07/31/voting-intention-con-32-lab-22-lib-dem-19-brex-13-
As for the test of time, surely it makes sense to look around the world and see who lives the longest and the healthiest lives, and copy what they eat and do?
On that basis the ideal life is a combo of life in Iceland, Japan and parts of Italy/Greece. In other words: eat lots of fish, drink a fair amount, walk around quite fast, and don't worry about your diet.
How do these figures compare to pre-2017?
Why do you think this outcome is likely (LAD/LD/SNP) [I agree BTW].
I have always been happy with a soft Brexit
When you have meat, make it a fabulous, well-hung rib eye, or a glorious rack of milk fed lamb. With a stout walk before, and good wine to go with = a long life.
The almighty obesity crisis is the product of bad eating habits and lack of exercise, rooted in various other causes. Except when eaten by certain people with serious underlying health conditions, treats like chocolate biscuits, rich pastries and cream cakes are all absolutely harmless in and of themselves.
Having said that, western diets are far too protein heavy and the portion sizes too large. As always a good mix is best.
Currently 100% of illicit drug use is both illegal and untaxed, so the amount we spend on the criminal justice system is spread thinly across the whole drug sector without any tax income coming in.
If we legalise drugs perhaps initially at least 80% of consumers will choose to buy legally. Even if we maintained the same expenditure on the criminal justice system then it would be targeted on just 20% of the market now, so more effective. Furthermore there will be taxes on 80% making us more revenue.
If we chose to initially spend tax revenue on clamping down and eliminating remaining drug dealers it would have a triple-whammy at driving illegal narcotics off the streets - we would be reducing demand, more targeted and concentrated on our expenditure, we would be able to increase our expenditure.
One of the great unsung achievements of humanity is the conquest of hunger. When was the last major famine, anywhere on earth?
Exactly. It's difficult to remember. They are rare, and, these days, normally caused by very unusual and extreme events, such as war, and even then they are limited in scale.
When I was growing up the images of starving, swollen bellied kids in Africa/Asia were ubiquitous. Now they have largely disappeared. This is a marvellous thing.
Why the Remainer majority under FPTP? Because compared to Leavers they are more likely to vote and are a bit smarter - hence will vote a bit smarter and more tactically.
But all hypo since I expect BJohnson to pass the WA in 2020 without recourse to an election.
I know! Niche view!
Good decision...there is more dead wood that needs to go. They need to hire some players who have only just retired and have real insight into the modern game.
Am sick and tired of the likes of Botham having no idea what really are the tactics in modern T20 and ODIs.
Taxes are a necessary evil and taxes on stuff the government wants to reduce or prevent [alcohol abuse, tobacco, drugs, petrol, gambling etc] are preferable IMO than taxing stuff that we should be wanting to encourage like working or hiring people [income taxes, NI].
Regulations should be minimal but not zero. The most relevant regulation IMO that should be encouraged is Challenge 25 - let adults buy what they want to buy but no reason for children to be able to buy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine
There is a TEDx video on how much better the world is becoming. It makes compelling watching
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCm9Ng0bbEQ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines
But there are some intriguing anomalies. There was a famine in the English Midlands in 1728? And why was there a famine in Morocco caused by French refuelling laws?
The best of them all has to be the Canadian Caribou Famine of 1950, which killed..... 60 people.
It's very sad but it has an undeniable bathos.
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/vegan-meat-life-expectancy-eggs-dairy-research-a7168036.html
https://www.nhs.uk/news/food-and-diet/vegetarian-diet-linked-to-longer-lifespan/
Partly this is from other associated health behaviours, but a plant based diet is a healthy one both for the individual and for the planet.
The best bet is to trust your taste buds and your genes. We have evolved to eat meat in a mixed, omnivorous diet, along with plenty of exercise and socialising. Do that.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1150886/smoking-news-cigarettes-tobacco-ban-UK-Department-of-Health-2030-health-news
And while certain sections of society, notably middle class women, have an increasing problem with alcohol induced damage, the young are drinking less and less. Indeed one of the strongest growth markets at the moment is low alcohol beer. Of these, I find the Heineken and Nanny State the best, though also Adnams Ghost Ship.
https://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/Article/2019/05/20/How-much-has-the-no-alcohol-category-grown
Insects are probably the best protein source, but not my favourite!
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1156682088395026433?s=20
But I did google the local council and found that one of the polling stations only has 14 voters, the next one up has a massive 17.
The Great British democracy in action!
You don’t need much meat or fish to supply the daily requirement, though.
Fun fact, it’s quite abundant in herbivore faeces, too. Which explains why some animals eat a lot of shit.
Eating flies is not high on my list
A warning from history.
I have eaten flying ants in Malawi, and various insects in SE Asia. Think of them as land based crustaceans...