I am sure they said the same to NOTW journalists back in the say....
What's the story here? I've clicked on a couple of the twitter feeds listed but cannot see anything apart from someone resigned from the FT.
Mark Di Stefano of the FT joined the video chats of the Indy and the Evening Standard, the ones where furloughs were being announced.
Kinda broke the FT rules on news gathering and possibly the law.
He also then "broke" the news of the furloughs publicly from having been in the video chat claiming "sources" from the Indy had informed him rather than that he'd observed it himself after gatecrashing.
Silly. He should have phoned the journos in the meeting till he found one to confirm.
Meanwhile ... following Sam Bowman's twitter link took me to this paper about keeping business afloat which proposes the same "student loans for business" idea I've suggested here from time to time. https://www.tenentrepreneurs.org/blog/coronavirusukeconomy
He broke the story live while the video call was still ongoing. Also silly, all the journos in the meeting where still in the meeting apart from him who'd gatecrashed, left and broke the story.
I am sure they said the same to NOTW journalists back in the say....
What's the story here? I've clicked on a couple of the twitter feeds listed but cannot see anything apart from someone resigned from the FT.
Mark Di Stefano of the FT joined the video chats of the Indy and the Evening Standard, the ones where furloughs were being announced.
Kinda broke the FT rules on news gathering and possibly the law.
I must admit I don't understand why lots of journalists are defending him on Twitter so much. Surely this is a cut and dried case of stepping way over the line? Makes me worry about how much similar stuff goes on that lots of journos seem to think this is normal and 'anyone would have done it' in his position.
He's a genuinely nice guy for an Aussie (and you'll find people across the political spectrum saying that.)
I think the bigger story is just how easy it is to join video chats when you've not been invited.
All you really need is someone giving you a link to the call/chat.
Talking of getting things done I am being sent to the plague infested swamp otherwise known as the supermarket. In the words of the great MLK, "free at last, hallelujah free at last."
That really is encouraging. We are winning even if we have not yet worked out how to end this.
Wonder what the Care Home one looks like?
As for winning i think we have lost as we are well above the "good outcome" number of deaths already.
Without the lockdown etc we were looking at deaths of roughly 1% of the population, roughly 650K. We are heading towards something short of 50K. Anyone who doesn't regard that as a win is not looking at this objectively.
And if we had locked down a week earlier instead of the nonsense about not going to the pub but the pubs running drinks promotions then the death figure would have been under 20k, the lockdown would have been several weeks shorter and we would be into the track and trace phase by now. 30k additional deaths due to a week of dither.
Are pubgoers more likely to get Covid-19? At risk of upsetting the stereotype police, were pubs really full of fat, BAME coffin-dodgers that have been dying disproportionately?
I don't know if there's specific pub data but in Japan based on their cluster tracing they're very emphatic that the problem is crowded, badly-ventilated, noisy places with people talking loudly to each other.
They've found particular clusters associated with bars?
Unhelpfully they report several they found as "飲食店" which is an eating and/or drinking venue, so I'm not entirely clear whether they're restaurants or bars, but yes, they found a few clusters at eating-and-drinking venues.
783 days till Covid is eliminated in the UK with current measures according to my (Likely very wrong) Excel fag packet estimation. Death toll with no restrictions, 1.5 million.
That really is encouraging. We are winning even if we have not yet worked out how to end this.
Wonder what the Care Home one looks like?
As for winning i think we have lost as we are well above the "good outcome" number of deaths already.
Without the lockdown etc we were looking at deaths of roughly 1% of the population, roughly 650K. We are heading towards something short of 50K. Anyone who doesn't regard that as a win is not looking at this objectively.
And if we had locked down a week earlier instead of the nonsense about not going to the pub but the pubs running drinks promotions then the death figure would have been under 20k, the lockdown would have been several weeks shorter and we would be into the track and trace phase by now. 30k additional deaths due to a week of dither.
Are pubgoers more likely to get Covid-19? At risk of upsetting the stereotype police, were pubs really full of fat, BAME coffin-dodgers that have been dying disproportionately?
I don't know if there's specific pub data but in Japan based on their cluster tracing they're very emphatic that the problem is crowded, badly-ventilated, noisy places with people talking loudly to each other.
That makes sense. Virus in saliva in air. I'm not sure when I last saw a crowded pub though, which is probably why so many closed down. Three up the road from me are being redeveloped and a fourth is basically a steakhouse with lager on tap.
And yet, in the Telegraph:
"Ministers have asked the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) to look again at whether people need to stay so far apart, amid growing evidence that coronavirus does not transmit well in the air ."
Personally, it would take a fair chunk of evidence to convince me that this doesn't travel well by air.
Both can be true. There is no convincing evidence of outdoors spread at events like, say, Cheltenham. And the 2m distancing thing is based on 1m travel, doubled for luck. So this fits with the virus being spread by saliva indoors over small distances among people cheek by jowl, especially where communal singing or just talking loudly spreads saliva that bit further.
Which means when we do reopen schools, no assembly and get the teachers mic'd up rather than projecting their voices to the back of the classroom at the expense of spreading saliva over the girly swots at the front.
That really is encouraging. We are winning even if we have not yet worked out how to end this.
Wonder what the Care Home one looks like?
As for winning i think we have lost as we are well above the "good outcome" number of deaths already.
Without the lockdown etc we were looking at deaths of roughly 1% of the population, roughly 650K. We are heading towards something short of 50K. Anyone who doesn't regard that as a win is not looking at this objectively.
And if we had locked down a week earlier instead of the nonsense about not going to the pub but the pubs running drinks promotions then the death figure would have been under 20k, the lockdown would have been several weeks shorter and we would be into the track and trace phase by now. 30k additional deaths due to a week of dither.
Are pubgoers more likely to get Covid-19? At risk of upsetting the stereotype police, were pubs really full of fat, BAME coffin-dodgers that have been dying disproportionately?
I don't know if there's specific pub data but in Japan based on their cluster tracing they're very emphatic that the problem is crowded, badly-ventilated, noisy places with people talking loudly to each other.
They've found particular clusters associated with bars?
Unhelpfully they report several they found as "飲食店" which is an eating and/or drinking venue, so I'm not entirely clear whether they're restaurants or bars, but yes, they found a few clusters at eating-and-drinking venues.
Thanks, I know there was one with that bar in the skiing resort back in January. Might be reassessing my desire for a pint... at least indoors.
That really is encouraging. We are winning even if we have not yet worked out how to end this.
Wonder what the Care Home one looks like?
As for winning i think we have lost as we are well above the "good outcome" number of deaths already.
Without the lockdown etc we were looking at deaths of roughly 1% of the population, roughly 650K. We are heading towards something short of 50K. Anyone who doesn't regard that as a win is not looking at this objectively.
And if we had locked down a week earlier instead of the nonsense about not going to the pub but the pubs running drinks promotions then the death figure would have been under 20k, the lockdown would have been several weeks shorter and we would be into the track and trace phase by now. 30k additional deaths due to a week of dither.
Are pubgoers more likely to get Covid-19? At risk of upsetting the stereotype police, were pubs really full of fat, BAME coffin-dodgers that have been dying disproportionately?
I don't know if there's specific pub data but in Japan based on their cluster tracing they're very emphatic that the problem is crowded, badly-ventilated, noisy places with people talking loudly to each other.
That makes sense. Virus in saliva in air. I'm not sure when I last saw a crowded pub though, which is probably why so many closed down. Three up the road from me are being redeveloped and a fourth is basically a steakhouse with lager on tap.
And yet, in the Telegraph:
"Ministers have asked the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) to look again at whether people need to stay so far apart, amid growing evidence that coronavirus does not transmit well in the air ."
Personally, it would take a fair chunk of evidence to convince me that this doesn't travel well by air.
If you read the article the thought seems to be that there may not be much transmission *outdoors*, so you don't might not need to worry too much about queuing in the street very far apart or getting too close to someone you pass in the street. That would be consistent with the emphasis on closed spaces where people are talking to each other.
I am sure they said the same to NOTW journalists back in the say....
What's the story here? I've clicked on a couple of the twitter feeds listed but cannot see anything apart from someone resigned from the FT.
Mark Di Stefano of the FT joined the video chats of the Indy and the Evening Standard, the ones where furloughs were being announced.
Kinda broke the FT rules on news gathering and possibly the law.
I must admit I don't understand why lots of journalists are defending him on Twitter so much. Surely this is a cut and dried case of stepping way over the line? Makes me worry about how much similar stuff goes on that lots of journos seem to think this is normal and 'anyone would have done it' in his position.
He's a genuinely nice guy for an Aussie (and you'll find people across the political spectrum saying that.)
I think the bigger story is just how easy it is to join video chats when you've not been invited.
All you really need is someone giving you a link to the call/chat.
He knew he shouldn't have been there given the lengths he went to hide himself (no video, no name). It wasn't accidental or anything.
That really is encouraging. We are winning even if we have not yet worked out how to end this.
Wonder what the Care Home one looks like?
As for winning i think we have lost as we are well above the "good outcome" number of deaths already.
Without the lockdown etc we were looking at deaths of roughly 1% of the population, roughly 650K. We are heading towards something short of 50K. Anyone who doesn't regard that as a win is not looking at this objectively.
And if we had locked down a week earlier instead of the nonsense about not going to the pub but the pubs running drinks promotions then the death figure would have been under 20k, the lockdown would have been several weeks shorter and we would be into the track and trace phase by now. 30k additional deaths due to a week of dither.
Are pubgoers more likely to get Covid-19? At risk of upsetting the stereotype police, were pubs really full of fat, BAME coffin-dodgers that have been dying disproportionately?
I don't know if there's specific pub data but in Japan based on their cluster tracing they're very emphatic that the problem is crowded, badly-ventilated, noisy places with people talking loudly to each other.
They've found particular clusters associated with bars?
Unhelpfully they report several they found as "飲食店" which is an eating and/or drinking venue, so I'm not entirely clear whether they're restaurants or bars, but yes, they found a few clusters at eating-and-drinking venues.
One Singapore cluster was traced to a dinner party.
I am sure they said the same to NOTW journalists back in the say....
What's the story here? I've clicked on a couple of the twitter feeds listed but cannot see anything apart from someone resigned from the FT.
Mark Di Stefano of the FT joined the video chats of the Indy and the Evening Standard, the ones where furloughs were being announced.
Kinda broke the FT rules on news gathering and possibly the law.
I must admit I don't understand why lots of journalists are defending him on Twitter so much. Surely this is a cut and dried case of stepping way over the line? Makes me worry about how much similar stuff goes on that lots of journos seem to think this is normal and 'anyone would have done it' in his position.
plus ca change
The journalists defending him are those who like his politics and were content to ferociously attack the News of the World, while ignoring the fact the Daily Mirror had been doing the same thing.
I try not to think about journalistic ethics. Many scoops depend on confidential information being leaked, sometimes unlawfully. Some MPs wanted to prosecute the Telegraph under the Official Secrets Act over the expenses scandal, where the Telegraph paid for an illicit copy of claims. There is a line between Watergate and hacking Milly Dowler's phone but I'm glad I do not have to draw it.
They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.
Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.
Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
Last week I bought four Charles Tyrwhitt shirts for £20 each. Delivered three days later. Non iron cotton poplin short sleeves. Perfect for your home office.
They look great and aren't bad value.
But they don't last. Build-quality is poor. My Tyrwhitt shirts and suits have never lasted longer than 2 years.
TM Lewin? M&S? Gieves & Hawkes? Turnbull & Asser?
They go the full mile, and some.
Hawes & Curtis I find work
TM Lewin were always my favs, 4 for £100 and seemed to last forever. Their knitwear fits nicely too. Who doesn’t love a cardigan/shirt combo?
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
I think you will find the French had quite a lot to do with the loss of the 13 colonies.
The financial implications of the French intervention eventually led to Calonne’s famous advice to the French King - ‘Your Majesty, I am afraid there is no money left.’*
Had it been left to the Americans on their own, they might have struggled.
*No that’s not exactly what he said, but it’s a great line. I’ve always thought so ever since Laws Byrned Liam over it.
The cost of beating France in the Seven Years War led to Britain imposing the taxes that triggered the American Revolution. The cost to France of beating Britain in the American Revolution led to the French Revolution. The French Revolution ultimately led to Waterloo and the long C19 Pax Britannica. Discuss.
Salic law is the ultimate cause of the Arab Israeli crisis. Discuss.
I am sure they said the same to NOTW journalists back in the say....
What's the story here? I've clicked on a couple of the twitter feeds listed but cannot see anything apart from someone resigned from the FT.
Mark Di Stefano of the FT joined the video chats of the Indy and the Evening Standard, the ones where furloughs were being announced.
Kinda broke the FT rules on news gathering and possibly the law.
I must admit I don't understand why lots of journalists are defending him on Twitter so much. Surely this is a cut and dried case of stepping way over the line? Makes me worry about how much similar stuff goes on that lots of journos seem to think this is normal and 'anyone would have done it' in his position.
He's a genuinely nice guy for an Aussie (and you'll find people across the political spectrum saying that.)
I think the bigger story is just how easy it is to join video chats when you've not been invited.
All you really need is someone giving you a link to the call/chat.
Video chats are a nightmare security-wise. Not just zoomjackers and official Chinese government spies but have you checked what is visible in the background or on a whiteboard? If you share your screen, have you checked your tabs or file names that might leak confidential content. Can you be sure that Jeff in Accounts will not screenshot (or photograph) anything for later use against you?
It is back to the early days of mobile phones when doctors and lawyers were quite happy to broadcast client details to their fellow commuters.
There is a huge market out there for guys 40-70 who want to buy smart, top quality yet slightly edgy clothing.
And they should be discouraged in that enterprise as much as possible. If you can't wear a standard classic cut or afford the expensive bespoke alternative, go straight to beige poly cotton and velcro strap shoes.
My particular bugbear du jour is vividly patterned shirts with even more vividly patterned contrasting lining on the inners of collars and cuffs, usually top 2 buttons undone and straining over a medicine ball belly. Clarkson is a bit of a one for that type of thing.
Almost as bad as those v neck sweaters with a sewn-in insert of a shirt collar; I hope everyone agrees that they were the sperm of Satan.
Today is World Naked Gardening Day. (No, I don’t know why either.)
Do you know the most depressing thing for me - on top of everything else? Despite being surrounded by the most beautiful countryside (and, now 3 ewes and their lambs who have taken residence outside our front door) and despite the glorious weather and having all the time in the world to garden I have NO ACTUAL GARDEN.
None. It is unbelievably depressing, the sort of cosmically bad joke at my expense which makes me believe in a malicious God tormenting humans just for the sheer hell of it.
I could buy a few pots and stick some plants in them but that is not proper gardening. If only the bloody landlord had laid down earth rather than bloody slate chippings I could be creating something beautiful and worthwhile and even growing my own food.
But no - I stare at sheep who eat, sleep and walk round the hills - and realise that I am now living the life of a sheep.
Pots can be great. Start a sempervivum collection.
I know, I love them and succulents of all kinds. I have loads in London.
I just want to see my ferns unfurling, the bright green of euphorbia wulfenii, the deliciously warm orange of euphorbia Fireglow against dark leaves, the geums poking though the earth, my roses bursting into bud and soon flowers, the scent from my evergreen jasmine, the scent of my pelargonium Attar of Roses filling the conservatory as the windows are opened (Son No 1 says it is glorious and you don’t get scent through a screen, I can tell you), the honey smell from euphorbia mellifera, the purple alliums set against Ballerina tulips, the fresh greenness of spring leaves, that sense of the earth rebounding and springing into life, the bees, the sheer sensuality of gardens: sight and sound and smell and yes the feel of leaves and petals and earth. It is so joyful and hopeful and healing. And I miss it.
* head on table / begins to weep *
Ah, that's so beautiful, makes me feel intensely guilty as I look out at my little garden, which I just haven't had time to do anything with except have a few pots. You're encouraging me to try harder.
Must admit that I misread Ishmaerl's advice. I thought he said "Pets can be great" and was advising you to adopt the sheep.
All those considering naked gardening, beware. My other half, who is prone to malapropisms, is constantly confusing clematis with Chlamydia. Try not to make this mistake.
So how is this retirement malarkey?
I no longer have excuses for not getting things done. This is troubling.
Surely writing penetrating thread headers for PB is all the excuse a man can need?
I am sure they said the same to NOTW journalists back in the say....
What's the story here? I've clicked on a couple of the twitter feeds listed but cannot see anything apart from someone resigned from the FT.
Mark Di Stefano of the FT joined the video chats of the Indy and the Evening Standard, the ones where furloughs were being announced.
Kinda broke the FT rules on news gathering and possibly the law.
He also then "broke" the news of the furloughs publicly from having been in the video chat claiming "sources" from the Indy had informed him rather than that he'd observed it himself after gatecrashing.
Throw the book at him, I say.
Sounds like the sort of thing Boris Johnson used to get up to as a journo.
We have a massive garden and it gets on my fucking nerves. I pay somebody to cut the grass sporadically and I go full Halabja with Roundup on the borders.
Joining the other 90% of the planet which either have banned foreigners from arrival absolutely to as a minimum making everyone self-quarantine for 14 days and fining quarantine breakers. Yes, I know "the scientists".....but are all the other countries wrong? For example, Singapore, absolutely no foreigners, residents only with permission if they work in medical fields and all Singaporean arrivals quarantined in government controlled hotels - which they have to pay for if they went abroad after the SG government issued its "no travel" advice.
It will make sense to do that when the rest of the world is higher risk than the UK is. That's not the case at the minute.
As it stands which is higher risk - a doctor flying in from New Zealand ready and eager to work in the NHS, or a domestic retired person who is ignoring the lockdown rules and going to visit friends and family?
Asthe UK looks to phase out lockdown it will make sense to introduce quarantine regulations then, but only from high risk areas not areas like NZ etc
Under normal circumstances the vast majority flying in from NZ would spend several hours in planes and airports with people from all the over world. Not sure how the airlines would operate but not sure place of origin really works unless there is a global policy in place to deal with transfers.
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?
Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.
However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?
No-one knows.
Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
Which is the opposite of what actually happened after the Union. Scotland led the way intellectually, scientifically and in empire building and more than matched England industrially.
Funny the way certain narratives can emerge.
What actually happened was that the cream of Scottish society was extracted to run colonial possessions whilst the poor were used to fill the British army to garrison the holdings. The Treasure that flowed back went to the London treasury not Scotland.
For all that the Scots 'ran' the Empire the betterment did not go proportionally to Scotland. Scotland was drained to power the empire.
Yes, all those Scottish officers forced unwillingly to go and serve in the British army over two centuries. You can do a sensible class based analysis of where wealth was distributed for the whole of the UK but a nationalistic grudge viewpoint is nonsense historically. All nationalisms are sustained by myths but the Scottish Nationalism that exists today is a modern concoction based on a total denial of Scottish history. Modern Scotland evolved within the union. Scottish nationalism must be the only variety that denies some of the greatest triumphs of its nation - because they took place under the hated union.
I really can't agree. There has been a great revival of interest in Scottish history over the last few decades in aprallel with the rise of interest in independence. One only need look at bookshops, or a run of the National to find articles about the triumps, as you put it, as well as the mess-ups - it's all history to be remembered and commemorated - but not celebrated.
That latter contrast is perhaps the root of the difference I find most striking between mainstream Scottish nationalism (or rather self-determinationism) and British/English nationalism (as manifest in the last few years most obviously) is the former's almost complete omission of historical references in public discourse. You just don't get Ms Sturgeon going on about Saltires and the claymore, for instance, or the Clearances lowland or otherwise. But just look at almost any speech by Mr Johnson - or Mr Cameron before him. It's all Somme, Agincourt, WW2, WW2 again, Spitfires, Blitz spirit etc. etc. It's a very, very noticeable difference. One is very much looking to the future, but what is one to make of the other?
That's true enough. The vulgar historical references to WW2 are going to get less traction I suspect. The lack of historical references in public by SNP politicians (as opposed to the victim history narrative modelled on Ireland voiced by independence supporters) supports my analysis. For instance, the intellectual giants of the Scottish Enlightenment that were an important part of founding the modern world were not only comfortable with the Union but arguably enabled by it.
I am sure they said the same to NOTW journalists back in the say....
What's the story here? I've clicked on a couple of the twitter feeds listed but cannot see anything apart from someone resigned from the FT.
Mark Di Stefano of the FT joined the video chats of the Indy and the Evening Standard, the ones where furloughs were being announced.
Kinda broke the FT rules on news gathering and possibly the law.
He also then "broke" the news of the furloughs publicly from having been in the video chat claiming "sources" from the Indy had informed him rather than that he'd observed it himself after gatecrashing.
Throw the book at him, I say.
Sounds like the sort of thing Boris Johnson used to get up to as a journo.
So we should put a bet on him becoming PM of Australia in 2030?
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Incoming article from the Guardian claiming the government is fatist over claiming links between size and coronavirus.
One imagines that, if there's one place in the country where this disease feels less like a horror movie and more like all our Christmases come at once, it's Graun Towers. This illness picks on non-white people, old and sick people, obese people, poor people. It's very nearly every -ist and -phobic rolled into one: they only need evidence that it massacres transexuals and they've got the complete set. And that's before we get to the outright deification of the NHS, and the Government having to hose down the economy with hundreds of billions in borrowed money, prop up half the entire private sector with state aid, and possibly be left to contemplate vast tax rises and a universal basic income further down the line.
Their underwear must be so sticky from all those orgasms that they need industrial strength solvent to help peel it off.
And don't forget the regulation, the bullying, the shame facing of those not clapping loud enough, the petty bureaucracy of it all. Just catnip.
Oh God yes, the bloody clapping. Having to justify to people why you won't open the front door and stand outside banging a frying pan with a wooden spoon and making wailing noises every Thursday at 8pm. Cos if you don't emote loudly and publicly enough it means you DON'T CARE, and are therefore a heartless Tory deserving of a slow, painful and lingering death.
I've had to argue the toss with my own mother over the stupid bloody clapping. One more thing about the present miserable situation I'll be glad to see the back of, whichever month/year it's finally over.
I can see why some people don't join in but I can't see the need to denigrate those that do. If people want to take a few minutes once a week to show their appreciation for those who are taking a much greater risk than the rest of us in this crisis where is the harm?
It clearly eats one or two of you up but I really don't get it.
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?
Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.
However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?
No-one knows.
Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
Which is the opposite of what actually happened after the Union. Scotland led the way intellectually, scientifically and in empire building and more than matched England industrially.
Funny the way certain narratives can emerge.
What actually happened was that the cream of Scottish society was extracted to run colonial possessions whilst the poor were used to fill the British army to garrison the holdings. The Treasure that flowed back went to the London treasury not Scotland.
For all that the Scots 'ran' the Empire the betterment did not go proportionally to Scotland. Scotland was drained to power the empire.
Yes, all those Scottish officers forced unwillingly to go and serve in the British army over two centuries. You can do a sensible class based analysis of where wealth was distributed for the whole of the UK but a nationalistic grudge viewpoint is nonsense historically. All nationalisms are sustained by myths but the Scottish Nationalism that exists today is a modern concoction based on a total denial of Scottish history. Modern Scotland evolved within the union. Scottish nationalism must be the only variety that denies some of the greatest triumphs of its nation - because they took place under the hated union.
Speaking of nationalist myths, a persistent British nationalist/Unionist myth appears to simultaneously believe that Scotland benefited and still benefits hugely from being part of the Union, and yet among smallish, well educated European nations with developed & diverse industries, substantial natural resources and stable civic polities, is uniquely ill suited to independence. Even smarter Unionists seem unable to square this circle in their own heads, let alone to my satisfaction.
I am sorry that you are not satisfied Divvy but I may just have to live with that.
Scotland could survive as an independent country, of course it could. But would its people have a better life, would we cope with something like this virus as well, would our young have the same breadth of opportunities? I really don't see how an independent Scotland, particularly one using Sterling, would have been able to match the furlough scheme, the grants, the guaranteed loans etc. A Scotland with its own currency would have been flotsam on the current markets with highly unpredictable results.
An independent Scotland today would be significantly poorer with less well funded public services, a serious trade deficit and limited prospects of improving our standard of living going forward. For some that is a price worth paying and the argument that we might eventually find a sense of common purpose and thrive is not to be dismissed out of hand but why on earth would we take that risk? Its bordering on irrational.
The SNP need to focus on our economy, on our education system, on our infrastructure, on business development and create a country that is indeed viable, that would indeed thrive on its own. Instead their obsession with constitutional matters and the uncertaintly that creates means the situation gets worse and worse. They are a menace.
Currently I see one party in Scotland that goes on and on and on about Scottish indy and another referendum and it ain't the SNP. Check the skelf in your own ee.
I actually agree that the Tories, and the also rans, need to go beyond no to a second referendum as a policy platform. But it is not true to say that the SNP do not claim that virtually every single thing that happens shows that we would be better off as an independent nation. It is their raison d'etre.
And as I have said repeatedly to the the point of tediousness, until Unionism, whether it be SCon, SLab or (lol)SLD, puts together a coherent and attractive vision not based on SNPbad, the SNP are the only game in town. On that basis I'd actually say the dire, unimaginative 4th raters that pass for Unionist pols are more to blame than anyone for the state we're in.
Those in government are always more responsible than anyone else. They make the decisions. But Scotland does need a viable choice. I find it frustrating.
Sure, and we could no doubt argue over which government is more responsible for non devolved matters in Scotland. However I've heard it said repeatedly on here (usually in relation to Corbyn) that good government needs a decent opposition. I'd be hard put to make a case that the recent and current crew in Holyrood even meet the the Corbyn quality threshold.
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?
Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.
However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?
No-one knows.
Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
Which is the opposite of what actually happened after the Union. Scotland led the way intellectually, scientifically and in empire building and more than matched England industrially.
Funny the way certain narratives can emerge.
What actually happened was that the cream of Scottish society was extracted to run colonial possessions whilst the poor were used to fill the British army to garrison the holdings. The Treasure that flowed back went to the London treasury not Scotland.
For all that the Scots 'ran' the Empire the betterment did not go proportionally to Scotland. Scotland was drained to power the empire.
Yes, all those Scottish officers forced unwillingly to go and serve in the British army over two centuries. You can do a sensible class based analysis of where wealth was distributed for the whole of the UK but a nationalistic grudge viewpoint is nonsense historically. All nationalisms are sustained by myths but the Scottish Nationalism that exists today is a modern concoction based on a total denial of Scottish history. Modern Scotland evolved within the union. Scottish nationalism must be the only variety that denies some of the greatest triumphs of its nation - because they took place under the hated union.
I really can't agree. There has been a great revival of interest in Scottish history over the last few decades in aprallel with the rise of interest in independence. One only need look at bookshops, or a run of the National to find articles about the triumps, as you put it, as well as the mess-ups - it's all history to be remembered and commemorated - but not celebrated.
That latter contrast is perhaps the root of the difference I find most striking between mainstream Scottish nationalism (or rather self-determinationism) and British/English nationalism (as manifest in the last few years most obviously) is the former's almost complete omission of historical references in public discourse. You just don't get Ms Sturgeon going on about Saltires and the claymore, for instance, or the Clearances lowland or otherwise. But just look at almost any speech by Mr Johnson - or Mr Cameron before him. It's all Somme, Agincourt, WW2, WW2 again, Spitfires, Blitz spirit etc. etc. It's a very, very noticeable difference. One is very much looking to the future, but what is one to make of the other?
That's true enough. The vulgar historical references to WW2 are going to get less traction I suspect. The lack of historical references in public by SNP politicians (as opposed to the victim history narrative modelled on Ireland voiced by independence supporters) supports my analysis. For instance, the intellectual giants of the Scottish Enlightenment that were an important part of founding the modern world were not only comfortable with the Union but arguably enabled by it.
Boris and Cameron went to the same school at the same time so perhaps it means nothing more than the Eton headmaster was fond of great historical sweeps during assembly.
I am sure they said the same to NOTW journalists back in the say....
What's the story here? I've clicked on a couple of the twitter feeds listed but cannot see anything apart from someone resigned from the FT.
Mark Di Stefano of the FT joined the video chats of the Indy and the Evening Standard, the ones where furloughs were being announced.
Kinda broke the FT rules on news gathering and possibly the law.
I must admit I don't understand why lots of journalists are defending him on Twitter so much. Surely this is a cut and dried case of stepping way over the line? Makes me worry about how much similar stuff goes on that lots of journos seem to think this is normal and 'anyone would have done it' in his position.
plus ca change
The journalists defending him are those who like his politics and were content to ferociously attack the News of the World, while ignoring the fact the Daily Mirror had been doing the same thing.
I try not to think about journalistic ethics. Many scoops depend on confidential information being leaked, sometimes unlawfully. Some MPs wanted to prosecute the Telegraph under the Official Secrets Act over the expenses scandal, where the Telegraph paid for an illicit copy of claims. There is a line between Watergate and hacking Milly Dowler's phone but I'm glad I do not have to draw it.
I'd draw the line to one side of those 2 examples rather than between them.
There is a huge market out there for guys 40-70 who want to buy smart, top quality yet slightly edgy clothing.
And they should be discouraged in that enterprise as much as possible. If you can't wear a standard classic cut or afford the expensive bespoke alternative, go straight to beige poly cotton and velcro strap shoes.
My particular bugbear du jour is vividly patterned shirts with even more vividly patterned contrasting lining on the inners of collars and cuffs, usually top 2 buttons undone and straining over a medicine ball belly. Clarkson is a bit of a one for that type of thing.
Almost as bad as those v neck sweaters with a sewn-in insert of a shirt collar; I hope everyone agrees that they were the sperm of Satan.
Spawn (children) is the more conventional phrase!
Have I Got News for You. Someone referred to someone else as the sperm of Satan. It might have been Ian Hislop.
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?
Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.
However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?
No-one knows.
Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
Which is the opposite of what actually happened after the Union. Scotland led the way intellectually, scientifically and in empire building and more than matched England industrially.
Funny the way certain narratives can emerge.
What actually happened was that the cream of Scottish society was extracted to run colonial possessions whilst the poor were used to fill the British army to garrison the holdings. The Treasure that flowed back went to the London treasury not Scotland.
For all that the Scots 'ran' the Empire the betterment did not go proportionally to Scotland. Scotland was drained to power the empire.
Yes, all those Scottish officers forced unwillingly to go and serve in the British army over two centuries. You can do a sensible class based analysis of where wealth was distributed for the whole of the UK but a nationalistic grudge viewpoint is nonsense historically. All nationalisms are sustained by myths but the Scottish Nationalism that exists today is a modern concoction based on a total denial of Scottish history. Modern Scotland evolved within the union. Scottish nationalism must be the only variety that denies some of the greatest triumphs of its nation - because they took place under the hated union.
Speaking of nationalist myths, a persistent British nationalist/Unionist myth appears to simultaneously believe that Scotland benefited and still benefits hugely from being part of the Union, and yet among smallish, well educated European nations with developed & diverse industries, substantial natural resources and stable civic polities, is uniquely ill suited to independence. Even smarter Unionists seem unable to square this circle in their own heads, let alone to my satisfaction.
I am sorry that you are not satisfied Divvy but I may just have to live with that.
Scotland could survive as an independent country, of course it could. But would its people have a better life, would we cope with something like this virus as well, would our young have the same breadth of opportunities? I really don't see how an independent Scotland, particularly one using Sterling, would have been able to match the furlough scheme, the grants, the guaranteed loans etc. A Scotland with its own currency would have been flotsam on the current markets with highly unpredictable results.
An independent Scotland today would be significantly poorer with less well funded public services, a serious trade deficit and limited prospects of improving our standard of living going forward. For some that is a price worth paying and the argument that we might eventually find a sense of common purpose and thrive is not to be dismissed out of hand but why on earth would we take that risk? Its bordering on irrational.
The SNP need to focus on our economy, on our education system, on our infrastructure, on business development and create a country that is indeed viable, that would indeed thrive on its own. Instead their obsession with constitutional matters and the uncertaintly that creates means the situation gets worse and worse. They are a menace.
Currently I see one party in Scotland that goes on and on and on about Scottish indy and another referendum and it ain't the SNP. Check the skelf in your own ee.
I actually agree that the Tories, and the also rans, need to go beyond no to a second referendum as a policy platform. But it is not true to say that the SNP do not claim that virtually every single thing that happens shows that we would be better off as an independent nation. It is their raison d'etre.
And as I have said repeatedly to the the point of tediousness, until Unionism, whether it be SCon, SLab or (lol)SLD, puts together a coherent and attractive vision not based on SNPbad, the SNP are the only game in town. On that basis I'd actually say the dire, unimaginative 4th raters that pass for Unionist pols are more to blame than anyone for the state we're in.
Judging by Wings comments there will be a non SNP pro Indy party standing for Holyrood next year, given the loathing of many there for Sturgeon. Thus finally splitting the Nat vote as the Unionist vote has been split
Today is World Naked Gardening Day. (No, I don’t know why either.)
Do you know the most depressing thing for me - on top of everything else? Despite being surrounded by the most beautiful countryside (and, now 3 ewes and their lambs who have taken residence outside our front door) and despite the glorious weather and having all the time in the world to garden I have NO ACTUAL GARDEN.
None. It is unbelievably depressing, the sort of cosmically bad joke at my expense which makes me believe in a malicious God tormenting humans just for the sheer hell of it.
I could buy a few pots and stick some plants in them but that is not proper gardening. If only the bloody landlord had laid down earth rather than bloody slate chippings I could be creating something beautiful and worthwhile and even growing my own food.
But no - I stare at sheep who eat, sleep and walk round the hills - and realise that I am now living the life of a sheep.
I am bewildered. How on earth did you, of all people, ever choose a house without a garden?
It was that or homelessness. Seriously.
Our house is in the middle of rebuilding. Daughter and I were temporarily house-sitting due to come to an end on March 24. We got a short-term holiday let and were due to move in at the end of it. Then lockdown happened.
Sofa surfing for me, daughter & 3 cats not an option, especially not given my health issues. Holiday lets no longer an option and not much else to rent either. This barely completed barn conversion ( really meant for holiday letting) was the only thing on offer for a long-term tenancy since God knows when house will be finished.
And, to be fair, the house is comfortable and the surrounding countryside and the views and the walks outstanding. But landlords far away tend not to create gardens given the maintenance involved.
Perhaps I could offer to create one for him - or at least design one.
That’s what I would do - although perhaps suggest a single flower bed to start
It should be noted that nearly all journalists believe that what goes in inside news organisations is not news and reporting it is an attack on the Freedom of The Press.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Yes, I’ve lived in Upminster or Hornchurch nearly all of my life. I’d always say they were Essex, they both have an Essex postcodes, although technically London too as Havering is a London borough, and they’re on the tube.
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?
Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.
However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?
No-one knows.
Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
Which is the opposite of what actually happened after the Union. Scotland led the way intellectually, scientifically and in empire building and more than matched England industrially.
Funny the way certain narratives can emerge.
What actually happened was that the cream of Scottish society was extracted to run colonial possessions whilst the poor were used to fill the British army to garrison the holdings. The Treasure that flowed back went to the London treasury not Scotland.
For all that the Scots 'ran' the Empire the betterment did not go proportionally to Scotland. Scotland was drained to power the empire.
Yes, all those Scottish officers forced unwillingly to go and serve in the British army over two centuries. You can do a sensible class based analysis of where wealth was distributed for the whole of the UK but a nationalistic grudge viewpoint is nonsense historically. All nationalisms are sustained by myths but the Scottish Nationalism that exists today is a modern concoction based on a total denial of Scottish history. Modern Scotland evolved within the union. Scottish nationalism must be the only variety that denies some of the greatest triumphs of its nation - because they took place under the hated union.
I really can't agree. There has been a great revival of interest in Scottish history over the last few decades in aprallel with the rise of interest in independence. One only need look at bookshops, or a run of the National to find articles about the triumps, as you put it, as well as the mess-ups - it's all history to be remembered and commemorated - but not celebrated.
That latter contrast is perhaps the root of the difference I find most striking between mainstream Scottish nationalism (or rather self-determinationism) and British/English nationalism (as manifest in the last few years most obviously) is the former's almost complete omission of historical references in public discourse. You just don't get Ms Sturgeon going on about Saltires and the claymore, for instance, or the Clearances lowland or otherwise. But just look at almost any speech by Mr Johnson - or Mr Cameron before him. It's all Somme, Agincourt, WW2, WW2 again, Spitfires, Blitz spirit etc. etc. It's a very, very noticeable difference. One is very much looking to the future, but what is one to make of the other?
That's true enough. The vulgar historical references to WW2 are going to get less traction I suspect. The lack of historical references in public by SNP politicians (as opposed to the victim history narrative modelled on Ireland voiced by independence supporters) supports my analysis. For instance, the intellectual giants of the Scottish Enlightenment that were an important part of founding the modern world were not only comfortable with the Union but arguably enabled by it.
Agincourt, Dunkirk, The Blitz. These all have extraordinary power to unite and provide nationalist pride, but only if are used sparingly - all the while coming up with new myths to replenish the well.
The trouble with the current crop of populists is that they are wringing every last ounce of nationalistic energy from these myths, and killing the goose in the process.
It starts to look artificial, frankly embarrassing and the youngsters increasingly roll their eyes at it.
I took the summed data (the latest figures) for NHS England and plotted this -
A surprisingly linear decline - 25 less deaths per day on average.
A linear decrease in deaths indicates r(t) is decreasing ! A constant sub 1 r(t) should ceteris paribus yield a logarithmic decrease I think. I expect it'll take us more than 4 days to go to a true sub 300 death rate.
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?
Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.
However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?
No-one knows.
Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
Which is the opposite of what actually happened after the Union. Scotland led the way intellectually, scientifically and in empire building and more than matched England industrially.
Funny the way certain narratives can emerge.
What actually happened was that the cream of Scottish society was extracted to run colonial possessions whilst the poor were used to fill the British army to garrison the holdings. The Treasure that flowed back went to the London treasury not Scotland.
For all that the Scots 'ran' the Empire the betterment did not go proportionally to Scotland. Scotland was drained to power the empire.
Yes, all those Scottish officers forced unwillingly to go and serve in the British army over two centuries. You can do a sensible class based analysis of where wealth was distributed for the whole of the UK but a nationalistic grudge viewpoint is nonsense historically. All nationalisms are sustained by myths but the Scottish Nationalism that exists today is a modern concoction based on a total denial of Scottish history. Modern Scotland evolved within the union. Scottish nationalism must be the only variety that denies some of the greatest triumphs of its nation - because they took place under the hated union.
Speaking of nationalist myths, a persistent British nationalist/Unionist myth appears to simultaneously believe that Scotland benefited and still benefits hugely from being part of the Union, and yet among smallish, well educated European nations with developed & diverse industries, substantial natural resources and stable civic polities, is uniquely ill suited to independence. Even smarter Unionists seem unable to square this circle in their own heads, let alone to my satisfaction.
I am sorry that you are not satisfied Divvy but I may just have to live with that.
Scotland could survive as an independent country, of course it could. But would its people have a better life, would we cope with something like this virus as well, would our young have the same breadth of opportunities? I really don't see how an independent Scotland, particularly one using Sterling, would have been able to match the furlough scheme, the grants, the guaranteed loans etc. A Scotland with its own currency would have been flotsam on the current markets with highly unpredictable results.
An independent Scotland today would be significantly poorer with less well funded public services, a serious trade deficit and limited prospects of improving our standard of living going forward. For some that is a price worth paying and the argument that we might eventually find a sense of common purpose and thrive is not to be dismissed out of hand but why on earth would we take that risk? Its bordering on irrational.
The SNP need to focus on our economy, on our education system, on our infrastructure, on business development and create a country that is indeed viable, that would indeed thrive on its own. Instead their obsession with constitutional matters and the uncertaintly that creates means the situation gets worse and worse. They are a menace.
Currently I see one party in Scotland that goes on and on and on about Scottish indy and another referendum and it ain't the SNP. Check the skelf in your own ee.
I actually agree that the Tories, and the also rans, need to go beyond no to a second referendum as a policy platform. But it is not true to say that the SNP do not claim that virtually every single thing that happens shows that we would be better off as an independent nation. It is their raison d'etre.
And as I have said repeatedly to the the point of tediousness, until Unionism, whether it be SCon, SLab or (lol)SLD, puts together a coherent and attractive vision not based on SNPbad, the SNP are the only game in town. On that basis I'd actually say the dire, unimaginative 4th raters that pass for Unionist pols are more to blame than anyone for the state we're in.
Judging by Wings comments there will be a non SNP pro Indy party standing for Holyrood next year, given the loathing of many there for Sturgeon. Thus finally splitting the Nat vote as the Unionist vote has been split
Hope springs eternal in the new Wings convert's heart.
I am sure they said the same to NOTW journalists back in the say....
What's the story here? I've clicked on a couple of the twitter feeds listed but cannot see anything apart from someone resigned from the FT.
Mark Di Stefano of the FT joined the video chats of the Indy and the Evening Standard, the ones where furloughs were being announced.
Kinda broke the FT rules on news gathering and possibly the law.
I must admit I don't understand why lots of journalists are defending him on Twitter so much. Surely this is a cut and dried case of stepping way over the line? Makes me worry about how much similar stuff goes on that lots of journos seem to think this is normal and 'anyone would have done it' in his position.
He's a genuinely nice guy for an Aussie (and you'll find people across the political spectrum saying that.)
I think the bigger story is just how easy it is to join video chats when you've not been invited.
All you really need is someone giving you a link to the call/chat.
Video chats are a nightmare security-wise. Not just zoomjackers and official Chinese government spies but have you checked what is visible in the background or on a whiteboard? If you share your screen, have you checked your tabs or file names that might leak confidential content. Can you be sure that Jeff in Accounts will not screenshot (or photograph) anything for later use against you?
It is back to the early days of mobile phones when doctors and lawyers were quite happy to broadcast client details to their fellow commuters.
I remember sitting next to a spin doctor on the train, as she talked to the shadow home secretary about the ongoing Raol Moat incident.
Apparently, since he had acquired his weapons illegally, unfortunately they wouldn't be able to use the matter to further their anti-firearms agenda.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
But such sensible names are not nearly as gutting as seeing that the first question on learning that an ELEVEN YEAR OLD has been shot is whether the location is London or Essex.
Can the PB arbiters of what is and isn't reliable media (Guido - yeah!) confirm if there has been a concerted effort to astroturf the government view, just so we poor schmucks don't have to rely on these dodgy types?
"Experts give their opinions on why the UK has been hit so hard by the Covid-19 virus"
Possible reasons:
An elderly and unhealthy population. Too late to lockdown and a failure to close the borders. Insufficient PPE. Lack of testing. Failure to protect the elderly? Protect the NHS has actually cost lives Just bad luck.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Yes, I’ve lived in Upminster or Hornchurch nearly all of my life. I’d always say they were Essex, they both have an Essex postcodes, although technically London too as Havering is a London borough, and they’re on the tube.
In electoral terms it certainly has resembled Southern Essex rather than Greater London. At the 1974 elections, Upminster was very much a tossup very marginal seat between Tory and Labour. Against the wider London trend it has long become a safe Tory seat - only falling to Labour in 1997 - much more in line with the pattern seen in Basildon , Thurrock and Harlow.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Essex address = not London.
Upminster..... and indeed further in towards London regard themselves as, and indeed cricketers play for, Essex. Think it's a Romford postal address.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Yes, I’ve lived in Upminster or Hornchurch nearly all of my life. I’d always say they were Essex, they both have an Essex postcodes, although technically London too as Havering is a London borough, and they’re on the tube.
In electoral terms it certainly has resembled Southern Essex rather than Greater London. At the 1974 elections, Upminster was very much a tossup very marginal seat between Tory and Labour. Against the wider London trend it has long become a safe Tory seat - only falling to Labour in 1997 - much more in line with the pattern seen in Basildon , Thurrock and Harlow.
Small boy shot.
Let us discuss the psephology of the location for the last 46 years.
Can the PB arbiters of what is and isn't reliable media (Guido - yeah!) confirm if there has been a concerted effort to astroturf the government view, just so we poor schmucks don't have to rely on these dodgy types?
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Yes, I’ve lived in Upminster or Hornchurch nearly all of my life. I’d always say they were Essex, they both have an Essex postcodes, although technically London too as Havering is a London borough, and they’re on the tube.
In electoral terms it certainly has resembled Southern Essex rather than Greater London. At the 1974 elections, Upminster was very much a tossup very marginal seat between Tory and Labour. Against the wider London trend it has long become a safe Tory seat - only falling to Labour in 1997 - much more in line with the pattern seen in Basildon , Thurrock and Harlow.
Indeed and most of the handful of Tory gains from Labour at the 2001 general election came in Havering and Essex e.g. Upminster, Romford and Castle Point (the others being Newark and Norfolk North West)
"Experts give their opinions on why the UK has been hit so hard by the Covid-19 virus"
Possible reasons:
An elderly and unhealthy population. Too late to lockdown and a failure to close the borders. Insufficient PPE. Lack of testing. Failure to protect the elderly? Protect the NHS has actually cost lives Just bad luck.
Can the PB arbiters of what is and isn't reliable media (Guido - yeah!) confirm if there has been a concerted effort to astroturf the government view, just so we poor schmucks don't have to rely on these dodgy types?
So who's behind these bots? Surely it can only be Dom or Vlad. If the latter then that's very worrying as it suggests that the Kremlin sees the Boris government as conducive to its aims and wants to it keep it in power.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Yes, I’ve lived in Upminster or Hornchurch nearly all of my life. I’d always say they were Essex, they both have an Essex postcodes, although technically London too as Havering is a London borough, and they’re on the tube.
In electoral terms it certainly has resembled Southern Essex rather than Greater London. At the 1974 elections, Upminster was very much a tossup very marginal seat between Tory and Labour. Against the wider London trend it has long become a safe Tory seat - only falling to Labour in 1997 - much more in line with the pattern seen in Basildon , Thurrock and Harlow.
Small boy shot.
Let us discuss the psephology of the location for the last 46 years.
Can we please get a grip here, people?
But no objection to discussing which cricket team local residents might play for?
But such sensible names are not nearly as gutting as seeing that the first question on learning that an ELEVEN YEAR OLD has been shot is whether the location is London or Essex.
Yes. About a mile away from me, in Cranham actually. Rumour is someone knocked on the door saying they were a delivery man, then shot the householder and his son
The fact that on twitter people were paying more attention to the location than the incident was the reason I mentioned it on here in the first place
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Yes, I’ve lived in Upminster or Hornchurch nearly all of my life. I’d always say they were Essex, they both have an Essex postcodes, although technically London too as Havering is a London borough, and they’re on the tube.
In electoral terms it certainly has resembled Southern Essex rather than Greater London. At the 1974 elections, Upminster was very much a tossup very marginal seat between Tory and Labour. Against the wider London trend it has long become a safe Tory seat - only falling to Labour in 1997 - much more in line with the pattern seen in Basildon , Thurrock and Harlow.
Indeed and most of the handful of Tory gains from Labour at the 2001 general election came in Havering and Essex e.g. Upminster, Romford and Castle Point
If the Tory member for Castle Point hadn't been a complete and utter idiot he wouldn't have lost it in '97. Best election result of my life!
Can the PB arbiters of what is and isn't reliable media (Guido - yeah!) confirm if there has been a concerted effort to astroturf the government view, just so we poor schmucks don't have to rely on these dodgy types?
So who's behind these bots? Surely it can only be Dom or Vlad. If the latter then that's very worrying as it suggests that the Kremlin sees the Boris government as conducive to its aims and wants to it keep it in power.
It is quite obviously the work of the tory party shitposting apparatus of which they are so inestimably proud.
That really is encouraging. We are winning even if we have not yet worked out how to end this.
Wonder what the Care Home one looks like?
As for winning i think we have lost as we are well above the "good outcome" number of deaths already.
Without the lockdown etc we were looking at deaths of roughly 1% of the population, roughly 650K. We are heading towards something short of 50K. Anyone who doesn't regard that as a win is not looking at this objectively.
And if we had locked down a week earlier instead of the nonsense about not going to the pub but the pubs running drinks promotions then the death figure would have been under 20k, the lockdown would have been several weeks shorter and we would be into the track and trace phase by now. 30k additional deaths due to a week of dither.
Are pubgoers more likely to get Covid-19? At risk of upsetting the stereotype police, were pubs really full of fat, BAME coffin-dodgers that have been dying disproportionately?
I don't know if there's specific pub data but in Japan based on their cluster tracing they're very emphatic that the problem is crowded, badly-ventilated, noisy places with people talking loudly to each other.
But such sensible names are not nearly as gutting as seeing that the first question on learning that an ELEVEN YEAR OLD has been shot is whether the location is London or Essex.
Yes. About a mile away from me, in Cranham actually. Rumour is someone knocked on the door saying they were a delivery man, then shot the householder and his son
The fact that on twitter people were paying more attention to the location than the incident was the reason I mentioned it on here in the first place
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Yes, I’ve lived in Upminster or Hornchurch nearly all of my life. I’d always say they were Essex, they both have an Essex postcodes, although technically London too as Havering is a London borough, and they’re on the tube.
In electoral terms it certainly has resembled Southern Essex rather than Greater London. At the 1974 elections, Upminster was very much a tossup very marginal seat between Tory and Labour. Against the wider London trend it has long become a safe Tory seat - only falling to Labour in 1997 - much more in line with the pattern seen in Basildon , Thurrock and Harlow.
Small boy shot.
Let us discuss the psephology of the location for the last 46 years.
I am sure they said the same to NOTW journalists back in the say....
What's the story here? I've clicked on a couple of the twitter feeds listed but cannot see anything apart from someone resigned from the FT.
Mark Di Stefano of the FT joined the video chats of the Indy and the Evening Standard, the ones where furloughs were being announced.
Kinda broke the FT rules on news gathering and possibly the law.
And Owen Jones et al are not condemning it in the way they did phone hacking
Funny that....reminds me a bit like how many of the left seem very quiet about the fact the Mirror were in a league of their own when it comes to phone hacking.
"Experts give their opinions on why the UK has been hit so hard by the Covid-19 virus"
Possible reasons:
An elderly and unhealthy population. Too late to lockdown and a failure to close the borders. Insufficient PPE. Lack of testing. Failure to protect the elderly? Protect the NHS has actually cost lives Just bad luck.
"Experts give their opinions on why the UK has been hit so hard by the Covid-19 virus"
Possible reasons:
An elderly and unhealthy population. Too late to lockdown and a failure to close the borders. Insufficient PPE. Lack of testing. Failure to protect the elderly? Protect the NHS has actually cost lives Just bad luck.
Population density has to be in there as well. Look at the other areas really hard hit, NY, Northern Italy, Madrid, Paris, Belgium....all high population density. The UK, its basically London and Birmingham that have been really hard hit.
I think another question that needs asking is, why such poor outcomes of those in hospital. Are we waiting too long to get people into hospitals / is the advice wrong about how long to wait. Is there something missing in the "best practice" approach.
There is a suggestion that Germany, with its higher capacity, gets people into hospital quicker. I have no idea if there is data to back that up.
One thing we do know though is a lot of people who are actually very serious condition, with very low blood oxygen levels, actually feel / appear fine. But are actually in a very dangerous situation.
Have we missed a trick by not just filling NHS Nightingale's with people for monitoring.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Yes, I’ve lived in Upminster or Hornchurch nearly all of my life. I’d always say they were Essex, they both have an Essex postcodes, although technically London too as Havering is a London borough, and they’re on the tube.
In electoral terms it certainly has resembled Southern Essex rather than Greater London. At the 1974 elections, Upminster was very much a tossup very marginal seat between Tory and Labour. Against the wider London trend it has long become a safe Tory seat - only falling to Labour in 1997 - much more in line with the pattern seen in Basildon , Thurrock and Harlow.
Indeed and most of the handful of Tory gains from Labour at the 2001 general election came in Havering and Essex e.g. Upminster, Romford and Castle Point (the others being Newark and Norfolk North West)
Essex feels like a white supremacy theme park - Stewart Lee.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Essex address = not London.
Upminster..... and indeed further in towards London regard themselves as, and indeed cricketers play for, Essex. Think it's a Romford postal address.
I would think of Romford as London. I was born in Ilford while it was still part of Essex and claim to be either a Londoner or an Essex Boy as it suits me. In terms of cricket, historically Essex included all of London east of the Lea and for a long time the County Ground was in Leyton, which has an E postcode (although it was also in Essex until 1965).
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?
Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.
However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?
No-one knows.
Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
Which is the opposite of what actually happened after the Union. Scotland led the way intellectually, scientifically and in empire building and more than matched England industrially.
Funny the way certain narratives can emerge.
What actually happened was that the cream of Scottish society was extracted to run colonial possessions whilst the poor were used to fill the British army to garrison the holdings. The Treasure that flowed back went to the London treasury not Scotland.
For all that the Scots 'ran' the Empire the betterment did not go proportionally to Scotland. Scotland was drained to power the empire.
Yes, all those Scottish officers forced unwillingly to go and serve in the British army over two centuries. You can do a sensible class based analysis of where wealth was distributed for the whole of the UK but a nationalistic grudge viewpoint is nonsense historically. All nationalisms are sustained by myths but the Scottish Nationalism that exists today is a modern concoction based on a total denial of Scottish history. Modern Scotland evolved within the union. Scottish nationalism must be the only variety that denies some of the greatest triumphs of its nation - because they took place under the hated union.
Speaking of nationalist myths, a persistent British nationalist/Unionist myth appears to simultaneously believe that Scotland benefited and still benefits hugely from being part of the Union, and yet among smallish, well educated European nations with developed & diverse industries, substantial natural resources and stable civic polities, is uniquely ill suited to independence. Even smarter Unionists seem unable to square this circle in their own heads, let alone to my satisfaction.
I am sorry that you are not satisfied Divvy but I may just have to live with that.
Scotland could survive as an independent country, of course it could. But would its people have a better life, would we cope with something like this virus as well, would our young have the same breadth of opportunities? I really don't see how an independent Scotland, particularly one using Sterling, would have been able to match the furlough scheme, the grants, the guaranteed loans etc. A Scotland with its own currency would have been flotsam on the current markets with highly unpredictable results.
An independent Scotland today would be significantly poorer with less well funded public services, a serious trade deficit and limited prospects of improving our standard of living going forward. For some that is a price worth paying and the argument that we might eventually find a sense of common purpose and thrive is not to be dismissed out of hand but why on earth would we take that risk? Its bordering on irrational.
The SNP need to focus on our economy, on our education system, on our infrastructure, on business development and create a country that is indeed viable, that would indeed thrive on its own. Instead their obsession with constitutional matters and the uncertaintly that creates means the situation gets worse and worse. They are a menace.
Currently I see one party in Scotland that goes on and on and on about Scottish indy and another referendum and it ain't the SNP. Check the skelf in your own ee.
I actually agree that the Tories, and the also rans, need to go beyond no to a second referendum as a policy platform. But it is not true to say that the SNP do not claim that virtually every single thing that happens shows that we would be better off as an independent nation. It is their raison d'etre.
And as I have said repeatedly to the the point of tediousness, until Unionism, whether it be SCon, SLab or (lol)SLD, puts together a coherent and attractive vision not based on SNPbad, the SNP are the only game in town. On that basis I'd actually say the dire, unimaginative 4th raters that pass for Unionist pols are more to blame than anyone for the state we're in.
Judging by Wings comments there will be a non SNP pro Indy party standing for Holyrood next year, given the loathing of many there for Sturgeon. Thus finally splitting the Nat vote as the Unionist vote has been split
Hope springs eternal in the new Wings convert's heart.
Also shows an ignorance of the new party's voting strategy, and the Scottish Pmt's voting system.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Yes, I’ve lived in Upminster or Hornchurch nearly all of my life. I’d always say they were Essex, they both have an Essex postcodes, although technically London too as Havering is a London borough, and they’re on the tube.
In electoral terms it certainly has resembled Southern Essex rather than Greater London. At the 1974 elections, Upminster was very much a tossup very marginal seat between Tory and Labour. Against the wider London trend it has long become a safe Tory seat - only falling to Labour in 1997 - much more in line with the pattern seen in Basildon , Thurrock and Harlow.
Small boy shot.
Let us discuss the psephology of the location for the last 46 years.
Can we please get a grip here, people?
But no objection to discussing which cricket team local residents might play for?
All of the different strands seem, frankly, to be totally inappropriate. Does it matter what tube stop it is on, or what postcode it has, or which cricket team local clubs play for, or who voted for whom in 1974?
They’re potentially interesting discussions in isolation, if we’re discussing the likely outcome of a council election say, but not in this context.
A small boy has been shot, and it sounds like he’s been left paralysed. Isn’t the key question how on Earth that can be happening in a civilised country with some of the strictest gun control laws in the world?
"Experts give their opinions on why the UK has been hit so hard by the Covid-19 virus"
Possible reasons:
An elderly and unhealthy population. Too late to lockdown and a failure to close the borders. Insufficient PPE. Lack of testing. Failure to protect the elderly? Protect the NHS has actually cost lives Just bad luck.
Population density has to be in there as well. Look at the other areas really hard hit, NY, Northern Italy, Madrid, Paris, Belgium....all high population density. The UK, its basically London and Birmingham that have been really hard hit.
And a high BAME population, particularly in those high density areas.
But such sensible names are not nearly as gutting as seeing that the first question on learning that an ELEVEN YEAR OLD has been shot is whether the location is London or Essex.
Yes. About a mile away from me, in Cranham actually. Rumour is someone knocked on the door saying they were a delivery man, then shot the householder and his son
The fact that on twitter people were paying more attention to the location than the incident was the reason I mentioned it on here in the first place
I saw, and I was shocked, even though I thought I was passed being shocked at Twitter’s lunacy.
But not nearly as shocked as to see that people went down the same route on here.
Just heard - Boris Johnson has got a little willy.
Willie Johnson is somewhat tautologous. One can have too much of a good thing?
We are apparently only counting the kids Johnson has had in hospital. The true figure could be higher.
As someone replied to a hack (Peston I think?) getting dewy eyed about how fatherhood can change you, 'Well it didn't fucking work the previous 5+ times'.
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?
Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.
However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?
No-one knows.
Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
Which is the opposite of what actually happened after the Union. Scotland led the way intellectually, scientifically and in empire building and more than matched England industrially.
Funny the way certain narratives can emerge.
What actually happened was that the cream of Scottish society was extracted to run colonial possessions whilst the poor were used to fill the British army to garrison the holdings. The Treasure that flowed back went to the London treasury not Scotland.
For all that the Scots 'ran' the Empire the betterment did not go proportionally to Scotland. Scotland was drained to power the empire.
Yes, all those Scottish officers forced unwillingly to go and serve in the British army over two centuries. You can do a sensible class based analysis of where wealth was distributed for the whole of the UK but a nationalistic grudge viewpoint is nonsense historically. All nationalisms are sustained by myths but the Scottish Nationalism that exists today is a modern concoction based on a total denial of Scottish history. Modern Scotland evolved within the union. Scottish nationalism must be the only variety that denies some of the greatest triumphs of its nation - because they took place under the hated union.
Speaking of nationalist myths, a persistent British nationalist/Unionist myth appears to simultaneously believe that Scotland benefited and still benefits hugely from being part of the Union, and yet among smallish, well educated European nations with developed & diverse industries, substantial natural resources and stable civic polities, is uniquely ill suited to independence. Even smarter Unionists seem unable to square this circle in their own heads, let alone to my satisfaction.
I am sorry that you are not satisfied Divvy but I may just have to live with that.
Scotland could survive as an independent country, of course it could. But would its people have a better life, would we cope with something like this virus as well, would our young have the same breadth of opportunities? I really don't see how an independent Scotland, particularly one using Sterling, would have been able to match the furlough scheme, the grants, the guaranteed loans etc. A Scotland with its own currency would have been flotsam on the current markets with highly unpredictable results.
An independent Scotland today would be significantly poorer with less well funded public services, a serious trade deficit and limited prospects of improving our standard of living going forward. For some that is a price worth paying and the argument that we might eventually find a sense of common purpose and thrive is not to be dismissed out of hand but why on earth would we take that risk? Its bordering on irrational.
The SNP need to focus on our economy, on our education system, on our infrastructure, on business development and create a country that is indeed viable, that would indeed thrive on its own. Instead their obsession with constitutional matters and the uncertaintly that creates means the situation gets worse and worse. They are a menace.
Currently I see one party in Scotland that goes on and on and on about Scottish indy and another referendum and it ain't the SNP. Check the skelf in your own ee.
I actually agree that the Tories, and the also rans, need to go beyond no to a second referendum as a policy platform. But it is not true to say that the SNP do not claim that virtually every single thing that happens shows that we would be better off as an independent nation. It is their raison d'etre.
And as I have said repeatedly to the the point of tediousness, until Unionism, whether it be SCon, SLab or (lol)SLD, puts together a coherent and attractive vision not based on SNPbad, the SNP are the only game in town. On that basis I'd actually say the dire, unimaginative 4th raters that pass for Unionist pols are more to blame than anyone for the state we're in.
Judging by Wings comments there will be a non SNP pro Indy party standing for Holyrood next year, given the loathing of many there for Sturgeon. Thus finally splitting the Nat vote as the Unionist vote has been split
Hope springs eternal in the new Wings convert's heart.
Also shows an ignorance of the new party's voting strategy, and the Scottish Pmt's voting system.
Provided any new Indy party does not gain enough votes to elect MSPs it will likely cost the SNP list seats and increase the chances of a Unionist majority, more so if it stands for constituency FPTP seats too
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?
Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.
However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?
No-one knows.
Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
Which is the opposite of what actually happened after the Union. Scotland led the way intellectually, scientifically and in empire building and more than matched England industrially.
Funny the way certain narratives can emerge.
What actually happened was that the cream of Scottish society was extracted to run colonial possessions whilst the poor were used to fill the British army to garrison the holdings. The Treasure that flowed back went to the London treasury not Scotland.
For all that the Scots 'ran' the Empire the betterment did not go proportionally to Scotland. Scotland was drained to power the empire.
Yes, all those Scottish officers forced unwillingly to go and serve in the British army over two centuries. You can do a sensible class based analysis of where wealth was distributed for the whole of the UK but a nationalistic grudge viewpoint is nonsense historically. All nationalisms are sustained by myths but the Scottish Nationalism that exists today is a modern concoction based on a total denial of Scottish history. Modern Scotland evolved within the union. Scottish nationalism must be the only variety that denies some of the greatest triumphs of its nation - because they took place under the hated union.
I really can't agree. There has been a great revival of interest in Scottish history over the last few decades in aprallel with the rise of interest in independence. One only need look at bookshops, or a run of the National to find articles about the triumps, as you put it, as well as the mess-ups - it's all history to be remembered and commemorated - but not celebrated.
That latter contrast is perhaps the root of the difference I find most striking between mainstream Scottish nationalism (or rather self-determinationism) and British/English nationalism (as manifest in the last few years most obviously) is the former's almost complete omission of historical references in public discourse. You just don't get Ms Sturgeon going on about Saltires and the claymore, for instance, or the Clearances lowland or otherwise. But just look at almost any speech by Mr Johnson - or Mr Cameron before him. It's all Somme, Agincourt, WW2, WW2 again, Spitfires, Blitz spirit etc. etc. It's a very, very noticeable difference. One is very much looking to the future, but what is one to make of the other?
That's true enough. The vulgar historical references to WW2 are going to get less traction I suspect. The lack of historical references in public by SNP politicians (as opposed to the victim history narrative modelled on Ireland voiced by independence supporters) supports my analysis. For instance, the intellectual giants of the Scottish Enlightenment that were an important part of founding the modern world were not only comfortable with the Union but arguably enabled by it.
Boris and Cameron went to the same school at the same time so perhaps it means nothing more than the Eton headmaster was fond of great historical sweeps during assembly.
Don’t forget that he was also Tony Blair and Prince Charles’ housemaster
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?
Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.
However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?
No-one knows.
Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
Which is the opposite of what actually happened after the Union. Scotland led the way intellectually, scientifically and in empire building and more than matched England industrially.
Funny the way certain narratives can emerge.
What actually happened was that the cream of Scottish society was extracted to run colonial possessions whilst the poor were used to fill the British army to garrison the holdings. The Treasure that flowed back went to the London treasury not Scotland.
For all that the Scots 'ran' the Empire the betterment did not go proportionally to Scotland. Scotland was drained to power the empire.
Yes, all those Scottish officers forced unwillingly to go and serve in the British army over two centuries. You can do a sensible class based analysis of where wealth was distributed for the whole of the UK but a nationalistic grudge viewpoint is nonsense historically. All nationalisms are sustained by myths but the Scottish Nationalism that exists today is a modern concoction based on a total denial of Scottish history. Modern Scotland evolved within the union. Scottish nationalism must be the only variety that denies some of the greatest triumphs of its nation - because they took place under the hated union.
Speaking of nationalist myths, a persistent British nationalist/Unionist myth appears to simultaneously believe that Scotland benefited and still benefits hugely from being part of the Union, and yet among smallish, well educated European nations with developed & diverse industries, substantial natural resources and stable civic polities, is uniquely ill suited to independence. Even smarter Unionists seem unable to square this circle in their own heads, let alone to my satisfaction.
I am sorry that you are not satisfied Divvy but I may just have to live with that.
Scotland could survive as an independent country, of course it could. But would its people have a better life, would we cope with something like this virus as well, would our young have the same breadth of opportunities? I really don't see how an independent Scotland, particularly one using Sterling, would have been able to match the furlough scheme, the grants, the guaranteed loans etc. A Scotland with its own currency would have been flotsam on the current markets with highly unpredictable results.
An independent Scotland today would be significantly poorer with less well funded public services, a serious trade deficit and limited prospects of improving our standard of living going forward. For some that is a price worth paying and the argument that we might eventually find a sense of common purpose and thrive is not to be dismissed out of hand but why on earth would we take that risk? Its bordering on irrational.
The SNP need to focus on our economy, on our education system, on our infrastructure, on business development and create a country that is indeed viable, that would indeed thrive on its own. Instead their obsession with constitutional matters and the uncertaintly that creates means the situation gets worse and worse. They are a menace.
Currently I see one party in Scotland that goes on and on and on about Scottish indy and another referendum and it ain't the SNP. Check the skelf in your own ee.
I actually agree that the Tories, and the also rans, need to go beyond no to a second referendum as a policy platform. But it is not true to say that the SNP do not claim that virtually every single thing that happens shows that we would be better off as an independent nation. It is their raison d'etre.
And as I have said repeatedly to the the point of tediousness, until Unionism, whether it be SCon, SLab or (lol)SLD, puts together a coherent and attractive vision not based on SNPbad, the SNP are the only game in town. On that basis I'd actually say the dire, unimaginative 4th raters that pass for Unionist pols are more to blame than anyone for the state we're in.
Judging by Wings comments there will be a non SNP pro Indy party standing for Holyrood next year, given the loathing of many there for Sturgeon. Thus finally splitting the Nat vote as the Unionist vote has been split
Hope springs eternal in the new Wings convert's heart.
Also shows an ignorance of the new party's voting strategy, and the Scottish Pmt's voting system.
Ignorance is no barrier to commenting on Scotpol on PB, quite often a prerequisite in fact.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Yes, I’ve lived in Upminster or Hornchurch nearly all of my life. I’d always say they were Essex, they both have an Essex postcodes, although technically London too as Havering is a London borough, and they’re on the tube.
In electoral terms it certainly has resembled Southern Essex rather than Greater London. At the 1974 elections, Upminster was very much a tossup very marginal seat between Tory and Labour. Against the wider London trend it has long become a safe Tory seat - only falling to Labour in 1997 - much more in line with the pattern seen in Basildon , Thurrock and Harlow.
Small boy shot.
Let us discuss the psephology of the location for the last 46 years.
Can we please get a grip here, people?
But no objection to discussing which cricket team local residents might play for?
All of the different strands seem, frankly, to be totally inappropriate. Does it matter what tube stop it is on, or what postcode it has, or which cricket team local clubs play for, or who voted for whom in 1974?
They’re potentially interesting discussions in isolation, if we’re discussing the likely outcome of a council election say, but not in this context.
A small boy has been shot, and it sounds like he’s been left paralysed. Isn’t the key question how on Earth that can be happening in a civilised country with some of the strictest gun control laws in the world?
TBH, while we know little else apart from where, that it's happened where it has has to be a point of discussion. When there's a bit more known, then maybe we can look at the essentials. Sounds, ATM, like some sort of 'grudge event'.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
We don't want it!!! London can have it.
Aw don’t be like that! It’s definitely more Essex than London.
It's in both. My mother's generation would call it "London over the border" although of course since 1965 it has actually been in London. Probably has an Essex postal address though.
Yes, I’ve lived in Upminster or Hornchurch nearly all of my life. I’d always say they were Essex, they both have an Essex postcodes, although technically London too as Havering is a London borough, and they’re on the tube.
In electoral terms it certainly has resembled Southern Essex rather than Greater London. At the 1974 elections, Upminster was very much a tossup very marginal seat between Tory and Labour. Against the wider London trend it has long become a safe Tory seat - only falling to Labour in 1997 - much more in line with the pattern seen in Basildon , Thurrock and Harlow.
Indeed and most of the handful of Tory gains from Labour at the 2001 general election came in Havering and Essex e.g. Upminster, Romford and Castle Point (the others being Newark and Norfolk North West)
Essex feels like a white supremacy theme park - Stewart Lee.
Depends which part North Essex is rural and posh Home Counties e.g. Saffron Walden, London borders Essex tends to be nouveau riche wealthy suburbia and market town e.g. Brentwood and Chigwell, coastal Essex though is very white working class, Leave and pro Brexit and indeed Clacton elected UKIP's only MP
I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.
Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.
It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.
Edit: God bless America.
If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?
Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.
However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?
No-one knows.
Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
Which is the opposite of what actually happened after the Union. Scotland led the way intellectually, scientifically and in empire building and more than matched England industrially.
Funny the way certain narratives can emerge.
What actually happened was that the cream of Scottish society was extracted to run colonial possessions whilst the poor were used to fill the British army to garrison the holdings. The Treasure that flowed back went to the London treasury not Scotland.
For all that the Scots 'ran' the Empire the betterment did not go proportionally to Scotland. Scotland was drained to power the empire.
Yes, all those Scottish officers forced unwillingly to go and serve in the British army over two centuries. You can do a sensible class based analysis of where wealth was distributed for the whole of the UK but a nationalistic grudge viewpoint is nonsense historically. All nationalisms are sustained by myths but the Scottish Nationalism that exists today is a modern concoction based on a total denial of Scottish history. Modern Scotland evolved within the union. Scottish nationalism must be the only variety that denies some of the greatest triumphs of its nation - because they took place under the hated union.
Speaking of nationalist myths, a persistent British nationalist/Unionist myth appears to simultaneously believe that Scotland benefited and still benefits hugely from being part of the Union, and yet among smallish, well educated European nations with developed & diverse industries, substantial natural resources and stable civic polities, is uniquely ill suited to independence. Even smarter Unionists seem unable to square this circle in their own heads, let alone to my satisfaction.
I am sorry that you are not satisfied Divvy but I may just have to live with that.
Scotland could survive as an independent country, of course it could. But would its people have a better life, would we cope with something like this virus as well, would our young have the same breadth of opportunities? I really don't see how an independent Scotland, particularly one using Sterling, would have been able to match the furlough scheme, the grants, the guaranteed loans etc. A Scotland with its own currency would have been flotsam on the current markets with highly unpredictable results.
An independent Scotland today would be significantly poorer with less well funded public services, a serious trade deficit and limited prospects of improving our standard of living going forward. For some that is a price worth paying and the argument that we might eventually find a sense of common purpose and thrive is not to be dismissed out of hand but why on earth would we take that risk? Its bordering on irrational.
The SNP need to focus on our economy, on our education system, on our infrastructure, on business development and create a country that is indeed viable, that would indeed thrive on its own. Instead their obsession with constitutional matters and the uncertaintly that creates means the situation gets worse and worse. They are a menace.
Currently I see one party in Scotland that goes on and on and on about Scottish indy and another referendum and it ain't the SNP. Check the skelf in your own ee.
I actually agree that the Tories, and the also rans, need to go beyond no to a second referendum as a policy platform. But it is not true to say that the SNP do not claim that virtually every single thing that happens shows that we would be better off as an independent nation. It is their raison d'etre.
And as I have said repeatedly to the the point of tediousness, until Unionism, whether it be SCon, SLab or (lol)SLD, puts together a coherent and attractive vision not based on SNPbad, the SNP are the only game in town. On that basis I'd actually say the dire, unimaginative 4th raters that pass for Unionist pols are more to blame than anyone for the state we're in.
Judging by Wings comments there will be a non SNP pro Indy party standing for Holyrood next year, given the loathing of many there for Sturgeon. Thus finally splitting the Nat vote as the Unionist vote has been split
Hope springs eternal in the new Wings convert's heart.
Also shows an ignorance of the new party's voting strategy, and the Scottish Pmt's voting system.
Provided any new Indy party does not gain enough votes to elect MSPs it will likely cost the SNP list seats and increase the chances of a Unionist majority, more so if it stands for constituency FPTP seats too
The whole point is that if it got so few on the list then it wouldn't make much difference to the SNP, which gets disproportionately few seats for its list votes assuming it does well on the constituencies.
The way in which the Scottish Pmt was deliberately gerrymandered - and confessedly so - by its creators to favout a split British Nationalist vote against the (initially) unified vote for self-determination is something that might well repay a careful analysis on PB early in 2021, when the Holyrood elections approach. Would a Wings party approach work?
[Edit - British Nationalist used as descriptive term as 'Unionist' is too confused with Ulster, or so I tend to feel. But use whichever you prefer.]
Comments
I think the bigger story is just how easy it is to join video chats when you've not been invited.
All you really need is someone giving you a link to the call/chat.
Laters.
Death toll with no restrictions, 1.5 million.
Which means when we do reopen schools, no assembly and get the teachers mic'd up rather than projecting their voices to the back of the classroom at the expense of spreading saliva over the girly swots at the front.
https://twitter.com/HTScotPol/status/1253701382684708864?s=20
It is back to the early days of mobile phones when doctors and lawyers were quite happy to broadcast client details to their fellow commuters.
An 11 year old has been shot, but people seem more concerned about whether Upminster is in East London or Essex
Must admit that I misread Ishmaerl's advice. I thought he said "Pets can be great" and was advising you to adopt the sheep.
https://twitter.com/vonstrenginho/status/1256180132701786112
Sounds like the sort of thing Boris Johnson used to get up to as a journo.
It clearly eats one or two of you up but I really don't get it.
I took the summed data (the latest figures) for NHS England and plotted this -
A surprisingly linear decline - 25 less deaths per day on average.
The trouble with the current crop of populists is that they are wringing every last ounce of nationalistic energy from these myths, and killing the goose in the process.
It starts to look artificial, frankly embarrassing and the youngsters increasingly roll their eyes at it.
A constant sub 1 r(t) should ceteris paribus yield a logarithmic decrease I think.
I expect it'll take us more than 4 days to go to a true sub 300 death rate.
Apparently, since he had acquired his weapons illegally, unfortunately they wouldn't be able to use the matter to further their anti-firearms agenda.
Fewer.
But such sensible names are not nearly as gutting as seeing that the first question on learning that an ELEVEN YEAR OLD has been shot is whether the location is London or Essex.
https://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/1256557039985328133?s=20
Possible reasons:
An elderly and unhealthy population.
Too late to lockdown and a failure to close the borders.
Insufficient PPE.
Lack of testing.
Failure to protect the elderly?
Protect the NHS has actually cost lives
Just bad luck.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/01/britain-ended-one-worst-world-fighting-coronavirus-experts/
But a nice name I’d say.
Think it's a Romford postal address.
Let us discuss the psephology of the location for the last 46 years.
Can we please get a grip here, people?
There's a Nick Johnson locally. Labour through and through.
https://twitter.com/serialsockthief/status/1256565988243517440?s=20
The fact that on twitter people were paying more attention to the location than the incident was the reason I mentioned it on here in the first place
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/05/COVID-19-daily-announced-deaths-2-May-2020.xlsx
The big structural failure was statist bureaucracy which led to failings re PPE, testing and care homes.
The big societal causes are obesity and population density.
I think another question that needs asking is, why such poor outcomes of those in hospital. Are we waiting too long to get people into hospitals / is the advice wrong about how long to wait. Is there something missing in the "best practice" approach.
There is a suggestion that Germany, with its higher capacity, gets people into hospital quicker. I have no idea if there is data to back that up.
One thing we do know though is a lot of people who are actually very serious condition, with very low blood oxygen levels, actually feel / appear fine. But are actually in a very dangerous situation.
Have we missed a trick by not just filling NHS Nightingale's with people for monitoring.
They’re potentially interesting discussions in isolation, if we’re discussing the likely outcome of a council election say, but not in this context.
A small boy has been shot, and it sounds like he’s been left paralysed. Isn’t the key question how on Earth that can be happening in a civilised country with some of the strictest gun control laws in the world?
But not nearly as shocked as to see that people went down the same route on here.
Eric Anderson. A good man. RIP
Sounds, ATM, like some sort of 'grudge event'.
The way in which the Scottish Pmt was deliberately gerrymandered - and confessedly so - by its creators to favout a split British Nationalist vote against the (initially) unified vote for self-determination is something that might well repay a careful analysis on PB early in 2021, when the Holyrood elections approach. Would a Wings party approach work?
[Edit - British Nationalist used as descriptive term as 'Unionist' is too confused with Ulster, or so I tend to feel. But use whichever you prefer.]