Thursday clapping over as nobody comes out and no clapping heard from anywhere
First time as each week most everybody has been out
I went out clapping tonight for the first time but have to report that no one joined me despite my having resorted to banging a pan. It is what I expected and shows that most people act like sheep on such matters - by following the crowd or wishing to be seen to participate.
How is it being a sheep if the whole thing was planned? There is such a thing as organisation, you know?
But if people start clapping when so many others are doing so and then all happen to stop at the sayso of an individual, it rather suggests lack of spontaneity. In reality, there were probably a fair number who wished to carry on clapping but who have stopped simply to be seen to conform with the behaviour of neighbours etc. Personally I never favoured the clapping at all - I did it tonight just to make a point and may do so again next week.
Surely by doing it at 8pm on a Thursday you are conforming to the nominated clapping time?
Or they could have written "No Parking" in big font, and "Enforcement In Operation" in smaller font?
Strictly speaking, it should be a colon.
‘No Parking: Enforcement in Operation.’
The actual sign has very little ambiguity. Good luck to the jobsworth in charge of defending it. Is it even a legal sign, they’re supposed to be to the DoT standard?
Probably, because it was a temporary sign and different rules apply.
But it does look, on that photo, as though the sign is saying no parking enforcement is in operation due to Covid 19.
Surely this is a temporary no parking sign: clear, unambiguous and to the DoT standard?
Powerful stuff. It just seems so obvious that the US police are so badly, awfully trained. They don't even manage to keep themselves safe because they fly into situations without knowing what's going on. And they're a liability to the public.
The police are heavily armed and aggressive because a small minority of the public are likewise. For every situation that gets out of control there are dozens which are resolved without any violence, except maybe a door kicked in. But until the Second Amendment is reinterpreted and the drug trade brought under control, we'll have many more situations like the current one.
Everyone has guns in Switzerland, and it doesn't seem to cause too many problems.
The Lancet paper that halted global trials of hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19 because of fears of increased deaths has been retracted.
The lead author, Prof Mandeep Mehra, from the Brigham and Women’s hospital in Boston, decided to ask the Lancet for the retraction because he could no longer vouch for the accuracy of the data.
Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.
Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !
So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?
Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.
The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.
Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.
I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.
You won’t be able to make that choice because the US will insist that food cannot be labelled so as to allow consumers to know where their meat, for instance, comes from.
Powerful stuff. It just seems so obvious that the US police are so badly, awfully trained. They don't even manage to keep themselves safe because they fly into situations without knowing what's going on. And they're a liability to the public.
The police are heavily armed and aggressive because a small minority of the public are likewise. For every situation that gets out of control there are dozens which are resolved without any violence, except maybe a door kicked in. But until the Second Amendment is reinterpreted and the drug trade brought under control, we'll have many more situations like the current one.
Everyone has guns in Switzerland, and it doesn't seem to cause too many problems.
(Agree re the drug trade.)
That's propaganda from the US gun lobby.
Actually Switzerland has eight times our level of gun deaths by population. And its gun ownership rate is only a third of the US's.
Switzerland may not be as spectacularly murderous as the US, but it has a definite gun problem.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Starmer is setting up booby traps, and he is very astute at it too. Either BoZo does what Keir says, or he doesn't. It means that he leads the agenda, or he closes off an escape route, or is forced to make a blunder, like the JRM one on parliament.
Like all barristers, Starmer is good at anticipation. Not for a long time has there been a LOTO who manipulates a PM so well. It is like watching a cat with a mouse. The PM is way out of his depth, and knows it.
Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.
Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !
So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?
Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.
The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.
Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.
I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.
You won’t be able to make that choice because the US will insist that food cannot be labelled so as to allow consumers to know where their meat, for instance, comes from.
We had this discussion earlier. Would it just ban compulsory labelling, or would it include a ban on voluntary labelling? If the latter, there would be nothing the US could do to stop others labeling their meat as humane-grown, hormone-free, not processed in chlorine, or from Devon.
Also, the big US brands - Perdue, Tyson etc... - will presumably still insist on branding their products, and we'll all soon know them and their place of origin.
If the government is serious about dropping food standards, it’s even barmier than I thought
Surely labelling is the key here. If your food is labelled, you can make your own choice.
The FTA on current US demand will prohibit any requirement for labelling that identifies US origin.
That's a lie.
I don't appreciate being called a liar.
The US Trade Representative repeatedly highlights labeling as a barrier to trade in this document (mentioned 177 times)
The US is very aggressive in regarding mandatory labelling as a non-tariff barrier. Nowhere else - to be the best of my knowledge - takes such a stance.
For the record, the bigger issue (though) is not labelling country of origin, but more issues like "contains genetically modified produce".
So do you think the US might be happy with labelling that said 'produce of the USA' on their chicken or other animal products, but not anything about animal rearing or processing?
It's a good question. I suspect that they would be OK with it, so long as there wasn't a requirement to make labelling excessively large. (Yes, arguments really do get that detailed.)
How much imported chicken is sold in supermarkets as "chicken", where consumers at least have a chance to look at the labelling, and how much goes into "processed foods" i.e. chicken nuggets underneath the golden arks? IIRC the latter is considerably more than the former.
If the government is serious about dropping food standards, it’s even barmier than I thought
Surely labelling is the key here. If your food is labelled, you can make your own choice.
The FTA on current US demand will prohibit any requirement for labelling that identifies US origin.
That's a lie.
I don't appreciate being called a liar.
The US Trade Representative repeatedly highlights labeling as a barrier to trade in this document (mentioned 177 times)
The US is very aggressive in regarding mandatory labelling as a non-tariff barrier. Nowhere else - to be the best of my knowledge - takes such a stance.
For the record, the bigger issue (though) is not labelling country of origin, but more issues like "contains genetically modified produce".
So do you think the US might be happy with labelling that said 'produce of the USA' on their chicken or other animal products, but not anything about animal rearing or processing?
It's a good question. I suspect that they would be OK with it, so long as there wasn't a requirement to make labelling excessively large. (Yes, arguments really do get that detailed.)
How much imported chicken is sold in supermarkets as "chicken", where consumers at least have a chance to look at the labelling, and how much goes into "processed foods" i.e. chicken nuggets underneath the golden arks? IIRC the latter is considerably more than the former.
For all their faults, McDonalds have a policy of buying in the country.
Powerful stuff. It just seems so obvious that the US police are so badly, awfully trained. They don't even manage to keep themselves safe because they fly into situations without knowing what's going on. And they're a liability to the public.
The police are heavily armed and aggressive because a small minority of the public are likewise. For every situation that gets out of control there are dozens which are resolved without any violence, except maybe a door kicked in. But until the Second Amendment is reinterpreted and the drug trade brought under control, we'll have many more situations like the current one.
Everyone has guns in Switzerland, and it doesn't seem to cause too many problems.
(Agree re the drug trade.)
That's propaganda from the US gun lobby.
Actually Switzerland has eight times our level of gun deaths by population. And its gun ownership rate is only a third of the US's.
Switzerland may not be as spectacularly murderous as the US, but it has a definite gun problem.
Quoting a death rate as a multiple of that of a country which effectively has no guns in general circulation seems to me to be a rather misleading way of arguing.
On topic a lot of people who work in Parliament were very surprised that the hybrid proceedings were cancelled so abruptly. It took an incredible amount of effort to make it work. People often forget that once MPs are there a whole army of staff have to come in too.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Starmer is setting up booby traps, and he is very astute at it too. Either BoZo does what Keir says, or he doesn't. It means that he leads the agenda, or he closes off an escape route, or is forced to make a blunder, like the JRM one on parliament.
Like all barristers, Starmer is good at anticipation. Not for a long time has there been a LOTO who manipulates a PM so well. It is like watching a cat with a mouse. The PM is way out of his depth, and knows it.
Way overstated. Good barristers practise, indifferent ones get hived off to the DPP. He is so bleeding obvious about the heffalump traps he is digging that it's painful to watch. Normal people quite rightly loathe lawyers anyway, and surely everybody sides with the mouse?
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Starmer is setting up booby traps, and he is very astute at it too. Either BoZo does what Keir says, or he doesn't. It means that he leads the agenda, or he closes off an escape route, or is forced to make a blunder, like the JRM one on parliament.
Like all barristers, Starmer is good at anticipation. Not for a long time has there been a LOTO who manipulates a PM so well. It is like watching a cat with a mouse. The PM is way out of his depth, and knows it.
Maybe but as has been said do not underestimate Boris ability to win over normal voters
Boris has lost me, but I think many on here see Starmer as a messiah and he is far from that, though he is a huge relief from the toxic days of Corbyn
As well as whether MPs vote by walking or clicking, another question that pollsters might usefully ask is this:
"Now that the trend for deaths with coronavirus has been falling in Britain for six weeks, do you think the NHS should immediately restore all of the services it closed down indefinitely? [Yes|No]"
Whoever here wrote of "national religion" was right. It might be posited that for many citizens ritualised clapping is not conducive to critical thinking.
Lets not forget, Starmer dodgy del-boy trotter dossier fell apart like a CPS case on celebrity child sex offenders. His i wrote to you and you only called didn't work.
The real problem is Boris is crap at PMQs, especially post COVID, where reading questions off a screen and giving a coherent answer seems incredibly taxing.
If the government is serious about dropping food standards, it’s even barmier than I thought
Surely labelling is the key here. If your food is labelled, you can make your own choice.
The FTA on current US demand will prohibit any requirement for labelling that identifies US origin.
That's a lie.
I don't appreciate being called a liar.
The US Trade Representative repeatedly highlights labeling as a barrier to trade in this document (mentioned 177 times)
The US is very aggressive in regarding mandatory labelling as a non-tariff barrier. Nowhere else - to be the best of my knowledge - takes such a stance.
For the record, the bigger issue (though) is not labelling country of origin, but more issues like "contains genetically modified produce".
So do you think the US might be happy with labelling that said 'produce of the USA' on their chicken or other animal products, but not anything about animal rearing or processing?
It's a good question. I suspect that they would be OK with it, so long as there wasn't a requirement to make labelling excessively large. (Yes, arguments really do get that detailed.)
How much imported chicken is sold in supermarkets as "chicken", where consumers at least have a chance to look at the labelling, and how much goes into "processed foods" i.e. chicken nuggets underneath the golden arks? IIRC the latter is considerably more than the former.
For all their faults, McDonalds have a policy of buying in the country.
For beef that is correct, 100% British/Irish. For chicken, not so much. Anyway, McD nuggets were just an example. Food processing is a huge industry. All considerations of labelling practices and food standards need to take the different realities in this industry into account.
Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.
Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !
So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?
Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.
The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.
Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.
I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.
You won’t be able to make that choice because the US will insist that food cannot be labelled so as to allow consumers to know where their meat, for instance, comes from.
I am finding this argument very amusing because clearly no one has actually gone and looked at US law.
Under the "Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002" almost all fresh produce - including chicken - must carry a Mandatory Country of Origin label. This has been reaffirmed by several amendments to the acts - the most recent in 2016.
The really funny bit is that it was Canada who took the US to the WTO to claim that the mCOOL laws were counter to free trade and should be outlawed. The Canadians won as far as Beef and Pork are concerned but the list of foodstuffs that have to carry the mCOOL under US Federal law currently includes fresh fruits, raw vegetables, fish, shellfish, muscle cuts and ground lamb, chicken, goat, peanuts, pecans, ginseng, and macadamia nuts.
So no, the US will not be insisting that there cannot be Country of Origin labels. In fact their own laws make it mandatory.
This in Bethesda MD (home of the NIH and Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (Navy, that was). It is impressive how organized these high school kids are - and how universal face mask-wearing is. Let's hope this activism is turned into voters.
If the government is serious about dropping food standards, it’s even barmier than I thought
Surely labelling is the key here. If your food is labelled, you can make your own choice.
The FTA on current US demand will prohibit any requirement for labelling that identifies US origin.
That's a lie.
I don't appreciate being called a liar.
The US Trade Representative repeatedly highlights labeling as a barrier to trade in this document (mentioned 177 times)
The US is very aggressive in regarding mandatory labelling as a non-tariff barrier. Nowhere else - to be the best of my knowledge - takes such a stance.
For the record, the bigger issue (though) is not labelling country of origin, but more issues like "contains genetically modified produce".
So do you think the US might be happy with labelling that said 'produce of the USA' on their chicken or other animal products, but not anything about animal rearing or processing?
It's a good question. I suspect that they would be OK with it, so long as there wasn't a requirement to make labelling excessively large. (Yes, arguments really do get that detailed.)
How much imported chicken is sold in supermarkets as "chicken", where consumers at least have a chance to look at the labelling, and how much goes into "processed foods" i.e. chicken nuggets underneath the golden arks? IIRC the latter is considerably more than the former.
For all their faults, McDonalds have a policy of buying in the country.
For beef that is correct, 100% British/Irish. For chicken, not so much. Anyway, McD nuggets were just an example. Food processing is a huge industry. All considerations of labelling practices and food standards need to take the different realities in this industry into account.
Nope, chicken and pork is British.
I agree though on cheaper chicken shops (when not laundering drug money...)
If the government is serious about dropping food standards, it’s even barmier than I thought
Surely labelling is the key here. If your food is labelled, you can make your own choice.
The FTA on current US demand will prohibit any requirement for labelling that identifies US origin.
That's a lie.
I don't appreciate being called a liar.
The US Trade Representative repeatedly highlights labeling as a barrier to trade in this document (mentioned 177 times)
The US is very aggressive in regarding mandatory labelling as a non-tariff barrier. Nowhere else - to be the best of my knowledge - takes such a stance.
For the record, the bigger issue (though) is not labelling country of origin, but more issues like "contains genetically modified produce".
So do you think the US might be happy with labelling that said 'produce of the USA' on their chicken or other animal products, but not anything about animal rearing or processing?
It's a good question. I suspect that they would be OK with it, so long as there wasn't a requirement to make labelling excessively large. (Yes, arguments really do get that detailed.)
How much imported chicken is sold in supermarkets as "chicken", where consumers at least have a chance to look at the labelling, and how much goes into "processed foods" i.e. chicken nuggets underneath the golden arks? IIRC the latter is considerably more than the former.
Its probably already the case that most British produce is sold directly in markets and Supermarkets and "processed" foods are probably mostly imports.
A lot of processed chicken sold in this country comes from Thailand etc already.
You know people think Biden has lost his faculties, there's a body of evidence to say the same about Trump.
Biden is beginning to grow on me a little. PoTUS is not nessecarily supposed to be coherent. Several recent ones rambled like the best. What they do need to be able to do is to do the folksy schmaltz with a straight face. Even his age is a reminder of a kinder, gentler age, reminiscent of picket fences, lemonade stalls and moose lodges.
This...and it is f##king bananas...also see the tweet i posted last night calling out high end stores for boarding up their windows. And folk outside of cities are of course thought NYT liberals were a bit too left, the new lot, well. It is massive polarization.
On Parliament. The PM lent his support to shielded MOs being able to vote remotely. He did not support returning to the hybrid Parliament, which (a) the Speaker certainly supports, and (b) the YouGov survey may have been taken to be about. For the time being, the vast majority of MPs should be able to work from home -- as has been show to be possible and workable.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Starmer is setting up booby traps, and he is very astute at it too. Either BoZo does what Keir says, or he doesn't. It means that he leads the agenda, or he closes off an escape route, or is forced to make a blunder, like the JRM one on parliament.
Like all barristers, Starmer is good at anticipation. Not for a long time has there been a LOTO who manipulates a PM so well. It is like watching a cat with a mouse. The PM is way out of his depth, and knows it.
Maybe but as has been said do not underestimate Boris ability to win over normal voters
Boris has lost me, but I think many on here see Starmer as a messiah and he is far from that, though he is a huge relief from the toxic days of Corbyn
The fact that he has lost you as a Tory loyalist must make it highly likely that many other less Tory-inclined voters will have seen the scales fall from their eyes.I suspect that many of the firsttime Tory voters from last December already feel pretty disillusioned with Johnson - and the factors which attracted them to him - Brexit and Corbyn - have ceased to be relevant. The poll leads we were seeing two months ago were always artificial and were never going to last. The vote shares we are now being presented with are much more realistic with some return to normal politics having been accelerated by recent perceptions of Government mismanagement. On the basis of earlier Parliaments,however, there must be a strong possibility - particularly given the economic storms which lie ahead - that the polls are continuing to flatter the Tories relative to their likely performance in 2024. When we look back to other big election victories from 2001 - 1997 - 1987 - 1966 - and 1959, the ruling party was doing a fair bit better six months into those Parliaments than it was able to sustain at the subsequent General Election several years later.
This...and it is f##king bananas...also see the tweet i posted last night calling out high end stores for boarding up their windows. And folk outside of cities are of course thought NYT liberals were a bit too left, the new lot, well. It is massive polarization.
You know people think Biden has lost his faculties, there's a body of evidence to say the same about Trump.
Bidens solution to excessive deaths, Shoot 'em in the knees, was practically Trumpian.
How on Earth have we got to the point where the USA has a choice of two manifestly unsuitable candidates for the most important job in the country?
The last two times there was rioting on at least the current scale (in fact with much higher numbers of casualties), third party candidates bagged 14% and 19% of the voteshare in the subsequent presidential elections (1968 and 1992).
Current betting market prices, five months out, imply a probability of 93.1% Biden or Trump, and 94.4% Biden, Trump, or Clinton (sic)! What would Nassim Taleb suggest?
Comments
The one thing which would really tarnish his credibility would be accepting a place on Trump’s ticket.
He made himself look like a fool the first time round after joining the administration. I think he smart enough not to make the same mistake twice.
(And wasn’t that an improper use of a comma ?)
(Agree re the drug trade.)
The lead author, Prof Mandeep Mehra, from the Brigham and Women’s hospital in Boston, decided to ask the Lancet for the retraction because he could no longer vouch for the accuracy of the data.
Might need to mimic the Wuhan approach of testing everybody in certain cities
"You've never had it? So, good!"
My biggest faux pas is missing out a (crucial) word from sentences.
Words that usually change the entire meaning of the sentence.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/covid-19-lancet-retracts-paper-that-halted-hydroxychloroquine-trials
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-8388505/DNA-make-people-Type-blood-vulnerable-coronavirus.html
Fewer than four in 10 cover face on UK public transport – Guardian survey
Survey of almost 800 travellers in three cities shows in some areas rate is just 10%
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/fewer-than-four-in-10-people-in-uk-wear-a-face-covering-guardian-survey
Actually Switzerland has eight times our level of gun deaths by population. And its gun ownership rate is only a third of the US's.
Switzerland may not be as spectacularly murderous as the US, but it has a definite gun problem.
Like all barristers, Starmer is good at anticipation. Not for a long time has there been a LOTO who manipulates a PM so well. It is like watching a cat with a mouse. The PM is way out of his depth, and knows it.
Also, the big US brands - Perdue, Tyson etc... - will presumably still insist on branding their products, and we'll all soon know them and their place of origin.
Rand Paul battles Kamala Harris and Cory Booker on anti-lynching bill
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/04/rand-paul-anti-lynching-bill-301617
IIRC the latter is considerably more than the former.
https://www.mcdonalds.com/gb/en-gb/good-to-know/about-our-food/beef.html
Boris has lost me, but I think many on here see Starmer as a messiah and he is far from that, though he is a huge relief from the toxic days of Corbyn
"Now that the trend for deaths with coronavirus has been falling in Britain for six weeks, do you think the NHS should immediately restore all of the services it closed down indefinitely? [Yes|No]"
Whoever here wrote of "national religion" was right. It might be posited that for many citizens ritualised clapping is not conducive to critical thinking.
The real problem is Boris is crap at PMQs, especially post COVID, where reading questions off a screen and giving a coherent answer seems incredibly taxing.
Under the "Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002" almost all fresh produce - including chicken - must carry a Mandatory Country of Origin label. This has been reaffirmed by several amendments to the acts - the most recent in 2016.
The really funny bit is that it was Canada who took the US to the WTO to claim that the mCOOL laws were counter to free trade and should be outlawed. The Canadians won as far as Beef and Pork are concerned but the list of foodstuffs that have to carry the mCOOL under US Federal law currently includes fresh fruits, raw vegetables, fish, shellfish, muscle cuts and ground lamb, chicken, goat, peanuts, pecans, ginseng, and macadamia nuts.
So no, the US will not be insisting that there cannot be Country of Origin labels. In fact their own laws make it mandatory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9hFEFEEDuE&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR3QGlzmy-zFN0cYMoNNuath4HbTQSq3wxvz4lhwcDhl1UvpNM8I0eNemys
I agree though on cheaper chicken shops (when not laundering drug money...)
A lot of processed chicken sold in this country comes from Thailand etc already.
Again.
https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1268628680797978625
I think he might just pull it off...
https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1268628683952185346?s=19
https://twitter.com/leahmcelrath/status/1268640754139836417
For the time being, the vast majority of MPs should be able to work from home -- as has been show to be possible and workable.
NEW THREAD
The poll leads we were seeing two months ago were always artificial and were never going to last. The vote shares we are now being presented with are much more realistic with some return to normal politics having been accelerated by recent perceptions of Government mismanagement. On the basis of earlier Parliaments,however, there must be a strong possibility - particularly given the economic storms which lie ahead - that the polls are continuing to flatter the Tories relative to their likely performance in 2024. When we look back to other big election victories from 2001 - 1997 - 1987 - 1966 - and 1959, the ruling party was doing a fair bit better six months into those Parliaments than it was able to sustain at the subsequent General Election several years later.
Current betting market prices, five months out, imply a probability of 93.1% Biden or Trump, and 94.4% Biden, Trump, or Clinton (sic)! What would Nassim Taleb suggest?
First comment on my FB page (yes I'm that old) from a friend who has just been made redundant after 16 years having been furloughed.
Entertainment, marquees.