So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Given that excise duty and VAT on the duty is about £4.50, that doesn't leave them a lot of margin to actually make and sell the stuff!
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Teacher's of course find out.
But at the end, you find Bells.
And one that's so bad it's drinkers have a famous, Grouse.
People "on the right", yes. And, as you say it is mostly just reactionary to the left's obsession.
Phew, so it's still the left's faults reely. All's right with the world.
- Yes it's just trolling when it's them. Don't mean nothing by it. Bit of a laugh.
What exactly are you trying to imply they mean? Are you saying being pro-Israel is "white supremacy"?
No! - Just that many white supremacists ARE very pro Israel.
No, they aren't. If you are pro-jewish you are not white supremacist, they are incompatible.
Just lefty antisemites love playing with/demeaning words to call other people white supremacists who aren't, much like calling anyone you disagree with Nazis. E.g. you called Katie Hopkins a white supremacist. No, she isn't. She's a shock-jock and a baiter, but you are demeaning the term.
Now we've got an authority on the subject, can you analyse Griffin's period of supporting Israel? Was he a white supremacist before, stopped being a white supremacist while he was Israel's pal and then started being a white supremacist again when he decided he didn't like Israel any more?
'BNP leader Nick Griffin, friend of Israel?
For supporters of Israel, it was the shot heard around the UK.
Last night, BNP leader Nick Griffin told the entire country on Question Time that the BNP was the only party to support Israel in its war "against the terrorists" during Operation Cast Lead.'
I think you've just proven my point that white supremacists don't actually like Israel or Jews. If I remember correctly Griffin did a few things that riled the rank-and-file, this included.
It's the "no true white supremacist" argument!
Well sure, if you want to believe Nick Griffin cares about Israel I guess his support of Corbyn means something too.
Or alternatively, and more likely, he's just saying stuff he thinks will play well at the time.
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Weird thing to do. What did it taste like after being in your boots?
SNP are full of wokes at the top end , he knows as much about the law as I do , hence his dire Race hate debacle bill. What does he expect when over 96% of people are white right enough, would be strange indeed if all the posts were filled with non whites. Pretty dumb statement.
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Weird thing to do. What did it taste like after being in your boots?
Given how peaty tasting that stuff is, I reckon you would be hard pressed to notice and change in taste...
As opposed to the hard-left activists who are the official, American ones!
Who are the people organising the demos etc in the UK?
From my casual observation they are (a) white (b) female (c) 20-30 (d) on furlough from a London 'creative' job (e) back home living with their parents and, crucially, (f) bored silly.
You've squeezed a lot of prejudices into quite a compact space there. Hats off!
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Weird thing to do. What did it taste like after being in your boots?
Given how peaty tasting that stuff is, I reckon you would be hard pressed to notice and change in taste...
I suppose that might depend on how often @Malmesbury changes his socks.
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Teacher's of course find out.
But at the end, you find Bells.
And one that's so bad it's drinkers have a famous, Grouse.
As opposed to the hard-left activists who are the official, American ones!
Who are the people organising the demos etc in the UK?
From my casual observation they are (a) white (b) female (c) 20-30 (d) on furlough from a London 'creative' job (e) back home living with their parents and, crucially, (f) bored silly.
You've squeezed a lot of prejudices into quite a compact space there. Hats off!
It could be prejudice I agree. Alternatively it could be just correct?
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
get out of London pronto
Except we have oft heard you wax lyrical about your great times here. ☺
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Teacher's of course find out.
But at the end, you find Bells.
And one that's so bad it's drinkers have a famous, Grouse.
I would not say that yet. What I would say is that the latest numbers have some *indication* of an uptick. only time will tell.
The past four or so upticks have come and gone. The problem with the R number when there are a very low number of cases is that it swings around wildly. Didn't Germany get to 3 in recent weeks because of one localised outbreak?
It was 2.7 I think, which is curiously close to that number special to exponential mathematics.
But you're right that this estiamte is sensitive to small denominators and natural variation. This number R0 was not initially intended as a variable, but a constant relating to how virilant the virus is in a mathematical model. It seems that this has mutated into R which is a time variable parameter relating to the practical transmission value and is subject to the vaguaries of lockdown and demonstrations etc.
Indeed -
That's a misleading graph because the figures for 26 and 27th June are very incomplete and will be increased substantially over the next few days.
The graph makes it look as if it has almost died out and could lead to undue complacency.
For comparison, on the worst day of the outbreak in the UK, we recorded 8,600 cases, and then it fell away quite steeply. Florida is still going up fast.
A disaster is potentially unfolding there
I wonder if it's too late for Trump to get behind masks. Perhaps if they were red masks, with Make America Great Again on them.
I'm really not clear on the right wing objection to masks. You protect yourself with a gun, why not protect yourself with a mask? It has the added benefit of stopping the deep state from applying facial recognition software on you successfully. Lockdown - I completely see the objection to. Masks, not so much.
Indeed: especially as masks dramatically reduce the risk of needing lockdown.
Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:
1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.
2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.
But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Weird thing to do. What did it taste like after being in your boots?
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
What they did, I don't get from your post, but sadly 'Whiskey' is the far more common spelling down in England (and probably the worse informed parts of Scotland) now. Prevalence of Jack Daniels. I make this correction several times a week when I'm at work.
People "on the right", yes. And, as you say it is mostly just reactionary to the left's obsession.
Phew, so it's still the left's faults reely. All's right with the world.
- Yes it's just trolling when it's them. Don't mean nothing by it. Bit of a laugh.
What exactly are you trying to imply they mean? Are you saying being pro-Israel is "white supremacy"?
No! - Just that many white supremacists ARE very pro Israel.
No, they aren't. If you are pro-jewish you are not white supremacist, they are incompatible.
Just lefty antisemites love playing with/demeaning words to call other people white supremacists who aren't, much like calling anyone you disagree with Nazis. E.g. you called Katie Hopkins a white supremacist. No, she isn't. She's a shock-jock and a baiter, but you are demeaning the term.
Now we've got an authority on the subject, can you analyse Griffin's period of supporting Israel? Was he a white supremacist before, stopped being a white supremacist while he was Israel's pal and then started being a white supremacist again when he decided he didn't like Israel any more?
'BNP leader Nick Griffin, friend of Israel?
For supporters of Israel, it was the shot heard around the UK.
Last night, BNP leader Nick Griffin told the entire country on Question Time that the BNP was the only party to support Israel in its war "against the terrorists" during Operation Cast Lead.'
I think you've just proven my point that white supremacists don't actually like Israel or Jews. If I remember correctly Griffin did a few things that riled the rank-and-file, this included.
It's the "no true white supremacist" argument!
Well sure, if you want to believe Nick Griffin cares about Israel I guess his support of Corbyn means something too.
Or alternatively, and more likely, he's just saying stuff he thinks will play well at the time.
I think a lot of high profile extremists are mainly in it for ego and money.
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
The M25 doesn't generate a forcefield preventing "interesting" people from moving beyond it.
True, in a lower density living environment there will be fewer people to meet, but that has its advantages as well as its drawbacks. Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime. Also, under present circumstances, much less likelihood of catching a potentially lethal infectious disease.
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Nice thought. I will choose to believe this about Morrison's offering.
People "on the right", yes. And, as you say it is mostly just reactionary to the left's obsession.
Phew, so it's still the left's faults reely. All's right with the world.
- Yes it's just trolling when it's them. Don't mean nothing by it. Bit of a laugh.
What exactly are you trying to imply they mean? Are you saying being pro-Israel is "white supremacy"?
No! - Just that many white supremacists ARE very pro Israel.
No, they aren't. If you are pro-jewish you are not white supremacist, they are incompatible.
Just lefty antisemites love playing with/demeaning words to call other people white supremacists who aren't, much like calling anyone you disagree with Nazis. E.g. you called Katie Hopkins a white supremacist. No, she isn't. She's a shock-jock and a baiter, but you are demeaning the term.
Now we've got an authority on the subject, can you analyse Griffin's period of supporting Israel? Was he a white supremacist before, stopped being a white supremacist while he was Israel's pal and then started being a white supremacist again when he decided he didn't like Israel any more?
'BNP leader Nick Griffin, friend of Israel?
For supporters of Israel, it was the shot heard around the UK.
Last night, BNP leader Nick Griffin told the entire country on Question Time that the BNP was the only party to support Israel in its war "against the terrorists" during Operation Cast Lead.'
I think you've just proven my point that white supremacists don't actually like Israel or Jews. If I remember correctly Griffin did a few things that riled the rank-and-file, this included.
It's the "no true white supremacist" argument!
Well sure, if you want to believe Nick Griffin cares about Israel I guess his support of Corbyn means something too.
Or alternatively, and more likely, he's just saying stuff he thinks will play well at the time.
I think a lot of high profile extremists are mainly in it for ego and money.
Tommy Robinson was doing very nicely thankful from donations until the major processing platforms banned him.
SNP are full of wokes at the top end , he knows as much about the law as I do , hence his dire Race hate debacle bill. What does he expect when over 96% of people are white right enough, would be strange indeed if all the posts were filled with non whites. Pretty dumb statement.
Oh dear no - you think they will settle for 4%? The wookies* will want at least 25% of posts to be filled as they see fit....
I would not say that yet. What I would say is that the latest numbers have some *indication* of an uptick. only time will tell.
The past four or so upticks have come and gone. The problem with the R number when there are a very low number of cases is that it swings around wildly. Didn't Germany get to 3 in recent weeks because of one localised outbreak?
It was 2.7 I think, which is curiously close to that number special to exponential mathematics.
But you're right that this estiamte is sensitive to small denominators and natural variation. This number R0 was not initially intended as a variable, but a constant relating to how virilant the virus is in a mathematical model. It seems that this has mutated into R which is a time variable parameter relating to the practical transmission value and is subject to the vaguaries of lockdown and demonstrations etc.
Indeed -
That's a misleading graph because the figures for 26 and 27th June are very incomplete and will be increased substantially over the next few days.
The graph makes it look as if it has almost died out and could lead to undue complacency.
It also doesn't include any care home or home deaths in England.
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
The M25 doesn't generate a forcefield preventing "interesting" people from moving beyond it.
True, in a lower density living environment there will be fewer people to meet, but that has its advantages as well as its drawbacks. Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime. Also, under present circumstances, much less likelihood of catching a potentially lethal infectious disease.
I thought the whole car keys thing was more common in the countryside.
SNP are full of wokes at the top end , he knows as much about the law as I do , hence his dire Race hate debacle bill. What does he expect when over 96% of people are white right enough, would be strange indeed if all the posts were filled with non whites. Pretty dumb statement.
Oh dear no - you think they will settle for 4%? The wookies* will want at least 25% of posts to be filled as they see fit....
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
The M25 doesn't generate a forcefield preventing "interesting" people from moving beyond it.
True, in a lower density living environment there will be fewer people to meet, but that has its advantages as well as its drawbacks. Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime. Also, under present circumstances, much less likelihood of catching a potentially lethal infectious disease.
I thought the whole car keys thing was more common in the countryside.
Hmmm
"Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime....less likelihood of catching a ... infectious disease."
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Nice thought. I will choose to believe this about Morrison's offering.
I would not say that yet. What I would say is that the latest numbers have some *indication* of an uptick. only time will tell.
The past four or so upticks have come and gone. The problem with the R number when there are a very low number of cases is that it swings around wildly. Didn't Germany get to 3 in recent weeks because of one localised outbreak?
It was 2.7 I think, which is curiously close to that number special to exponential mathematics.
But you're right that this estiamte is sensitive to small denominators and natural variation. This number R0 was not initially intended as a variable, but a constant relating to how virilant the virus is in a mathematical model. It seems that this has mutated into R which is a time variable parameter relating to the practical transmission value and is subject to the vaguaries of lockdown and demonstrations etc.
Indeed -
That's a misleading graph because the figures for 26 and 27th June are very incomplete and will be increased substantially over the next few days.
The graph makes it look as if it has almost died out and could lead to undue complacency.
It also doesn't include any care home or home deaths in England.
apologies, i made a mistakie there, I think it does.
I would not say that yet. What I would say is that the latest numbers have some *indication* of an uptick. only time will tell.
The past four or so upticks have come and gone. The problem with the R number when there are a very low number of cases is that it swings around wildly. Didn't Germany get to 3 in recent weeks because of one localised outbreak?
It was 2.7 I think, which is curiously close to that number special to exponential mathematics.
But you're right that this estiamte is sensitive to small denominators and natural variation. This number R0 was not initially intended as a variable, but a constant relating to how virilant the virus is in a mathematical model. It seems that this has mutated into R which is a time variable parameter relating to the practical transmission value and is subject to the vaguaries of lockdown and demonstrations etc.
Indeed -
That's a misleading graph because the figures for 26 and 27th June are very incomplete and will be increased substantially over the next few days.
The graph makes it look as if it has almost died out and could lead to undue complacency.
It also doesn't include any care home or home deaths in England.
It's Pillar 1 *cases*.
All data by specimen date has back dating issues. In every country. Hence 7 day (or more) moving averages.
I thought we had gone through all of this about 2 months ago? Or do we have to add a warning sticker to every graph?
Betting on far from city, train or car to work, car everywhere else, type of lifestyles, is betting on easy climate change mitigation. Just a thought.
Yes, depends very much on how quickly we can migrate to battery electric and hydrogen powered road transport - although it's also hard to predict how living patterns for people inhabiting smaller towns, and who no longer need to commute, might change in a direction that helps to cut pollution. More localised living patterns - using local shops, visiting local restaurants, having more goods delivered through virtual retail rather than loads of people making family car journeys into cities or to retail parks - could also have a meaningful effect.
you would hope the numpties running it know what they are doing, but most are owned by global businesses now so its just quick buck thinking.
The Japanese are very good at what they do, for the most part. It would stand to reason that they produce whisky with the same precision and care that they produce consumer electronics. They won't ever replace Scotch whisky in volume, or prestige. They also don't ever produce blended Scotch because the companies don't have the same attitude toward working together that Scotch producers have.
The trend toward non age statement whiskies has harmed the credibility of the Scotch whisky industry, but this trend is receding. I have some distilleries I've never warmed to, but an expensive bottle that is poor whisky is rare - if you've tasted one that you felt was 'turps-like', it was probably heavily peated (not to everyone's taste) or cask strength (typically 50-60% ABV), which needs careful sipping to get used to it, or a few drops of water.
The BBC is banging on about being able to go to Spain or Greece on holiday, but I have absolutely no intention of going to either place in the summer. Will we be able to go somewhere more interesting (or temperate)? I have a working plan to do a train trip round Transylvania in Sept or Oct, but I admit to a sneaky plan to get away for a few days before the school holidays. Maybe Germany if available, although it's a bit complicated as each Land has different rules.
Regardng different rules in each state in Germany: The largish differences tend to be in details like whether schools return to normal after the school holidays, and max number of people allowed to meet outside, which are not priorities for tourists. The basics like distancing is still required, wear masks in shops and on public transport are very similar betweens states and you will have no practical problems if you look up the rules for the first state that you visit, and stick to those. The big problem with travelling in Autumn is anything could happen between now and then.
Oh and of course stay clear well clear of any Hotspot-lockdowns like Gütersloh. But predicting where those will be in 2-3 months is imposible.
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Nice thought. I will choose to believe this about Morrison's offering.
Apparently the producers make quite a lot of effort to hide this, when they do it.
As ever, the best drink in the world is the one *you* want in your glass.
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
The M25 doesn't generate a forcefield preventing "interesting" people from moving beyond it.
True, in a lower density living environment there will be fewer people to meet, but that has its advantages as well as its drawbacks. Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime. Also, under present circumstances, much less likelihood of catching a potentially lethal infectious disease.
I thought the whole car keys thing was more common in the countryside.
Not insofar as I'm aware, though granted I'm not exactly the ideal person to be asking about wife swapping parties.
As opposed to the hard-left activists who are the official, American ones!
Who are the people organising the demos etc in the UK?
From my casual observation they are (a) white (b) female (c) 20-30 (d) on furlough from a London 'creative' job (e) back home living with their parents and, crucially, (f) bored silly.
You've squeezed a lot of prejudices into quite a compact space there. Hats off!
It could be prejudice I agree. Alternatively it could be just correct?
Well it could be - but that would be a fortunate coincidence.
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
The M25 doesn't generate a forcefield preventing "interesting" people from moving beyond it.
True, in a lower density living environment there will be fewer people to meet, but that has its advantages as well as its drawbacks. Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime. Also, under present circumstances, much less likelihood of catching a potentially lethal infectious disease.
I thought the whole car keys thing was more common in the countryside.
Of cuorse, lots people who live in London and other large cities have no car.
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Nice thought. I will choose to believe this about Morrison's offering.
Well, they don't make it themselves.
I happen to be out of it right now but next time I will study the label for clues on origin and method of manufacture.
I would not say that yet. What I would say is that the latest numbers have some *indication* of an uptick. only time will tell.
The past four or so upticks have come and gone. The problem with the R number when there are a very low number of cases is that it swings around wildly. Didn't Germany get to 3 in recent weeks because of one localised outbreak?
It was 2.7 I think, which is curiously close to that number special to exponential mathematics.
But you're right that this estiamte is sensitive to small denominators and natural variation. This number R0 was not initially intended as a variable, but a constant relating to how virilant the virus is in a mathematical model. It seems that this has mutated into R which is a time variable parameter relating to the practical transmission value and is subject to the vaguaries of lockdown and demonstrations etc.
Indeed -
That's a misleading graph because the figures for 26 and 27th June are very incomplete and will be increased substantially over the next few days.
The graph makes it look as if it has almost died out and could lead to undue complacency.
It also doesn't include any care home or home deaths in England.
It's Pillar 1 *cases*.
All data by specimen date has back dating issues. In every country. Hence 7 day (or more) moving averages.
I thought we had gone through all of this about 2 months ago? Or do we have to add a warning sticker to every graph?
I agree that you need a seven day moving average but you should ignore the last four days data as grossly incomplete. That is what I do in my graphs and I make it clear in the heading. Otherwise it is misleading.
Incidentally I am an optimist with regard to the virus. I don't think there will be second wave. I think a significant proportion of the population have innate immunity which is why the disease seems to "fizzle out" when circa 20% exhibit anti-bodies which is insufficent for "herd immunity".
So I am not promoting a scare story with regard to London. I am just reporting the data as I find it every day. I think it is significant that cases in London are rising a bit. It might be a temporary blip caused by the demos or whatever, or a more serious feature caused by London behaviour. We'll see.
For comparison, on the worst day of the outbreak in the UK, we recorded 8,600 cases, and then it fell away quite steeply. Florida is still going up fast.
A disaster is potentially unfolding there
I wonder if it's too late for Trump to get behind masks. Perhaps if they were red masks, with Make America Great Again on them.
I'm really not clear on the right wing objection to masks. You protect yourself with a gun, why not protect yourself with a mask? It has the added benefit of stopping the deep state from applying facial recognition software on you successfully. Lockdown - I completely see the objection to. Masks, not so much.
Indeed: especially as masks dramatically reduce the risk of needing lockdown.
Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:
1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.
2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.
But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
I wouldn't quite put 2 down to vanity. It is more a No. 1 Alpha Male image. The top dog is showig his fallability if he has to wear a mask.
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
get out of London pronto
Except we have oft heard you wax lyrical about your great times here. ☺
Yes as a youngster in late 70's early 80's but not full time and was in hotels on expenses so a drinks fest. Recent past visits have not been so impressive , bit more swanky but not so nice.
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Nice thought. I will choose to believe this about Morrison's offering.
Well, they don't make it themselves.
I happen to be out of it right now but next time I will study the label for clues on origin and method of manufacture.
It will be a blended Scotch whisky, which is a combination of single malts (a very low percentage of the overall blend in bottle costing £6.95) and single grain whiskies. Each component whisky will have been matured for a minimum of 3 years in an oak barrel in Scotland (though it doesn't have to be bottled in Scotland), and with a cheap blend, they will make sure that none of it has spent longer in a cask than strictly necessary. Time is money. That doesn't mean it will be terrible though - it will be bland, vanilla tasting, probably a bit spirity due to the high grain whisky component and not having been matured for very long. The colour will have been artificially assisted.
People "on the right", yes. And, as you say it is mostly just reactionary to the left's obsession.
Phew, so it's still the left's faults reely. All's right with the world.
- Yes it's just trolling when it's them. Don't mean nothing by it. Bit of a laugh.
What exactly are you trying to imply they mean? Are you saying being pro-Israel is "white supremacy"?
No! - Just that many white supremacists ARE very pro Israel.
No, they aren't. If you are pro-jewish you are not white supremacist, they are incompatible.
Just lefty antisemites love playing with/demeaning words to call other people white supremacists who aren't, much like calling anyone you disagree with Nazis. E.g. you called Katie Hopkins a white supremacist. No, she isn't. She's a shock-jock and a baiter, but you are demeaning the term.
Now we've got an authority on the subject, can you analyse Griffin's period of supporting Israel? Was he a white supremacist before, stopped being a white supremacist while he was Israel's pal and then started being a white supremacist again when he decided he didn't like Israel any more?
'BNP leader Nick Griffin, friend of Israel?
For supporters of Israel, it was the shot heard around the UK.
Last night, BNP leader Nick Griffin told the entire country on Question Time that the BNP was the only party to support Israel in its war "against the terrorists" during Operation Cast Lead.'
I think you've just proven my point that white supremacists don't actually like Israel or Jews. If I remember correctly Griffin did a few things that riled the rank-and-file, this included.
It's the "no true white supremacist" argument!
Well sure, if you want to believe Nick Griffin cares about Israel I guess his support of Corbyn means something too.
Or alternatively, and more likely, he's just saying stuff he thinks will play well at the time.
I think a lot of high profile extremists are mainly in it for ego and money.
Tommy Robinson was doing very nicely thankful from donations until the major processing platforms banned him.
Indeed. I often doubt his sincerity. Then again he can be very convincing when he gets nasty. It does come over as the real him. So perhaps it is.
For me these people are worse if they DON'T believe what they're saying.
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Nice thought. I will choose to believe this about Morrison's offering.
Well, they don't make it themselves.
I happen to be out of it right now but next time I will study the label for clues on origin and method of manufacture.
If Scotch it has to have been bottled in Scotland and minimum 3 years in a barrel.
The BBC is banging on about being able to go to Spain or Greece on holiday, but I have absolutely no intention of going to either place in the summer. Will we be able to go somewhere more interesting (or temperate)? I have a working plan to do a train trip round Transylvania in Sept or Oct, but I admit to a sneaky plan to get away for a few days before the school holidays. Maybe Germany if available, although it's a bit complicated as each Land has different rules.
Regardng different rules in each state in Germany: The largish differences tend to be in details like whether schools return to normal after the school holidays, and max number of people allowed to meet outside, which are not priorities for tourists. The basics like distancing is still required, wear masks in shops and on public transport are very similar betweens states and you will have no practical problems if you look up the rules for the first state that you visit, and stick to those. The big problem with travelling in Autumn is anything could happen between now and then.
Oh and of course stay clear well clear of any Hotspot-lockdowns like Gütersloh. But predicting where those will be in 2-3 months is imposible.
Dank' schoen. Are bar & restaurant regulations fairly uniform then? One Berlin craft bar I follow on Facebook has posted its new operating procedures and it looks fairly civilised. Although, much as I love Berlin, I'm thinking I should go somewhere new, as museums and other attractions should be easier (and more socially distanced) and would reduce the reliance on bar-hopping to amuse me, which might be a bit of a pain in the arse. Meat-packing plants are not on the itinerary ;-) In terms of going somewhere in the autumn, quite - I am not making plans, and will book independently and short notice, but I have an itinerary to put into place quickly if feasible.
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Nice thought. I will choose to believe this about Morrison's offering.
Well, they don't make it themselves.
I happen to be out of it right now but next time I will study the label for clues on origin and method of manufacture.
If Scotch it has to have been bottled in Scotland and minimum 3 years in a barrel.
Blended doesn't have to be bottled in Scotland. Sad I know!
I would not say that yet. What I would say is that the latest numbers have some *indication* of an uptick. only time will tell.
The past four or so upticks have come and gone. The problem with the R number when there are a very low number of cases is that it swings around wildly. Didn't Germany get to 3 in recent weeks because of one localised outbreak?
It was 2.7 I think, which is curiously close to that number special to exponential mathematics.
But you're right that this estiamte is sensitive to small denominators and natural variation. This number R0 was not initially intended as a variable, but a constant relating to how virilant the virus is in a mathematical model. It seems that this has mutated into R which is a time variable parameter relating to the practical transmission value and is subject to the vaguaries of lockdown and demonstrations etc.
Indeed -
That's a misleading graph because the figures for 26 and 27th June are very incomplete and will be increased substantially over the next few days.
The graph makes it look as if it has almost died out and could lead to undue complacency.
It also doesn't include any care home or home deaths in England.
It's Pillar 1 *cases*.
All data by specimen date has back dating issues. In every country. Hence 7 day (or more) moving averages.
I thought we had gone through all of this about 2 months ago? Or do we have to add a warning sticker to every graph?
I agree that you need a seven day moving average but you should ignore the last four days data as grossly incomplete. That is what I do in my graphs and I make it clear in the heading. Otherwise it is misleading.
Incidentally I am an optimist with regard to the virus. I don't think there will be second wave. I think a significant proportion of the population have innate immunity which is why the disease seems to "fizzle out" when circa 20% exhibit anti-bodies which is insufficent for "herd immunity".
So I am not promoting a scare story with regard to London. I am just reporting the data as I find it every day. I think it is significant that cases in London are rising a bit. It might be a temporary blip caused by the demos or whatever, or a more serious feature caused by London behaviour. We'll see.
Chopping off the last x days is fiddling with data - which I don't like either.
It is too easy to slip down the slope of "if I get rid of *this*, it will be better..."
As to second waves... We are having a series of waves, right now. In every country.
The question is how high they rise, and how wide the geographical spread.
Is this guy really a Minister for the SNP??? His hatred just oozes. Extraordinary.
If this was in Westminster it would make headline news, I think
Presumably the next bit is somebody asking the silly twot wtf the SNP Government have been doing since 2007, and suggesting that they look in the mirror?
In the period the Met have taken their BAME percentage from about 5% to 13%.
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
The M25 doesn't generate a forcefield preventing "interesting" people from moving beyond it.
True, in a lower density living environment there will be fewer people to meet, but that has its advantages as well as its drawbacks. Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime. Also, under present circumstances, much less likelihood of catching a potentially lethal infectious disease.
I think you want to be in London as long as you are still looking for drama and the potential for big changes in your life.
Once you feel "set" and ready to settle for a comfortable groove to the grave you will be ready to leave and it makes sense to leave.
Is this guy really a Minister for the SNP??? His hatred just oozes. Extraordinary.
If this was in Westminster it would make headline news, I think
Except there's almost no interest in devolved politics in the main network news programmes or the UK-wide national newspapers. The occasional controversy achieves cut-through but the reality is that almost nobody in England who's not moved here from one of the devolved nations or has a very keen interest in politics would be able to name more than a small handful of devolved politicians. Sturgeon and Salmond are the obvious ones, some will be familiar with Arlene Foster and maybe one or two names like Gerry Adams from the peace process era. That's about it.
It's also why Nicola Sturgeon tends to poll well in GB-wide approval ratings - about 90% of the people being asked the questions don't know anything about her apart from her being in favour of independence for Scotland and, perhaps, that she comes across professionally on the television. They don't live in Scotland and are therefore unaffected by and almost entirely unaware of its Government's actions, and any of the successes or failures arising therefrom.
I'm not sure to what degree this ignorance is a cause of the gradual rotting away of the Union or a consequence thereof.
Betting on far from city, train or car to work, car everywhere else, type of lifestyles, is betting on easy climate change mitigation. Just a thought.
Yes, depends very much on how quickly we can migrate to battery electric and hydrogen powered road transport - although it's also hard to predict how living patterns for people inhabiting smaller towns, and who no longer need to commute, might change in a direction that helps to cut pollution. More localised living patterns - using local shops, visiting local restaurants, having more goods delivered through virtual retail rather than loads of people making family car journeys into cities or to retail parks - could also have a meaningful effect.
Battery electric cars are more efficient than trains - unless the trains are really, really full... Hmmmmmm.....
I would not say that yet. What I would say is that the latest numbers have some *indication* of an uptick. only time will tell.
The past four or so upticks have come and gone. The problem with the R number when there are a very low number of cases is that it swings around wildly. Didn't Germany get to 3 in recent weeks because of one localised outbreak?
It was 2.7 I think, which is curiously close to that number special to exponential mathematics.
But you're right that this estiamte is sensitive to small denominators and natural variation. This number R0 was not initially intended as a variable, but a constant relating to how virilant the virus is in a mathematical model. It seems that this has mutated into R which is a time variable parameter relating to the practical transmission value and is subject to the vaguaries of lockdown and demonstrations etc.
Indeed -
That's a misleading graph because the figures for 26 and 27th June are very incomplete and will be increased substantially over the next few days.
The graph makes it look as if it has almost died out and could lead to undue complacency.
It also doesn't include any care home or home deaths in England.
It's Pillar 1 *cases*.
All data by specimen date has back dating issues. In every country. Hence 7 day (or more) moving averages.
I thought we had gone through all of this about 2 months ago? Or do we have to add a warning sticker to every graph?
I agree that you need a seven day moving average but you should ignore the last four days data as grossly incomplete. That is what I do in my graphs and I make it clear in the heading. Otherwise it is misleading.
Incidentally I am an optimist with regard to the virus. I don't think there will be second wave. I think a significant proportion of the population have innate immunity which is why the disease seems to "fizzle out" when circa 20% exhibit anti-bodies which is insufficent for "herd immunity".
So I am not promoting a scare story with regard to London. I am just reporting the data as I find it every day. I think it is significant that cases in London are rising a bit. It might be a temporary blip caused by the demos or whatever, or a more serious feature caused by London behaviour. We'll see.
Chopping off the last x days is fiddling with data - which I don't like either.
It is too easy to slip down the slope of "if I get rid of *this*, it will be better..."
As to second waves... We are having a series of waves, right now. In every country.
The question is how high they rise, and how wide the geographical spread.
There is very good reason to ignore the last few days data as it is grossly misleading. It is not fiddling or a slippery slope.
The waves in the USA, for example, are first waves in different parts of the country at different times. There may be local flare ups (eg meat processing in Angelsey) but these do not qualify as second waves. Second waves are similar to the first wave in magnitude affecting the same area eg "spanish" flu. I don't think that is going to happen.
As we are discussing alcoholic beverages... I recently bough a half case from Naked Wines. I think they're quite nice, but as I only paid £5 a bottle I'm probably easy to please. Does anyone have any opinions on them, or is there a better source of a semi-regular mixed case or half case? I don't want a monthly subscription as I don't drink enough at home (in normal times)
you would hope the numpties running it know what they are doing, but most are owned by global businesses now so its just quick buck thinking.
The Japanese are very good at what they do, for the most part. It would stand to reason that they produce whisky with the same precision and care that they produce consumer electronics. They won't ever replace Scotch whisky in volume, or prestige. They also don't ever produce blended Scotch because the companies don't have the same attitude toward working together that Scotch producers have.
The trend toward non age statement whiskies has harmed the credibility of the Scotch whisky industry, but this trend is receding. I have some distilleries I've never warmed to, but an expensive bottle that is poor whisky is rare - if you've tasted one that you felt was 'turps-like', it was probably heavily peated (not to everyone's taste) or cask strength (typically 50-60% ABV), which needs careful sipping to get used to it, or a few drops of water.
Was not me lucky, I have not had any bad ones , as you say some of the peaty ones are an acquired taste. Some years ago my wife got me a nice 50 year old Glen Grant on my 50th birthday , it was really nice , costs £2000 pounds a bottle nowadays so not much chance I will be getting another one , I have one or two nips left and have one now and again when it takes my fancy.
"Hate" is obviously way too strong, and he was right to apologise, but JK Rowling does come across as viewing the issue to be much simpler than it is. She could have found space in nine tweets to acknowledge that discrimination against transgender people is a serious issue (or for that matter that the proportion of domestic abuse victims who are male is far from negligible), and that this discrimination often turns to hatred and even violence.
There's no smoking gun, but she has consistently come across as intolerant on the issue. Maybe she can be excused this due to her own experiences. Nevertheless, considering the profile she has, we shouldn't blame those with similarly terrible experiences who speak out against her.
I confess I don't know the nuances of the trans-TERF debate, even though I do try. I feel like an American realy trying to understand cricket.
I therefore don't feel confident enough to express a forthright opinion. I merely observe that is is a very vicious battle
I too know little on the topic other than they seem to be vicious bunch and hunt down anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Rowling was correct and no-one with bollocks should be in womens changing areas, fine if they have had their tackle removed , otherwise it is open to abuse by men. If that is a controversial view then so be it.
Lets have a fighting debate on a really contentious topic - Japanese Whisky.
rotgut, you cannot beat the real thing. I see last week Westminster did one to promote Scottish product and termed it the Scottish Whiskey Association, one wonders if deliberate.
I would say that the best Japanese stuff is deserving of respect - they have worked very hard to produce a very good product.
Some of the Scottish producers seem to think that turps in a bottle with a picture of bloke in a kilt, is a product plan.
This is the kind of thinking that gave the Australians and Chileans their opportunity in the wine market. The French were lazy and arrogant. First they gave up the low price sector, then realised that the competition was moving up the rankings...
In business you have 2 choices - either your product will be surpassed by a new product belonging to you, or a new product belonging to someone else.
Not if you are drinking malts though, the cheap stuff is for mixers and cocktails. I only ever drink good stuff so no idea what it is like at bottom end of the market
Morrison's own brand half bottle is £6.95.
There are worse ways to spend £6.95.
Often the own brands in the supermarkets are actually excess production from some big names.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
Nice thought. I will choose to believe this about Morrison's offering.
Well, they don't make it themselves.
I happen to be out of it right now but next time I will study the label for clues on origin and method of manufacture.
If Scotch it has to have been bottled in Scotland and minimum 3 years in a barrel.
Blended doesn't have to be bottled in Scotland. Sad I know!
crazy, at least they still insist it is distilled here, and malts have to be both.
As we are discussing alcoholic beverages... I recently bough a half case from Naked Wines. I think they're quite nice, but as I only paid £5 a bottle I'm probably easy to please. Does anyone have any opinions on them, or is there a better source of a semi-regular mixed case or half case? I don't want a monthly subscription as I don't drink enough at home (in normal times)
Is this guy really a Minister for the SNP??? His hatred just oozes. Extraordinary.
If this was in Westminster it would make headline news, I think
Presumably the next bit is somebody asking the silly twot wtf the SNP Government have been doing since 2007, and suggesting that they look in the mirror?
In the period the Met have taken their BAME percentage from about 5% to 13%.
I'm not sure that this would make a tremendous amount of difference. From my limited understanding of the situation (and I hold my hands up at this juncture - I've just posted on how most people outside of Scotland know nothing of devolved Government; I'm marginally less ignorant but not by much,) the SNP vote seems to rest upon two rather obvious pillars. Firstly, the vast majority of people in favour of independence vote for them because they want to signal their continued support for the project; and secondly, an awful lot of voters think that the SNP policy platform and leadership is best for Scotland. Whether those voters think that the SNP is the best thing since sliced bread or that they are flawed but all the available alternatives are worse hardly matters.
Beyond that, Scottish Labour destroyed its reputation through a series of second and third rate administrations predominantly staffed by politicians who weren't good enough to get selected for winnable Westminster seats - thus helping the SNP to break the party's back and steal most of its voters in the central belt - and that left them facing a hopelessly splintered opposition in which the single largest party are the Tories, who continue to be cordially loathed by a large fraction of the electorate and are therefore stymied by a low ceiling of support.
As long as these circumstances prevail the Scottish Government can get away with almost anything.
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
The M25 doesn't generate a forcefield preventing "interesting" people from moving beyond it.
True, in a lower density living environment there will be fewer people to meet, but that has its advantages as well as its drawbacks. Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime. Also, under present circumstances, much less likelihood of catching a potentially lethal infectious disease.
If large companies are actually serious about work-from-home, and prepared to ditch the expensive city-centre offices in favour of occasional team meetings, it will lead to the biggest transformation in living arrangements in decades.
For years now, technologists have looked forward to the day that millions of people can work from anywhere and don’t need to waste several hours a day generating pollution, but companies have always insisted on everyone congregating together in the world’s most expensive real estate at 9am five days a week.
This does present other challenges though, such as railways dependent on season ticket revenue, and even the possibility of people being able to work mainly from abroad and spend fewer than 90 days per year in the UK - thereby avoiding UK income tax entirely. Plenty of Brits in the Middle East do this already.
Betting on far from city, train or car to work, car everywhere else, type of lifestyles, is betting on easy climate change mitigation. Just a thought.
Yes, depends very much on how quickly we can migrate to battery electric and hydrogen powered road transport - although it's also hard to predict how living patterns for people inhabiting smaller towns, and who no longer need to commute, might change in a direction that helps to cut pollution. More localised living patterns - using local shops, visiting local restaurants, having more goods delivered through virtual retail rather than loads of people making family car journeys into cities or to retail parks - could also have a meaningful effect.
Battery electric cars are more efficient than trains - unless the trains are really, really full... Hmmmmmm.....
An electrically powered train only becomes as clean as not commuting at all when the entire electricity supply has been decarbonised, and we're some way short of that. Best to stick to not commuting at all, which is what an awful lot of people will be doing in future.
I would not say that yet. What I would say is that the latest numbers have some *indication* of an uptick. only time will tell.
The past four or so upticks have come and gone. The problem with the R number when there are a very low number of cases is that it swings around wildly. Didn't Germany get to 3 in recent weeks because of one localised outbreak?
It was 2.7 I think, which is curiously close to that number special to exponential mathematics.
But you're right that this estiamte is sensitive to small denominators and natural variation. This number R0 was not initially intended as a variable, but a constant relating to how virilant the virus is in a mathematical model. It seems that this has mutated into R which is a time variable parameter relating to the practical transmission value and is subject to the vaguaries of lockdown and demonstrations etc.
Indeed -
That's a misleading graph because the figures for 26 and 27th June are very incomplete and will be increased substantially over the next few days.
The graph makes it look as if it has almost died out and could lead to undue complacency.
It also doesn't include any care home or home deaths in England.
It's Pillar 1 *cases*.
All data by specimen date has back dating issues. In every country. Hence 7 day (or more) moving averages.
I thought we had gone through all of this about 2 months ago? Or do we have to add a warning sticker to every graph?
I agree that you need a seven day moving average but you should ignore the last four days data as grossly incomplete. That is what I do in my graphs and I make it clear in the heading. Otherwise it is misleading.
Incidentally I am an optimist with regard to the virus. I don't think there will be second wave. I think a significant proportion of the population have innate immunity which is why the disease seems to "fizzle out" when circa 20% exhibit anti-bodies which is insufficent for "herd immunity".
So I am not promoting a scare story with regard to London. I am just reporting the data as I find it every day. I think it is significant that cases in London are rising a bit. It might be a temporary blip caused by the demos or whatever, or a more serious feature caused by London behaviour. We'll see.
Chopping off the last x days is fiddling with data - which I don't like either.
It is too easy to slip down the slope of "if I get rid of *this*, it will be better..."
As to second waves... We are having a series of waves, right now. In every country.
The question is how high they rise, and how wide the geographical spread.
There is very good reason to ignore the last few days data as it is grossly misleading. It is not fiddling or a slippery slope.
The waves in the USA, for example, are first waves in different parts of the country at different times. There may be local flare ups (eg meat processing in Angelsey) but these do not qualify as second waves. Second waves are similar to the first wave in magnitude affecting the same area eg "spanish" flu. I don't think that is going to happen.
Too many people have chopped data too many times for me to be comfortable with that :-(
As to a general second wave, in a country - no one knows. It looks like the US has got one.
As we are discussing alcoholic beverages... I recently bough a half case from Naked Wines. I think they're quite nice, but as I only paid £5 a bottle I'm probably easy to please. Does anyone have any opinions on them, or is there a better source of a semi-regular mixed case or half case? I don't want a monthly subscription as I don't drink enough at home (in normal times)
Laithwaites is excellent
I pick and choose between Laithwaites, Virgin, Naked, Majestic and occasionally Lea and Sandeman. I recently bought two cases from Naked of "luxury" wine with some damage on their labels at half price reduced from £13.99 to £6.99. They are absolutely superb. Mostly reds. Some whites.
It has been FOUR MONTHS since I last rode on the London Underground
#withdrawal
I have been on a train a couple of times recently, and even that seems like a step back towards normality
Planning a trip up to Cambridge the weekend after next. The number of cars parked in our local railway station has shown almost no recovery since peak lockdown in April, which does rather suggest that this should be a low risk activity. We might very well have a carriage all to ourselves.
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
The M25 doesn't generate a forcefield preventing "interesting" people from moving beyond it.
True, in a lower density living environment there will be fewer people to meet, but that has its advantages as well as its drawbacks. Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime. Also, under present circumstances, much less likelihood of catching a potentially lethal infectious disease.
People outside cities are no less interesting than those within.
Is this guy really a Minister for the SNP??? His hatred just oozes. Extraordinary.
If this was in Westminster it would make headline news, I think
Except there's almost no interest in devolved politics in the main network news programmes or the UK-wide national newspapers. The occasional controversy achieves cut-through but the reality is that almost nobody in England who's not moved here from one of the devolved nations or has a very keen interest in politics would be able to name more than a small handful of devolved politicians. Sturgeon and Salmond are the obvious ones, some will be familiar with Arlene Foster and maybe one or two names like Gerry Adams from the peace process era. That's about it.
It's also why Nicola Sturgeon tends to poll well in GB-wide approval ratings - about 90% of the people being asked the questions don't know anything about her apart from her being in favour of independence for Scotland and, perhaps, that she comes across professionally on the television. They don't live in Scotland and are therefore unaffected by and almost entirely unaware of its Government's actions, and any of the successes or failures arising therefrom.
I'm not sure to what degree this ignorance is a cause of the gradual rotting away of the Union or a consequence thereof.
The population of Scotland is almost exactly the same as the population of Yorkshire. I suspect it gets more regional coverage than Yorkshire, and more national coverage too. Its politics is essentially regional and local from a UK point of view, just like where most of us live, in rather ignored parts of England.
Betting on far from city, train or car to work, car everywhere else, type of lifestyles, is betting on easy climate change mitigation. Just a thought.
Yes, depends very much on how quickly we can migrate to battery electric and hydrogen powered road transport - although it's also hard to predict how living patterns for people inhabiting smaller towns, and who no longer need to commute, might change in a direction that helps to cut pollution. More localised living patterns - using local shops, visiting local restaurants, having more goods delivered through virtual retail rather than loads of people making family car journeys into cities or to retail parks - could also have a meaningful effect.
Battery electric cars are more efficient than trains - unless the trains are really, really full... Hmmmmmm.....
An electrically powered train only becomes as clean as not commuting at all when the entire electricity supply has been decarbonised, and we're some way short of that. Best to stick to not commuting at all, which is what an awful lot of people will be doing in future.
It's also worth noting that cheaper, short range battery vehicles are growing popular in rural areas, as the second, runabout car.
Which has a big effect on the assumption that living in the country, where a car is required, is necessarily anti-environmental.
For comparison, on the worst day of the outbreak in the UK, we recorded 8,600 cases, and then it fell away quite steeply. Florida is still going up fast.
A disaster is potentially unfolding there
I wonder if it's too late for Trump to get behind masks. Perhaps if they were red masks, with Make America Great Again on them.
I'm really not clear on the right wing objection to masks. You protect yourself with a gun, why not protect yourself with a mask? It has the added benefit of stopping the deep state from applying facial recognition software on you successfully. Lockdown - I completely see the objection to. Masks, not so much.
Indeed: especially as masks dramatically reduce the risk of needing lockdown.
Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:
1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.
2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.
But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
Masks are hugely uncomfortable, and a very significant social barrier.
I only wear them in close proximity environments in public (like trains or the tube) and I possibly would in a busy office too.
I would not say that yet. What I would say is that the latest numbers have some *indication* of an uptick. only time will tell.
The past four or so upticks have come and gone. The problem with the R number when there are a very low number of cases is that it swings around wildly. Didn't Germany get to 3 in recent weeks because of one localised outbreak?
It was 2.7 I think, which is curiously close to that number special to exponential mathematics.
But you're right that this estiamte is sensitive to small denominators and natural variation. This number R0 was not initially intended as a variable, but a constant relating to how virilant the virus is in a mathematical model. It seems that this has mutated into R which is a time variable parameter relating to the practical transmission value and is subject to the vaguaries of lockdown and demonstrations etc.
Indeed -
That's a misleading graph because the figures for 26 and 27th June are very incomplete and will be increased substantially over the next few days.
The graph makes it look as if it has almost died out and could lead to undue complacency.
It also doesn't include any care home or home deaths in England.
It's Pillar 1 *cases*.
All data by specimen date has back dating issues. In every country. Hence 7 day (or more) moving averages.
I thought we had gone through all of this about 2 months ago? Or do we have to add a warning sticker to every graph?
I agree that you need a seven day moving average but you should ignore the last four days data as grossly incomplete. That is what I do in my graphs and I make it clear in the heading. Otherwise it is misleading.
Incidentally I am an optimist with regard to the virus. I don't think there will be second wave. I think a significant proportion of the population have innate immunity which is why the disease seems to "fizzle out" when circa 20% exhibit anti-bodies which is insufficent for "herd immunity".
So I am not promoting a scare story with regard to London. I am just reporting the data as I find it every day. I think it is significant that cases in London are rising a bit. It might be a temporary blip caused by the demos or whatever, or a more serious feature caused by London behaviour. We'll see.
Chopping off the last x days is fiddling with data - which I don't like either.
It is too easy to slip down the slope of "if I get rid of *this*, it will be better..."
As to second waves... We are having a series of waves, right now. In every country.
The question is how high they rise, and how wide the geographical spread.
There is very good reason to ignore the last few days data as it is grossly misleading. It is not fiddling or a slippery slope.
The waves in the USA, for example, are first waves in different parts of the country at different times. There may be local flare ups (eg meat processing in Angelsey) but these do not qualify as second waves. Second waves are similar to the first wave in magnitude affecting the same area eg "spanish" flu. I don't think that is going to happen.
Too many people have chopped data too many times for me to be comfortable with that :-(
As to a general second wave, in a country - no one knows. It looks like the US has got one.
They are still on the first wave. They unlocked too early.
Is this guy really a Minister for the SNP??? His hatred just oozes. Extraordinary.
If this was in Westminster it would make headline news, I think
Except there's almost no interest in devolved politics in the main network news programmes or the UK-wide national newspapers. The occasional controversy achieves cut-through but the reality is that almost nobody in England who's not moved here from one of the devolved nations or has a very keen interest in politics would be able to name more than a small handful of devolved politicians. Sturgeon and Salmond are the obvious ones, some will be familiar with Arlene Foster and maybe one or two names like Gerry Adams from the peace process era. That's about it.
It's also why Nicola Sturgeon tends to poll well in GB-wide approval ratings - about 90% of the people being asked the questions don't know anything about her apart from her being in favour of independence for Scotland and, perhaps, that she comes across professionally on the television. They don't live in Scotland and are therefore unaffected by and almost entirely unaware of its Government's actions, and any of the successes or failures arising therefrom.
I'm not sure to what degree this ignorance is a cause of the gradual rotting away of the Union or a consequence thereof.
Both.
Most English folk neither know nor care about Scotland. The Union is gradually rotting away through neglect and apathy, and increasingly through straightforward hostility.
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
The M25 doesn't generate a forcefield preventing "interesting" people from moving beyond it.
True, in a lower density living environment there will be fewer people to meet, but that has its advantages as well as its drawbacks. Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime. Also, under present circumstances, much less likelihood of catching a potentially lethal infectious disease.
If large companies are actually serious about work-from-home, and prepared to ditch the expensive city-centre offices in favour of occasional team meetings, it will lead to the biggest transformation in living arrangements in decades.
For years now, technologists have looked forward to the day that millions of people can work from anywhere and don’t need to waste several hours a day generating pollution, but companies have always insisted on everyone congregating together in the world’s most expensive real estate at 9am five days a week.
This does present other challenges though, such as railways dependent on season ticket revenue, and even the possibility of people being able to work mainly from abroad and spend fewer than 90 days per year in the UK - thereby avoiding UK income tax entirely. Plenty of Brits in the Middle East do this already.
A big issue is really fast internet connections in remote areas. Run a remote desktop, a couple of video sessions, and have bandwidth left for the kids Face timing their friends....
This BLM UK isnt the official BLM movement....official BLM has also had issues with anti-Semitism.
I guess just taking their cues from all their reading of Marx they have done.
Thankfully, I sense (at last) that this is petering out a little bit.
The lasting damage will be the voluntary desecration of our cultural heritage by genuflecting (and ignorant) white liberals.
The good news is that many of us will start to see things from a black person's perspective a little bit more, and hopefully a good many more of them will rise up to the top to stop all the dickheadery by the Left.
It has been FOUR MONTHS since I last rode on the London Underground
#withdrawal
I have been on a train a couple of times recently, and even that seems like a step back towards normality
Planning a trip up to Cambridge the weekend after next. The number of cars parked in our local railway station has shown almost no recovery since peak lockdown in April, which does rather suggest that this should be a low risk activity. We might very well have a carriage all to ourselves.
Is this guy really a Minister for the SNP??? His hatred just oozes. Extraordinary.
If this was in Westminster it would make headline news, I think
Except there's almost no interest in devolved politics in the main network news programmes or the UK-wide national newspapers. The occasional controversy achieves cut-through but the reality is that almost nobody in England who's not moved here from one of the devolved nations or has a very keen interest in politics would be able to name more than a small handful of devolved politicians. Sturgeon and Salmond are the obvious ones, some will be familiar with Arlene Foster and maybe one or two names like Gerry Adams from the peace process era. That's about it.
It's also why Nicola Sturgeon tends to poll well in GB-wide approval ratings - about 90% of the people being asked the questions don't know anything about her apart from her being in favour of independence for Scotland and, perhaps, that she comes across professionally on the television. They don't live in Scotland and are therefore unaffected by and almost entirely unaware of its Government's actions, and any of the successes or failures arising therefrom.
I'm not sure to what degree this ignorance is a cause of the gradual rotting away of the Union or a consequence thereof.
Both.
Most English folk neither know nor care about Scotland. The Union is gradually rotting away through neglect and apathy, and increasingly through straightforward hostility.
Arrant nonsense.
There is huge affection and love for Scotland in England.
Is this guy really a Minister for the SNP??? His hatred just oozes. Extraordinary.
If this was in Westminster it would make headline news, I think
Except there's almost no interest in devolved politics in the main network news programmes or the UK-wide national newspapers. The occasional controversy achieves cut-through but the reality is that almost nobody in England who's not moved here from one of the devolved nations or has a very keen interest in politics would be able to name more than a small handful of devolved politicians. Sturgeon and Salmond are the obvious ones, some will be familiar with Arlene Foster and maybe one or two names like Gerry Adams from the peace process era. That's about it.
It's also why Nicola Sturgeon tends to poll well in GB-wide approval ratings - about 90% of the people being asked the questions don't know anything about her apart from her being in favour of independence for Scotland and, perhaps, that she comes across professionally on the television. They don't live in Scotland and are therefore unaffected by and almost entirely unaware of its Government's actions, and any of the successes or failures arising therefrom.
I'm not sure to what degree this ignorance is a cause of the gradual rotting away of the Union or a consequence thereof.
Both.
Most English folk neither know nor care about Scotland. The Union is gradually rotting away through neglect and apathy, and increasingly through straightforward hostility.
55% of Scots voted to stay in the Union in 2014 without England getting a vote
As we are discussing alcoholic beverages... I recently bough a half case from Naked Wines. I think they're quite nice, but as I only paid £5 a bottle I'm probably easy to please. Does anyone have any opinions on them, or is there a better source of a semi-regular mixed case or half case? I don't want a monthly subscription as I don't drink enough at home (in normal times)
Laithwaites is excellent
I pick and choose between Laithwaites, Virgin, Naked, Majestic and occasionally Lea and Sandeman. I recently bought two cases from Naked of "luxury" wine with some damage on their labels at half price reduced from £13.99 to £6.99. They are absolutely superb. Mostly reds. Some whites.
I have been with Naked for some years. £20 per month gets a couple of cases per year. Naked wines tend to be in a modern fruity style, but generally pretty good midmarket value. I have reduced to a tenner a month now, as drinking less.
Is this guy really a Minister for the SNP??? His hatred just oozes. Extraordinary.
If this was in Westminster it would make headline news, I think
Except there's almost no interest in devolved politics in the main network news programmes or the UK-wide national newspapers. The occasional controversy achieves cut-through but the reality is that almost nobody in England who's not moved here from one of the devolved nations or has a very keen interest in politics would be able to name more than a small handful of devolved politicians. Sturgeon and Salmond are the obvious ones, some will be familiar with Arlene Foster and maybe one or two names like Gerry Adams from the peace process era. That's about it.
It's also why Nicola Sturgeon tends to poll well in GB-wide approval ratings - about 90% of the people being asked the questions don't know anything about her apart from her being in favour of independence for Scotland and, perhaps, that she comes across professionally on the television. They don't live in Scotland and are therefore unaffected by and almost entirely unaware of its Government's actions, and any of the successes or failures arising therefrom.
I'm not sure to what degree this ignorance is a cause of the gradual rotting away of the Union or a consequence thereof.
The population of Scotland is almost exactly the same as the population of Yorkshire. I suspect it gets more regional coverage than Yorkshire, and more national coverage too. Its politics is essentially regional and local from a UK point of view, just like where most of us live, in rather ignored parts of England.
Exactly, Essex has a quarter of the population of Scotland but how much coverage does Essex County Council get relative to Holyrood? Certainly less than 25% UK wide
Is this guy really a Minister for the SNP??? His hatred just oozes. Extraordinary.
If this was in Westminster it would make headline news, I think
Except there's almost no interest in devolved politics in the main network news programmes or the UK-wide national newspapers. The occasional controversy achieves cut-through but the reality is that almost nobody in England who's not moved here from one of the devolved nations or has a very keen interest in politics would be able to name more than a small handful of devolved politicians. Sturgeon and Salmond are the obvious ones, some will be familiar with Arlene Foster and maybe one or two names like Gerry Adams from the peace process era. That's about it.
It's also why Nicola Sturgeon tends to poll well in GB-wide approval ratings - about 90% of the people being asked the questions don't know anything about her apart from her being in favour of independence for Scotland and, perhaps, that she comes across professionally on the television. They don't live in Scotland and are therefore unaffected by and almost entirely unaware of its Government's actions, and any of the successes or failures arising therefrom.
I'm not sure to what degree this ignorance is a cause of the gradual rotting away of the Union or a consequence thereof.
The population of Scotland is almost exactly the same as the population of Yorkshire. I suspect it gets more regional coverage than Yorkshire, and more national coverage too. Its politics is essentially regional and local from a UK point of view, just like where most of us live, in rather ignored parts of England.
I think we do need to acknowledge some degree of difference between the activity of these powerful devolved administrations and legislatures and local government. Not that the minutiae of devolved politics is something to which we should be asked to pay attention daily, but it should get more attention than it does.
On the other hand, it's neither practical nor desirable to cover local affairs nationally in that kind of detail - one can't have a weekly round-up of what's been going on in every city, county and district in the land - although I, of course, get your point about the London-centric nature of our media landscape. The other large cities rarely get a look-in and the main national source of coverage of rural affairs isn't the news at all, it's Countryfile. Apart from the occasional spasm of interest in the northern towns - after the Brexit vote, and later surrounding the 2019 GE - almost no interest is shown in towns at all.
People "on the right", yes. And, as you say it is mostly just reactionary to the left's obsession.
Phew, so it's still the left's faults reely. All's right with the world.
- Yes it's just trolling when it's them. Don't mean nothing by it. Bit of a laugh.
What exactly are you trying to imply they mean? Are you saying being pro-Israel is "white supremacy"?
No! - Just that many white supremacists ARE very pro Israel.
No, they aren't. If you are pro-jewish you are not white supremacist, they are incompatible.
Just lefty antisemites love playing with/demeaning words to call other people white supremacists who aren't, much like calling anyone you disagree with Nazis. E.g. you called Katie Hopkins a white supremacist. No, she isn't. She's a shock-jock and a baiter, but you are demeaning the term.
Now we've got an authority on the subject, can you analyse Griffin's period of supporting Israel? Was he a white supremacist before, stopped being a white supremacist while he was Israel's pal and then started being a white supremacist again when he decided he didn't like Israel any more?
'BNP leader Nick Griffin, friend of Israel?
For supporters of Israel, it was the shot heard around the UK.
Last night, BNP leader Nick Griffin told the entire country on Question Time that the BNP was the only party to support Israel in its war "against the terrorists" during Operation Cast Lead.'
I think you've just proven my point that white supremacists don't actually like Israel or Jews. If I remember correctly Griffin did a few things that riled the rank-and-file, this included.
It's the "no true white supremacist" argument!
Well sure, if you want to believe Nick Griffin cares about Israel I guess his support of Corbyn means something too.
Or alternatively, and more likely, he's just saying stuff he thinks will play well at the time.
I think a lot of high profile extremists are mainly in it for ego and money.
Tommy Robinson was doing very nicely thankful from donations until the major processing platforms banned him.
Yes, he got kicked off Gofundme and Patreon, think he’s now on OnlyFans with the “adult performers”.
After BLM went the full anti-Semite today, it won’t take long before authorities start looking at where their donation money is going and who’s accountable for it.
So we are supposed to be building - the era of the major capital project is upon us - and from where I sit in lowland East London, the future is flats, flats and more flats.
I'm thinking about all these flats and all the people in them, whether owners or renters, and thinking how well they will get to know their new accommodation if we have to lockdown once again.
Perhaps in the not-too-distant the notion of living in a little box flat in a huge clock with no external space to call your own will go the same way as the idea of travelling for 4 hours on trains and tubes to go to and from an office.
I can see the attraction of rural life and life well away from the capital.
Whenever I see those new flats in east London, they always look like you'd have to practically be a millionaire in order to afford to buy one.
We're only at the very start of the transformation of working and living in this country that will be delivered by coronavirus, and the resultant realisation that (a) most commuting and centralised office activity is without value and (b) low density living beats high density living hands down for quality of life and of health.
Much of London's commercial property is now obsolete, and many of the well-heeled customers who might previously have been willing to pay telephone number sums for poky little flats in the capital will be emigrating to its more upmarket suburbs or right out into the Home Counties.
Outside of the leafiest areas and the Government and tourist theme park zones in the centre, the future of London is as a giant slum for those too poor to be able to afford to leave. One vast banlieue on the Parisian model.
Possibly a little hyperbolic, but probably not entirely wrong. I have friends talking of leaving London, whereas before they were avid fans of the city.
The same forces will also hollow out crowded cities across the West, from Paris and New York, to San Francisco and Madrid. Indeed cities outside Britain could suffer more, as rural property overseas is cheaper - because America, Spain and France are simply bigger, and emptier.
New York in particular could be entirely screwed. Why live in a small apartment in a newly desolate Manhattan, which freezes every winter and costs a fortune in heating, when you can move to sunny New Mexico and have acres of land?
The ramifications of all this are enormous
Here's a little something I made reference to a few days back:
Dominic Jackman, the founder of Escape from City, which helps people find work beyond London, said inquiries over the last fortnight revealed “a fundamental change in jobseeker preferences”.
Of 1,000 people signing up to the service, 51% wanted to leave the capital compared with 20% for the same period in 2019.
“Pre-Covid, while our jobseekers wanted to ‘escape the rat race’, a lot of them actually were happy living and working in London,” he said. “For the first time ever we have more people wanting to leave London than stay in it which is a huge shift in aspirations.”
An awful lot of people who previously stayed in London because of its cultural attractions and nightlife - which are now, of course, all shut - have discovered what exceptionally shitty places cities are to be trapped in the midst of public health crises (and this one could drag on for years, and it may not be the last occasion on which this happens in our lifetimes, either.) Many of those same people have also found out that they don't need to travel into the city centre to do their jobs, and have realised through simple internet property searches that they can exchange paying an extortionate rent on a shoebox flat for buying a substantial house with a garden, through the simple expedient of shaping up and shipping out.
I've read elsewhere that a quarter-of-a-million Londoners fled in the run-up to lockdown and haven't come back, and the phenomenon of middle-class flight is being observed, at a smaller scale, in other urban centres across the country. The only limiting factor here isn't even property prices in the commuter belts of cities, but imagination: if you're considering leaving London for Buckinghamshire then cost might still give you pause for thought but, if you are one of the many well-paid Londoners who really can work from home full-time, then why not just up sticks to somewhere like Lincolnshire and buy a detached house, or move to Powys and trade up to a small mansion and several acres?
I don't know, perhaps if you're a twentysomething singleton who's desperate to go out clubbing, get pissed and try to get laid every other night then perhaps you might want to stick with a shoebox flat with a convenient nearby Tube station, but once you've grown up then why bother?
What if you want to meet interesting people?
The M25 doesn't generate a forcefield preventing "interesting" people from moving beyond it.
True, in a lower density living environment there will be fewer people to meet, but that has its advantages as well as its drawbacks. Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime. Also, under present circumstances, much less likelihood of catching a potentially lethal infectious disease.
People outside cities are no less interesting than those within.
There are some people with fascinating back stories, tucked away in the Devon countryside round us. And they are only the ones we know about.
Comments
https://twitter.com/RealMattLucas/status/1277297507652042752?s=19
But at the end, you find Bells.
And one that's so bad it's drinkers have a famous, Grouse.
Or alternatively, and more likely, he's just saying stuff he thinks will play well at the time.
Many years ago a friend, in the know, told me to fill my boots with Sainsbury's brand 17 year old. Laphroaig, IIRC, at a third the price....
The graph makes it look as if it has almost died out and could lead to undue complacency.
Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:
1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.
2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.
But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
True, in a lower density living environment there will be fewer people to meet, but that has its advantages as well as its drawbacks. Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime. Also, under present circumstances, much less likelihood of catching a potentially lethal infectious disease.
*I like this correction by my spell checker.
Ah, my coat.
"Fewer addicts, fewer dealers, a lot less violent crime....less likelihood of catching a ... infectious disease."
You won't get many SeanTs living there then.
All data by specimen date has back dating issues. In every country. Hence 7 day (or more) moving averages.
I thought we had gone through all of this about 2 months ago? Or do we have to add a warning sticker to every graph?
The trend toward non age statement whiskies has harmed the credibility of the Scotch whisky industry, but this trend is receding. I have some distilleries I've never warmed to, but an expensive bottle that is poor whisky is rare - if you've tasted one that you felt was 'turps-like', it was probably heavily peated (not to everyone's taste) or cask strength (typically 50-60% ABV), which needs careful sipping to get used to it, or a few drops of water.
If this was in Westminster it would make headline news, I think
Oh and of course stay clear well clear of any Hotspot-lockdowns like Gütersloh. But predicting where those will be in 2-3 months is imposible.
As ever, the best drink in the world is the one *you* want in your glass.
Incidentally I am an optimist with regard to the virus. I don't think there will be second wave. I think a significant proportion of the population have innate immunity which is why the disease seems to "fizzle out" when circa 20% exhibit anti-bodies which is insufficent for "herd immunity".
So I am not promoting a scare story with regard to London. I am just reporting the data as I find it every day. I think it is significant that cases in London are rising a bit. It might be a temporary blip caused by the demos or whatever, or a more serious feature caused by London behaviour. We'll see.
There's nothing 'former' about it!
A. HIDALGO (PS-PCF-EELV) 49.3
R. DATI (LR) 32.7
A. BUZYN (LREM-MoDem-UDI) 13.7
Estimations for Lyon
G. DOUCET (EELV-PS-PCF-LFI) 53.5
Y. CUCHERAT (DVC-LR) 30.5
G. KEPENEKIAN (LREM diss/PRG) 16.0
Estimations for Bordeaux
Pierre HURMIC (EELV-PS-PCF) 46,8%
Nicolas FLORIAN (LR-MoDem-LREM) 43,2 %
Philippe POUTOU (NPA-LFI) 10%
Estimation for Strasbourg
Jeanne BARSEGHIAN (EELV-PCF) : 42.5
Alain FONTANEL (LREM-MoDem-LR) : 34.3
Catherine TRAUTMANN (PS) : 23.2
Estimation for Tolouse
Jean-Luc MOUDENC (LR-LREM) 51.6 %
Antoine MAURICE (EELV-LFI-PS-PCF) 48.4 %
For me these people are worse if they DON'T believe what they're saying.
That's my kind of joke.
It is too easy to slip down the slope of "if I get rid of *this*, it will be better..."
As to second waves... We are having a series of waves, right now. In every country.
The question is how high they rise, and how wide the geographical spread.
In the period the Met have taken their BAME percentage from about 5% to 13%.
Once you feel "set" and ready to settle for a comfortable groove to the grave you will be ready to leave and it makes sense to leave.
It's also why Nicola Sturgeon tends to poll well in GB-wide approval ratings - about 90% of the people being asked the questions don't know anything about her apart from her being in favour of independence for Scotland and, perhaps, that she comes across professionally on the television. They don't live in Scotland and are therefore unaffected by and almost entirely unaware of its Government's actions, and any of the successes or failures arising therefrom.
I'm not sure to what degree this ignorance is a cause of the gradual rotting away of the Union or a consequence thereof.
Battery electric cars are more efficient than trains - unless the trains are really, really full... Hmmmmmm.....
The waves in the USA, for example, are first waves in different parts of the country at different times. There may be local flare ups (eg meat processing in Angelsey) but these do not qualify as second waves. Second waves are similar to the first wave in magnitude affecting the same area eg "spanish" flu. I don't think that is going to happen.
#withdrawal
Beyond that, Scottish Labour destroyed its reputation through a series of second and third rate administrations predominantly staffed by politicians who weren't good enough to get selected for winnable Westminster seats - thus helping the SNP to break the party's back and steal most of its voters in the central belt - and that left them facing a hopelessly splintered opposition in which the single largest party are the Tories, who continue to be cordially loathed by a large fraction of the electorate and are therefore stymied by a low ceiling of support.
As long as these circumstances prevail the Scottish Government can get away with almost anything.
For years now, technologists have looked forward to the day that millions of people can work from anywhere and don’t need to waste several hours a day generating pollution, but companies have always insisted on everyone congregating together in the world’s most expensive real estate at 9am five days a week.
This does present other challenges though, such as railways dependent on season ticket revenue, and even the possibility of people being able to work mainly from abroad and spend fewer than 90 days per year in the UK - thereby avoiding UK income tax entirely. Plenty of Brits in the Middle East do this already.
As to a general second wave, in a country - no one knows. It looks like the US has got one.
Which has a big effect on the assumption that living in the country, where a car is required, is necessarily anti-environmental.
I only wear them in close proximity environments in public (like trains or the tube) and I possibly would in a busy office too.
Otherwise, it's a rather dystopian placebo.
Most English folk neither know nor care about Scotland. The Union is gradually rotting away through neglect and apathy, and increasingly through straightforward hostility.
The lasting damage will be the voluntary desecration of our cultural heritage by genuflecting (and ignorant) white liberals.
The good news is that many of us will start to see things from a black person's perspective a little bit more, and hopefully a good many more of them will rise up to the top to stop all the dickheadery by the Left.
There is huge affection and love for Scotland in England.
On the other hand, it's neither practical nor desirable to cover local affairs nationally in that kind of detail - one can't have a weekly round-up of what's been going on in every city, county and district in the land - although I, of course, get your point about the London-centric nature of our media landscape. The other large cities rarely get a look-in and the main national source of coverage of rural affairs isn't the news at all, it's Countryfile. Apart from the occasional spasm of interest in the northern towns - after the Brexit vote, and later surrounding the 2019 GE - almost no interest is shown in towns at all.
After BLM went the full anti-Semite today, it won’t take long before authorities start looking at where their donation money is going and who’s accountable for it.