Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As we head into August the impact on holidays becomes the big

15678911»

Comments

  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,192
    Scott_xP said:
    Trump's spokewomen might be free soon. Do Kelly-Anne Conway and Sarah Huckabee still take Trump's shilling?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,849
    All this chat about performance reviews and working from home versus in the office is serving to remind me what a great decision I made three years ago to retire early! :lol:
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    VP pick first week in August
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,570
    edited July 2020


    Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.

    OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
    Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.

    Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Foxy said:


    Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.

    Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
    Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,984
    Foxy said:


    Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.

    Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
    The empire was almost certainly toast before that. Singapore was just the disaster which made it obvious.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,384
    Scott_xP said:
    It's going to be some arse like Toby Young, isn't it?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,535

    Cummings ruled out as thinks its wrong for him to earn over 100k for some reason. How about his deputy, one Boris Johnson?
    This will end badly methinks.

    A great deal of day to day politics will now be focused on these TV events.

    But I can't see how any future PM will be able to undo it.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,061
    HYUFD said:


    I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one

    I suppose it depends on your definition of "superpower".

    Britain has never been the dominant European military power on land but as a maritime power it enjoyed a long period of ascendency.

    Yet, after Yorktown, wars were won with allies, The Napoleonic Wars weren't won by Britain alone though British money and influence supported the various coalitions and arguably Prussia, Russia and Austria played a not insignificant role.

    Both World Wars were won as part of alliances yet even in 1945 we still had a seat at the top table and soon after we had a Bomb keeping us there. However, if you define power as freedom to take action unilaterally, we lost that some time ago and both India and Suez were the recognition we were a bankrupt superpower.

    It was the experience of Suez that convinced Macmillan Britain's destiny lay in closer economic ties with Europe which set us on the road which ended in 2016 with us voting to leave the EU.

    In a sense, we are back to that question which was never resolved after 1945 - what is or should be Britain's place in the world? We have many advantages but no one suggests we are going to "go it alone" nor can we realistically claim to be comparable to the US and China and IF the last named are the global superpowers for the mid to late 21st Century, the Pacific, rather than the Atlantic, will be the focus of interest and for the first time in more than a thousand years, Europe won't be the centre of the world.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,854
    Scott_xP said:
    It will probably be someone like Chloe Westley or Tom Harwood.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,683
    Foxy said:


    Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.

    Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
    No, as India never fell to Japan and had a far bigger population and a bigger economy than all those areas you mentioned combined.

    Australia never was relevant to our superpower status
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,192

    It's going to be some arse like Toby Young, isn't it?
    We can always hope .... :D:D
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,849

    This will end badly methinks.

    A great deal of day to day politics will now be focused on these TV events.

    But I can't see how any future PM will be able to undo it.
    Of course they could. New PM swept into No 10 on a big majority, or even on a large vote of his or her party, could simply say "we're not doing that anymore". What or who could stop them?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,683
    rpjs said:

    Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
    Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,854
    HYUFD said:

    Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
    If Napoleon had conquered Ireland, we'd probably have been defeated.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    HYUFD said:

    Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
    It's not about the utility or value of the territory: John Bull failed to keep control of his other island. The Empire was doomed from that moment on.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,683
    stodge said:

    I suppose it depends on your definition of "superpower".

    Britain has never been the dominant European military power on land but as a maritime power it enjoyed a long period of ascendency.

    Yet, after Yorktown, wars were won with allies, The Napoleonic Wars weren't won by Britain alone though British money and influence supported the various coalitions and arguably Prussia, Russia and Austria played a not insignificant role.

    Both World Wars were won as part of alliances yet even in 1945 we still had a seat at the top table and soon after we had a Bomb keeping us there. However, if you define power as freedom to take action unilaterally, we lost that some time ago and both India and Suez were the recognition we were a bankrupt superpower.

    It was the experience of Suez that convinced Macmillan Britain's destiny lay in closer economic ties with Europe which set us on the road which ended in 2016 with us voting to leave the EU.

    In a sense, we are back to that question which was never resolved after 1945 - what is or should be Britain's place in the world? We have many advantages but no one suggests we are going to "go it alone" nor can we realistically claim to be comparable to the US and China and IF the last named are the global superpowers for the mid to late 21st Century, the Pacific, rather than the Atlantic, will be the focus of interest and for the first time in more than a thousand years, Europe won't be the centre of the world.

    Indian independence ended British superpower status, Suez just confirmed it.

    Europe was not really the centre of global economic and political and military power until the 16th century
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,144

    If Napoleon had conquered Ireland, we'd probably have been defeated.
    Another invasion scuppered by weather!
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,366
    edited July 2020

    This will end badly methinks.

    A great deal of day to day politics will now be focused on these TV events.

    But I can't see how any future PM will be able to undo it.
    Those who wanted an end to Brussels unelected bureaucrats will be delighted that not only is the bureaucrat Cummings the decision maker for the government but that the decisions will now be presented by another unelected bureaucrat rather than the PM and his cabinet in parliament.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,535
    Veep betting!! Rice drops to 3.25. I think her lowest yet.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,840
    nichomar said:

    VP pick first week in August

    Erm, you do know August starts on Saturday?

    Meanwhile, on Betfair, Susan Rice is into 3 (or 2/1) and challenging for favouritism, and is Gretchen Whitmer being nibbled back into 30 (still an outsider)?

    Kamala Harris: 2.9
    Susan Rice: 3
    Karen Bass: 9.8
    Tammy Duckworth: 11.5
    Elizabeth Warren: 15.5
    Val Demings: 17
    Gretchen Whitmer: 30
    Michelle Obama: 46
    Hillary Clinton: 90
    Stacey Abrams: 90
    Keisha Lance Bottoms: 120
    Michelle Lujan Grisham: 140
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,683

    If Napoleon had conquered Ireland, we'd probably have been defeated.
    No as there is something called the Irish Sea and after Trafalgar the Royal Navy still remained supreme
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,570
    rpjs said:

    Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
    Yes, I accept that is true. While the Empire increased in size post WW1, the financial situation was dire. At that time though America was looking inward, and other European countries down on their luck too.

    Britain as a world power ended after Singapore though. The writing was on the wall.

    I was musing on this Tweet the other day:

    https://twitter.com/arlenparsa/status/1168199200183586816?s=09

    It is easy to spot the hypocrisy of the USA founding fathers, but our hypocrisy fighting a war against tyranny with an undemocratic empire based on racial superiority, and well within living memory, is pretty stark too.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,366

    Veep betting!! Rice drops to 3.25. I think her lowest yet.

    Is that a value lay? Seems plausible enough and close enough to decision day that Im reluctant to take her on even at the short price but might be being overly frit.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,535
    Veep. Approaching cross-over Harris and Rice.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,683
    rpjs said:

    It's not about the utility or value of the territory: John Bull failed to keep control of his other island. The Empire was doomed from that moment on.
    Yes it is, we could never have set foot in Ireland and still have been a superpower thanks to India and earlier the American colonies
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,636
    HYUFD said:

    No as there is something called the Irish Sea and after Trafalgar the Royal Navy still remained supreme
    Who cares?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,535

    Is that a value lay? Seems plausible enough and close enough to decision day that Im reluctant to take her on even at the short price but might be being overly frit.
    You may want to wait a little bit. Still dropping.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,535
    NEW (Veep) THREAD!!!
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,758
    edited July 2020

    I can assure you the companies you cited use a process like I'm describing. Continual feedback is valuable but it doesn't replace a structured process for performance review.
    Formal performance reviews are counter productive. Far better to give continual feedback and support. The formal reviews can lead to games playing, resentment, and time wasting. Neither managers nor subordinates like them. I agree many companies continue to use them. It is the power of the HR department. Scrap them. I did.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,570
    HYUFD said:

    No, as India never fell to Japan and had a far bigger population and a bigger economy than all those areas you mentioned combined.

    Australia never was relevant to our superpower status
    After Singapore fell, and we retreated from Burma, and permitted the Bengal famine, Britain could not hold onto India. Between Gandhis "Quit India" campaign and Bose's Indian National Army, the Empire in India had lost all credibility.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,165

    I think you are deliberately misunderstanding what others are saying to exaggerate your own point.

    On this thread Ive probably been the poster most saying that wfh is not as simple as continuing the lockdown period. However I am agreeing that the trend is that way, just that it wont be as quick or as decisive as a forum dominated by middle aged geeks (myself included) is going to think.

    Not everyone works in an analytical role where concentration is vital, not everyone has an hour commute to a nice rural or suburban home.

    People new to the workplace will be at a huge disadvantage working from home, the best graduates will want to learn from our experience, and it is easier to do that in the same room.

    Do businesses want to focus on getting those in the door, or on making the most out of existing staff. The answer will vary significantly for businesses.

    We also dont know what happens to office costs, if they go back to 2008 levels for instance that would be about a 70% saving for our business, at which point its not particularly expensive to have an office.

    Good businesses are also often communities not just a set of tasks that need to be done. The future will be varied with more working from home but it will be an evolution accelerated by covid, not a revolution where expecting people to turn up to a physical office for work becomes taboo.
    I am not misunderstanding anything I am giving my point of view as a worker. One that has been separated from his family for 30 odd years by...you must be in the office when I have never had a need to be in the offfice and work better at home,

    The only reason I have had to be office based is managers who are too scared they will be shown up as superfluous as a lot are now in the covid era
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    HYUFD said:

    Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
    Churchill did NOT agree - he wanted to invade (Southern) Ireland, and was quite willing to let the Japanese conquer most or all of Australia.

    Both as short-term measures, of course - but show how much he prioritized defense of Great Britain, and how little defense of Australia.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,830
    Foxy said:

    Yes, I accept that is true. While the Empire increased in size post WW1, the financial situation was dire. At that time though America was looking inward, and other European countries down on their luck too.

    Britain as a world power ended after Singapore though. The writing was on the wall.

    I was musing on this Tweet the other day:

    https://twitter.com/arlenparsa/status/1168199200183586816?s=09

    It is easy to spot the hypocrisy of the USA founding fathers, but our hypocrisy fighting a war against tyranny with an undemocratic empire based on racial superiority, and well within living memory, is pretty stark too.
    Only if you pretend all sins are equal.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,094
    stodge said:


    It was the experience of Suez that convinced Macmillan Britain's destiny lay in closer economic ties with Europe which set us on the road which ended in 2016 with us voting to leave the EU.

    Didn't it also make Britain become much more closely aligned with the US? That's not a contradiction as the US has always supported UK membership of the EU (and it's predecessors).
  • eekeek Posts: 28,787

    I can assure you the companies you cited use a process like I'm describing. Continual feedback is valuable but it doesn't replace a structured process for performance review.
    Checks with 3 of those companies, nope, nope and nope....
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited July 2020

    Trump's spokewomen might be free soon. Do Kelly-Anne Conway and Sarah Huckabee still take Trump's shilling?
    We want Hope!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,683
    CatMan said:

    Didn't it also make Britain become much more closely aligned with the US? That's not a contradiction as the US has always supported UK membership of the EU (and it's predecessors).
    Until Trump
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,683

    Churchill did NOT agree - he wanted to invade (Southern) Ireland, and was quite willing to let the Japanese conquer most or all of Australia.

    Both as short-term measures, of course - but show how much he prioritized defense of Great Britain, and how little defense of Australia.
    Ireland might have been nice to have but was irrelevant to our superpower status as indeed was Australia, we only became a superpower because of 2 colonies, those in America and then those in India
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,984
    HYUFD said:

    No, as India never fell to Japan and had a far bigger population and a bigger economy than all those areas you mentioned combined.

    Australia never was relevant to our superpower status
    India was never going to remain part of the empire, whatever happened during WWII.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,165
    Charles said:

    There is no way you want a formal and documented review process every week.

    I talk to all my team individually every week, at least. We have team meetings 3 times a week. Feedback is given immediately. But we only have a formal and documented review process every 6 months.
    For non manager level staff a formal review every six months = this is where we come up with reasons why we wont give you a payrise this year. Poor performance shouldn't need to wait for a 6 month review it should be dealt with at the time

    Best I had was well we are marking you down on safety because you had a car accidend....yes I did I was a passenger in a car where a lorry decided to occupy the same space because it was continental and opposite drive....but was the difference between getting a pay rise and not that year
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,984
    HYUFD said:

    Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
    We were never a ‘superpower’, merely the strongest of the great powers for a time.
    The term really had no meaning until after WWII.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,683
    Nigelb said:

    We were never a ‘superpower’, merely the strongest of the great powers for a time.
    The term really had no meaning until after WWII.
    Of course it did ie domination of a large proportion of the globe or domination of the global economy made you a superpower.

    The Roman Empire, the Mongol Empire, the Spanish Empire and the British Empire were all superpowers before the USSR and USA came along. China was also arguably a superpower before too under the Qing dynasty
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468
    Very interesting article about the Bonus Army in Washington in the 1920s:

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/07/28/when_federal_troops_swept_away_the_bonus_army_143819.html
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468

    Churchill did NOT agree - he wanted to invade (Southern) Ireland, and was quite willing to let the Japanese conquer most or all of Australia.

    Both as short-term measures, of course - but show how much he prioritized defense of Great Britain, and how little defense of Australia.
    I presume the desire to invade Ireland was the same as that which drove the invasion of Iceland and the attempted invasion of Norway - protection of the Atlantic routes.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,384

    I believe Belorussia (in the same vicinity) suffered proportionally the most of all nations in WWII.
    Belarus has the current longest-serving Government-in-Exile.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,279
    JohnLoony said:

    Why would anybody even want to go to a foreign country on "holiday" anyway, when lots of the usual places like museums and galleries aren't open because of the pandemic?

    On the contrary museums are mostly open, and now is a fantastic time to visit them (if you are happy with the Covid risk) as they are crowd-free.
This discussion has been closed.