Howdy, Stranger!

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

Undefined discussion subject.

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited August 2020 in General
Undefined discussion subject.

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,087
    edited August 2020
    First.

    Yar-boo to People from Putney.

    :smiley:

    Off now to find a kipper for supper.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Damn, that was another value loser!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,574

    Damn, that was another value loser!

    I did say that laying all the second favourites, one by one, would have been the best strategy.
  • FPT
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK: number of asylum seekers by year

    image

    Are there any statistics as to where the claim of asylum was made?
    IIRC, between 75 and 80% of claims happen at the UK's international airports. So, if we assume that 30,000 asylum seekers arrive in the UK each year, that means around 6,000 come via the Channel.

    (It doesn't get much reported, but more of France's asylum seekers head North to Belgium, Holland and beyond than try and cross the Channel. While Sangrettes and the Calais jungle gets all the press, the reality is that the French government puts migrant camps by their international borders, makes conditions really shit, and then hope that as many as possible self-deport. They do this because it is politically popular in France.)
    Many votes in being "tough" on this issue. Merkel was imo brave and principled to go the other way.
    Merkel was neither brace nor principled. Brave and principled would have been saying Germany would be taking more migrants and offering safe transport to get there. She took the path of least resistance instead and created a darkly Darwinian experiment of survival of the fittest that led to many deaths with no safe transit.

    Cameron was brave and principled.
    I think it rather telling, whether one supports Merkel's intentions or their consequences or not, that apparently cooperation between nations which is usually stated to be so vital went right out the window and it was deemed ok to act unilaterally in the way she did.
    I think PT is absolutely correct on this one. Merkel's behaviour was despicable.

    One point not noted was that Germany at the time had a shrinking population and a lot empty homes (unlike the UK) so had many facilities available.

    This was 2014:

    image
    She exposed the hypocrisy and empty rhetoric of lesser, narrow minded politicians. This is not my definition of despicable.
    She was the lesser, narrow minded politician.

    Did she offer to take refugees from camps at the front line?

    Did she offer safe transport and safe transit to a safe harbour?

    She did nothing.
    Except make it possible - in defiance of a rising tide of introverted populism - for 1m plus people fleeing destitution and violence to have the sort of life that you and I take for granted.
    Oh really?

    So did she offer safe transit for a million plus people?
    Did she have some selection criteria, or even lottery or any other metric to fairly determine who those million would be?
    Did she do so based on needs?

    Or did she walk away from making any decisions and did people smugglers and criminal gangs provide the transport for a million people leaving people to drown due to her inaction?

    Given your objections to eg private schools, I don't understand how you don't seethe with rage at how despicable her letting money and gangs determine who could migrate instead of fairness. Clearly your ideals on fairness only go so far.

    By saying that anyone who made it there could stay but there'd be no legal movement or safe transit and you'd have to pay people smugglers to get you there - was no more fair than a politician saying everyone should have a good education, so long as parents pay tuition fees to private schools and there will be no state schools.
    I do wonder about you sometimes. That is a bizarre take and a beyond bizarre analogy.
    What's confusing about it?

    Cameron bravely did the right thing to much opprobrium and criticism - the UK took in refugees directly from Turkey, giving them safe transit to get her. Educationally, that's similar to Comprehensive education that you support - getting it fairly rather than via connections or money.

    Merkel stepped back and said let others sort it out and walked off. She offered no safe transit and people smugglers stepped in to the void so the people who made it to Germany were those wealthy enough to pay smugglers or healthy enough to make it on their own back. The educational equivalent of private schools only.

    Why is it that with education you want it to be determined by the state "fairly" in your eyes - but for migration you think that it is to be commended allowing people smugglers and connections to determine who gets in without any safe and legal transit organised by the state?
  • We are officially in a recession.
  • Don't take the 1.01 Harris because you can get 1.02 Biden to be the presidential nominee at the DNC next week.
  • Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411

    We are officially in a recession.

    Rishi will sort it out!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    Well that pick was something of an anticlimax after the months of speculation. Thankfully slightly green on very small stakes.

    I guess at least Harris will be good for getting the vote out in the marginal state of California.
  • The Americans are worse than the Irish when it comes to pronunciation of their names not matching the spelling.

    https://twitter.com/CarlosLozadaWP/status/1293292096342953986
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    What chance he also donated to others in the same race? Six grand isn’t a lot when you’ve got business interests to defend in a state.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,399
    So now the race begins to be Kamala's VP pick for 2024.

    Buttygig has already started his campaign.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,398
    Ave_it said:

    We are officially in a recession.

    Rishi will sort it out!
    He has magical powers then?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,574
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    Ave_it said:

    We are officially in a recession.

    Rishi will sort it out!
    The Nigel Pearson of the Conservative Party.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,226
    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 595
    edited August 2020
    dixiedean said:

    What exactly is the definition of the "Red Wall?"
    Is it seats Labour lost?
    It's a bit strange that they are still referred to as the "Red Wall". It rather implies that they are still Labour territory and Conservative success in them is a temporary aberration.

    Is it really a good idea of Biden to pick the least favourite black candidate with black voters?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Seems like a smart choice - capable and no threat.

    How many (potential) leaders can say that of their deputies?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    moonshine said:

    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?

    Don Jnr. unless Don Snr. can overturn the two term rule by than.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    moonshine said:

    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?

    Jared Kushner?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,040
    moonshine said:

    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?

    Haley.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    Let us hope Drakeford and Kirsty don't make him have to eat those words by Thursday.
  • https://twitter.com/siennamarla/status/1293225034740305922

    Tough on immigration, tough on the causes of immigration
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748
    Smart move to get on board someone whose last Scottish election as leader garnered *checks notes* 11.6% of the vote.
  • Sandpit said:

    moonshine said:

    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?

    Jared Kushner?
    Jews will not replace us.

    Watching 'The Plot Against America' I couldn't help but think of Jared when Rabbi Lionel Bengelsdorf was on screen.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,398
    It's a very easy move for him. By nearly all accounts it's going to be a fiasco, and attempts to fix it may well make it worse, either way the government is going to look bad and he need do no more than say 'This is bad. I will not be bad' and it'll make some headway.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK: number of asylum seekers by year

    image

    Are there any statistics as to where the claim of asylum was made?
    IIRC, between 75 and 80% of claims happen at the UK's international airports. So, if we assume that 30,000 asylum seekers arrive in the UK each year, that means around 6,000 come via the Channel.

    (It doesn't get much reported, but more of France's asylum seekers head North to Belgium, Holland and beyond than try and cross the Channel. While Sangrettes and the Calais jungle gets all the press, the reality is that the French government puts migrant camps by their international borders, makes conditions really shit, and then hope that as many as possible self-deport. They do this because it is politically popular in France.)
    Many votes in being "tough" on this issue. Merkel was imo brave and principled to go the other way.
    Merkel was neither brace nor principled. Brave and principled would have been saying Germany would be taking more migrants and offering safe transport to get there. She took the path of least resistance instead and created a darkly Darwinian experiment of survival of the fittest that led to many deaths with no safe transit.

    Cameron was brave and principled.
    I think it rather telling, whether one supports Merkel's intentions or their consequences or not, that apparently cooperation between nations which is usually stated to be so vital went right out the window and it was deemed ok to act unilaterally in the way she did.
    I think PT is absolutely correct on this one. Merkel's behaviour was despicable.

    One point not noted was that Germany at the time had a shrinking population and a lot empty homes (unlike the UK) so had many facilities available.

    This was 2014:

    image
    She exposed the hypocrisy and empty rhetoric of lesser, narrow minded politicians. This is not my definition of despicable.
    She was the lesser, narrow minded politician.

    Did she offer to take refugees from camps at the front line?

    Did she offer safe transport and safe transit to a safe harbour?

    She did nothing.
    Except make it possible - in defiance of a rising tide of introverted populism - for 1m plus people fleeing destitution and violence to have the sort of life that you and I take for granted.
    Oh really?

    So did she offer safe transit for a million plus people?
    Did she have some selection criteria, or even lottery or any other metric to fairly determine who those million would be?
    Did she do so based on needs?

    Or did she walk away from making any decisions and did people smugglers and criminal gangs provide the transport for a million people leaving people to drown due to her inaction?

    Given your objections to eg private schools, I don't understand how you don't seethe with rage at how despicable her letting money and gangs determine who could migrate instead of fairness. Clearly your ideals on fairness only go so far.

    By saying that anyone who made it there could stay but there'd be no legal movement or safe transit and you'd have to pay people smugglers to get you there - was no more fair than a politician saying everyone should have a good education, so long as parents pay tuition fees to private schools and there will be no state schools.
    I do wonder about you sometimes. That is a bizarre take and a beyond bizarre analogy.
    What's confusing about it?

    Cameron bravely did the right thing to much opprobrium and criticism - the UK took in refugees directly from Turkey, giving them safe transit to get her. Educationally, that's similar to Comprehensive education that you support - getting it fairly rather than via connections or money.

    Merkel stepped back and said let others sort it out and walked off. She offered no safe transit and people smugglers stepped in to the void so the people who made it to Germany were those wealthy enough to pay smugglers or healthy enough to make it on their own back. The educational equivalent of private schools only.

    Why is it that with education you want it to be determined by the state "fairly" in your eyes - but for migration you think that it is to be commended allowing people smugglers and connections to determine who gets in without any safe and legal transit organised by the state?
    The analogy - Merkel's "private schools" solution to the migrant crisis vs Cameron's "bog standard comp" approach - is utterly ludicrous.

    I think you know this and are seeking to irritate rather than illuminate.

    I am therefore forced to cancel you again. Same terms as last time. 48 hours with potential rethink after 24.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,398

    moonshine said:

    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?

    Don Jnr. unless Don Snr. can overturn the two term rule by than.
    Surely Ivanka is the favoured child?
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489
    So Its Kamala Harris.

    For anyone interested in a libertarian take on her:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-SaRDG6V-s
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    It is 28.3C in north London. At 22:34. That is all.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748

    Sandpit said:

    moonshine said:

    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?

    Jared Kushner?
    Jews will not replace us.

    Watching 'The Plot Against America' I couldn't help but think of Jared when Rabbi Lionel Bengelsdorf was on screen.
    Unfair.

    On Rebbe Lionel that is.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    kle4 said:

    moonshine said:

    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?

    Don Jnr. unless Don Snr. can overturn the two term rule by than.
    Surely Ivanka is the favoured child?
    Don Jnr. is even more witless than his father, certainly a chip off the old block. Ivanka has less of the totalitarian dictator about her than Jnr. or Eric.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    It's a fucking pandemic. Of course it's devastating.

    If there weren't these job losses, you'd be screaming that the government was making mountains of molehills.

    Question: what would you have done differently to what Rishi Sunak has done to mitigate the hardship? I'm guessing "nothing much", because that is what we are hearing from the Labour Party. Nothing much.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,092
      
    LadyG said:

    It is 28.3C in north London. At 22:34. That is all.

    Thunder & lightning all around up here. Scots paying for the heat bestowed on Southerners as usual.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019
    Oh, Hillary Clinton.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    moonshine said:

    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?

    Tom Cotton.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019
    LadyG said:

    It is 28.3C in north London. At 22:34. That is all.

    I spent £700 on a portable air con unit last week from Amazon.

    Not regretting it.
  • I was purposely down marked on some of my mocks.

    My teachers didn't want me to get complacent.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585

    It's a fucking pandemic. Of course it's devastating.

    If there weren't these job losses, you'd be screaming that the government was making mountains of molehills.

    Question: what would you have done differently to what Rishi Sunak has done to mitigate the hardship? I'm guessing "nothing much", because that is what we are hearing from the Labour Party. Nothing much.
    Sometimes life is unfair, sometimes incumbency is unfair.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,574

    moonshine said:

    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?

    Haley.

    Or Cotton.
  • kinabalu said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK: number of asylum seekers by year

    image

    Are there any statistics as to where the claim of asylum was made?
    IIRC, between 75 and 80% of claims happen at the UK's international airports. So, if we assume that 30,000 asylum seekers arrive in the UK each year, that means around 6,000 come via the Channel.

    (It doesn't get much reported, but more of France's asylum seekers head North to Belgium, Holland and beyond than try and cross the Channel. While Sangrettes and the Calais jungle gets all the press, the reality is that the French government puts migrant camps by their international borders, makes conditions really shit, and then hope that as many as possible self-deport. They do this because it is politically popular in France.)
    Many votes in being "tough" on this issue. Merkel was imo brave and principled to go the other way.
    Merkel was neither brace nor principled. Brave and principled would have been saying Germany would be taking more migrants and offering safe transport to get there. She took the path of least resistance instead and created a darkly Darwinian experiment of survival of the fittest that led to many deaths with no safe transit.

    Cameron was brave and principled.
    I think it rather telling, whether one supports Merkel's intentions or their consequences or not, that apparently cooperation between nations which is usually stated to be so vital went right out the window and it was deemed ok to act unilaterally in the way she did.
    I think PT is absolutely correct on this one. Merkel's behaviour was despicable.

    One point not noted was that Germany at the time had a shrinking population and a lot empty homes (unlike the UK) so had many facilities available.

    This was 2014:

    image
    She exposed the hypocrisy and empty rhetoric of lesser, narrow minded politicians. This is not my definition of despicable.
    She was the lesser, narrow minded politician.

    Did she offer to take refugees from camps at the front line?

    Did she offer safe transport and safe transit to a safe harbour?

    She did nothing.
    Except make it possible - in defiance of a rising tide of introverted populism - for 1m plus people fleeing destitution and violence to have the sort of life that you and I take for granted.
    Oh really?

    So did she offer safe transit for a million plus people?
    Did she have some selection criteria, or even lottery or any other metric to fairly determine who those million would be?
    Did she do so based on needs?

    Or did she walk away from making any decisions and did people smugglers and criminal gangs provide the transport for a million people leaving people to drown due to her inaction?

    Given your objections to eg private schools, I don't understand how you don't seethe with rage at how despicable her letting money and gangs determine who could migrate instead of fairness. Clearly your ideals on fairness only go so far.

    By saying that anyone who made it there could stay but there'd be no legal movement or safe transit and you'd have to pay people smugglers to get you there - was no more fair than a politician saying everyone should have a good education, so long as parents pay tuition fees to private schools and there will be no state schools.
    I do wonder about you sometimes. That is a bizarre take and a beyond bizarre analogy.
    What's confusing about it?

    Cameron bravely did the right thing to much opprobrium and criticism - the UK took in refugees directly from Turkey, giving them safe transit to get her. Educationally, that's similar to Comprehensive education that you support - getting it fairly rather than via connections or money.

    Merkel stepped back and said let others sort it out and walked off. She offered no safe transit and people smugglers stepped in to the void so the people who made it to Germany were those wealthy enough to pay smugglers or healthy enough to make it on their own back. The educational equivalent of private schools only.

    Why is it that with education you want it to be determined by the state "fairly" in your eyes - but for migration you think that it is to be commended allowing people smugglers and connections to determine who gets in without any safe and legal transit organised by the state?
    The analogy - Merkel's "private schools" solution to the migrant crisis vs Cameron's "bog standard comp" approach - is utterly ludicrous.

    I think you know this and are seeking to irritate rather than illuminate.

    I am therefore forced to cancel you again. Same terms as last time. 48 hours with potential rethink after 24.
    Before you cancel just answer one very simple question:

    Who provided more safe, state provided transit from Turkey: Merkel or Cameron?

    Are you afraid to admit the truth even to yourself.
  • It's a fucking pandemic. Of course it's devastating.

    If there weren't these job losses, you'd be screaming that the government was making mountains of molehills.

    Question: what would you have done differently to what Rishi Sunak has done to mitigate the hardship? I'm guessing "nothing much", because that is what we are hearing from the Labour Party. Nothing much.
    Woah just take it easy man
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585

    I was purposely down marked on some of my mocks.

    My teachers didn't want me to get complacent.
    If you were downmarked to A**** what were you expecting?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    I was purposely down marked on some of my mocks.

    My teachers didn't want me to get complacent.
    Did it work?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    It's a fucking pandemic. Of course it's devastating.

    If there weren't these job losses, you'd be screaming that the government was making mountains of molehills.

    Question: what would you have done differently to what Rishi Sunak has done to mitigate the hardship? I'm guessing "nothing much", because that is what we are hearing from the Labour Party. Nothing much.
    Expected would have been a better word to use to describe it. How the recovery is handled is crucial.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    I was purposely down marked on some of my mocks.

    My teachers didn't want me to get complacent.
    Did it work?
    Of course. You don't get to be an editor on PB without straight As.


    Surely?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,398

    It's a fucking pandemic. Of course it's devastating.

    If there weren't these job losses, you'd be screaming that the government was making mountains of molehills.

    Question: what would you have done differently to what Rishi Sunak has done to mitigate the hardship? I'm guessing "nothing much", because that is what we are hearing from the Labour Party. Nothing much.
    Sometimes life is unfair, sometimes incumbency is unfair.
    It certainly is, and I do think the government is ultimately screwed as a result. But it will be reasonable to seek to determine where problems were inevitable and unmitigatable, and where attempts at mitigation were possible but failed. I suspect massive job losses are in the former category, the school marking issue the latter.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,399
    I think I got ABC in my mocks. It would have got me in, but a far cry from my real results.

    I would never have known my true capabilities.

    Tough time for 6th formers.
  • humbuggerhumbugger Posts: 377
    What would Labour do instead of this?
  • LadyG said:

    It is 28.3C in north London. At 22:34. That is all.

    I spent £700 on a portable air con unit last week from Amazon.

    Not regretting it.
    You're blocked
  • We are officially in a recession.

    Actually we're not.

    Quarters 1 and 2 will have been a recession but the July to September period will have positive growth meaning the recession ended six weeks ago.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    edited August 2020

    I was purposely down marked on some of my mocks.

    My teachers didn't want me to get complacent.
    Did it work?
    4 As at A Level, I'd say it did.

    I did A Level maths in one year, and achieved an A, which I breezed, so there was a fear I might think A Levels were easy.
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 3,867
    edited August 2020

    kinabalu said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK: number of asylum seekers by year

    image

    Are there any statistics as to where the claim of asylum was made?
    IIRC, between 75 and 80% of claims happen at the UK's international airports. So, if we assume that 30,000 asylum seekers arrive in the UK each year, that means around 6,000 come via the Channel.

    (It doesn't get much reported, but more of France's asylum seekers head North to Belgium, Holland and beyond than try and cross the Channel. While Sangrettes and the Calais jungle gets all the press, the reality is that the French government puts migrant camps by their international borders, makes conditions really shit, and then hope that as many as possible self-deport. They do this because it is politically popular in France.)
    Many votes in being "tough" on this issue. Merkel was imo brave and principled to go the other way.
    Merkel was neither brace nor principled. Brave and principled would have been saying Germany would be taking more migrants and offering safe transport to get there. She took the path of least resistance instead and created a darkly Darwinian experiment of survival of the fittest that led to many deaths with no safe transit.

    Cameron was brave and principled.
    I think it rather telling, whether one supports Merkel's intentions or their consequences or not, that apparently cooperation between nations which is usually stated to be so vital went right out the window and it was deemed ok to act unilaterally in the way she did.
    I think PT is absolutely correct on this one. Merkel's behaviour was despicable.

    One point not noted was that Germany at the time had a shrinking population and a lot empty homes (unlike the UK) so had many facilities available.

    This was 2014:

    image
    She exposed the hypocrisy and empty rhetoric of lesser, narrow minded politicians. This is not my definition of despicable.
    She was the lesser, narrow minded politician.

    Did she offer to take refugees from camps at the front line?

    Did she offer safe transport and safe transit to a safe harbour?

    She did nothing.
    Except make it possible - in defiance of a rising tide of introverted populism - for 1m plus people fleeing destitution and violence to have the sort of life that you and I take for granted.
    Oh really?

    So did she offer safe transit for a million plus people?
    Did she have some selection criteria, or even lottery or any other metric to fairly determine who those million would be?
    Did she do so based on needs?

    Or did she walk away from making any decisions and did people smugglers and criminal gangs provide the transport for a million people leaving people to drown due to her inaction?

    Given your objections to eg private schools, I don't understand how you don't seethe with rage at how despicable her letting money and gangs determine who could migrate instead of fairness. Clearly your ideals on fairness only go so far.

    By saying that anyone who made it there could stay but there'd be no legal movement or safe transit and you'd have to pay people smugglers to get you there - was no more fair than a politician saying everyone should have a good education, so long as parents pay tuition fees to private schools and there will be no state schools.
    I do wonder about you sometimes. That is a bizarre take and a beyond bizarre analogy.
    What's confusing about it?

    Cameron bravely did the right thing to much opprobrium and criticism - the UK took in refugees directly from Turkey, giving them safe transit to get her. Educationally, that's similar to Comprehensive education that you support - getting it fairly rather than via connections or money.

    Merkel stepped back and said let others sort it out and walked off. She offered no safe transit and people smugglers stepped in to the void so the people who made it to Germany were those wealthy enough to pay smugglers or healthy enough to make it on their own back. The educational equivalent of private schools only.

    Why is it that with education you want it to be determined by the state "fairly" in your eyes - but for migration you think that it is to be commended allowing people smugglers and connections to determine who gets in without any safe and legal transit organised by the state?
    The analogy - Merkel's "private schools" solution to the migrant crisis vs Cameron's "bog standard comp" approach - is utterly ludicrous.

    I think you know this and are seeking to irritate rather than illuminate.

    I am therefore forced to cancel you again. Same terms as last time. 48 hours with potential rethink after 24.
    Before you cancel just answer one very simple question:

    Who provided more safe, state provided transit from Turkey: Merkel or Cameron?

    Are you afraid to admit the truth even to yourself.
    That seems almost completely irrelevant given that there were hundreds of thousands of refugees already crossing Europe at the height of the crisis in 2015. The immediate problem at the time was what to do with those who were already in Europe, and Merkel was the only one to offer more that mealy-mouthed platitudes. Cameron's offer of safe passage for a few thousand from Turkey was an insignificant drop in the ocean.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Sandpit said:

    moonshine said:

    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?

    Jared Kushner?
    Jews will not replace us.

    Watching 'The Plot Against America' I couldn't help but think of Jared when Rabbi Lionel Bengelsdorf was on screen.
    I keep thinking of John Oliver who said he’d never heard Kushner speak, so he got Gilbert Gottfried to mime his words like the BBC used to do with Gerry Adams. Every time I see Kushner now, I think he has a shouty and squeaky voice!
  • Triple lock? Where have we heard that before?

    Seems like the best of a bad situation.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    RobD said:

    It's a fucking pandemic. Of course it's devastating.

    If there weren't these job losses, you'd be screaming that the government was making mountains of molehills.

    Question: what would you have done differently to what Rishi Sunak has done to mitigate the hardship? I'm guessing "nothing much", because that is what we are hearing from the Labour Party. Nothing much.
    Expected would have been a better word to use to describe it. How the recovery is handled is crucial.
    Very true. However the scale of devastation makes a solid recovery by 2024 a very tough ask.

    By the way how is that trade deal with the EU coming along? Oh and Japan, cheese anyone?
  • Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    CON government is all about freedom of choice :lol:
  • ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649
    edited August 2020
    Oh, for god's sake. This is just farcical now. We didn't even have full mock exams, our grades were based on regular assessments then matched to value added scores from the past few years. There was a very accurate grade given to them, so use that one.
  • Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    Are LAB ahead in the polls yet?
  • kinabalu said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK: number of asylum seekers by year

    image

    Are there any statistics as to where the claim of asylum was made?
    IIRC, between 75 and 80% of claims happen at the UK's international airports. So, if we assume that 30,000 asylum seekers arrive in the UK each year, that means around 6,000 come via the Channel.

    (It doesn't get much reported, but more of France's asylum seekers head North to Belgium, Holland and beyond than try and cross the Channel. While Sangrettes and the Calais jungle gets all the press, the reality is that the French government puts migrant camps by their international borders, makes conditions really shit, and then hope that as many as possible self-deport. They do this because it is politically popular in France.)
    Many votes in being "tough" on this issue. Merkel was imo brave and principled to go the other way.
    Merkel was neither brace nor principled. Brave and principled would have been saying Germany would be taking more migrants and offering safe transport to get there. She took the path of least resistance instead and created a darkly Darwinian experiment of survival of the fittest that led to many deaths with no safe transit.

    Cameron was brave and principled.
    I think it rather telling, whether one supports Merkel's intentions or their consequences or not, that apparently cooperation between nations which is usually stated to be so vital went right out the window and it was deemed ok to act unilaterally in the way she did.
    I think PT is absolutely correct on this one. Merkel's behaviour was despicable.

    One point not noted was that Germany at the time had a shrinking population and a lot empty homes (unlike the UK) so had many facilities available.

    This was 2014:

    image
    She exposed the hypocrisy and empty rhetoric of lesser, narrow minded politicians. This is not my definition of despicable.
    She was the lesser, narrow minded politician.

    Did she offer to take refugees from camps at the front line?

    Did she offer safe transport and safe transit to a safe harbour?

    She did nothing.
    Except make it possible - in defiance of a rising tide of introverted populism - for 1m plus people fleeing destitution and violence to have the sort of life that you and I take for granted.
    Oh really?

    So did she offer safe transit for a million plus people?
    Did she have some selection criteria, or even lottery or any other metric to fairly determine who those million would be?
    Did she do so based on needs?

    Or did she walk away from making any decisions and did people smugglers and criminal gangs provide the transport for a million people leaving people to drown due to her inaction?

    Given your objections to eg private schools, I don't understand how you don't seethe with rage at how despicable her letting money and gangs determine who could migrate instead of fairness. Clearly your ideals on fairness only go so far.

    By saying that anyone who made it there could stay but there'd be no legal movement or safe transit and you'd have to pay people smugglers to get you there - was no more fair than a politician saying everyone should have a good education, so long as parents pay tuition fees to private schools and there will be no state schools.
    I do wonder about you sometimes. That is a bizarre take and a beyond bizarre analogy.
    What's confusing about it?

    Cameron bravely did the right thing to much opprobrium and criticism - the UK took in refugees directly from Turkey, giving them safe transit to get her. Educationally, that's similar to Comprehensive education that you support - getting it fairly rather than via connections or money.

    Merkel stepped back and said let others sort it out and walked off. She offered no safe transit and people smugglers stepped in to the void so the people who made it to Germany were those wealthy enough to pay smugglers or healthy enough to make it on their own back. The educational equivalent of private schools only.

    Why is it that with education you want it to be determined by the state "fairly" in your eyes - but for migration you think that it is to be commended allowing people smugglers and connections to determine who gets in without any safe and legal transit organised by the state?
    The analogy - Merkel's "private schools" solution to the migrant crisis vs Cameron's "bog standard comp" approach - is utterly ludicrous.

    I think you know this and are seeking to irritate rather than illuminate.

    I am therefore forced to cancel you again. Same terms as last time. 48 hours with potential rethink after 24.
    Before you cancel just answer one very simple question:

    Who provided more safe, state provided transit from Turkey: Merkel or Cameron?

    Are you afraid to admit the truth even to yourself.
    That seems almost completely irrelevant given that there were already hundreds of thousands of refugees in Europe at the height of the crisis in 2015. The immediate problem at the time was what to do with those who were already in Europe, and Merkel was the only one to offer more that mealy-mouthed platitudes. Cameron's offer of safe passage for a few thousand from Turkey was a drop in the ocean.
    No the hundreds of thousands in numbers surged AFTER Merkel unilaterally tore up the rulebook and said that she would accept people who make it there but not provide safe transport.

    But those hundreds of thousands either way were a drop in the ocean. There were millions of refugees. There were millions who ended in Turkey not hundreds of thousands. So what did Merkel offer to those millions beyond an incentive to pay people traffickers?

    Cameron offering safe transit and financial support to Turkey was far more honourable than Merkel encouraging criminal enterprises.
  • Ave_it said:

    Are LAB ahead in the polls yet?

    In time.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Trump's discussing "increasing cases" in European countries in percentage terms - omitting that they're starting from a much lower base! And keeps calling it the "China virus"
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,398
    ukpaul said:

    Oh, for god's sake. This is just farcical now. We didn't even have full mock exams, our grades were based on regular assessments then matched to value added scores from the past few years. There was a very accurate grade given to them, so use that one.
    I would absolutely love to see the list of potential options for this whole situation that civil servants will have drawn up, along with the risks and potential negatives. Given which options have been selected, some of the other ones on those lists must be quite something.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069

    Ave_it said:

    We are officially in a recession.

    Rishi will sort it out!
    The Nigel Pearson of the Conservative Party.
    Does he punch a lot of MPs?
  • That's actually a reasonably sensible suggestion.

    It gives pupils a choice and a responsibility.

    The alternative is 'I want, I want, I want' which does them no good in the medium or long term.
  • We are officially in a recession.

    Actually we're not.

    Quarters 1 and 2 will have been a recession but the July to September period will have positive growth meaning the recession ended six weeks ago.
    It will but that's not official until it's announced though is it?

    Technically I think we are officially in a recession now, but looking back we will be able to say the recession officially ended 30 June.

    Economics is fun.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787

    Trump's discussing "increasing cases" in European countries in percentage terms - omitting that they're starting from a much lower base! And keeps calling it the "China virus"

    NY Governor Cuomo calls it the "European Virus" as the initial outbreak in NY and neighbours seems to have come from Italy.
  • Is there a market for what name Trump gives to KH ?

    Sleepy Joe and ...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    RobD said:

    It's a fucking pandemic. Of course it's devastating.

    If there weren't these job losses, you'd be screaming that the government was making mountains of molehills.

    Question: what would you have done differently to what Rishi Sunak has done to mitigate the hardship? I'm guessing "nothing much", because that is what we are hearing from the Labour Party. Nothing much.
    Expected would have been a better word to use to describe it. How the recovery is handled is crucial.
    Very true. However the scale of devastation makes a solid recovery by 2024 a very tough ask.

    By the way how is that trade deal with the EU coming along? Oh and Japan, cheese anyone?
    The pandemic is also going to bring about structural changes in working patterns, which might otherwise have been seen over a decade or two. There’s probably a decade’s worth of economic rebalancing that needs to happen, but for most people their quality of life will look more positive than the raw GDP statistics will indicate.
  • kinabalu said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK: number of asylum seekers by year

    image

    Are there any statistics as to where the claim of asylum was made?
    IIRC, between 75 and 80% of claims happen at the UK's international airports. So, if we assume that 30,000 asylum seekers arrive in the UK each year, that means around 6,000 come via the Channel.

    (It doesn't get much reported, but more of France's asylum seekers head North to Belgium, Holland and beyond than try and cross the Channel. While Sangrettes and the Calais jungle gets all the press, the reality is that the French government puts migrant camps by their international borders, makes conditions really shit, and then hope that as many as possible self-deport. They do this because it is politically popular in France.)
    Many votes in being "tough" on this issue. Merkel was imo brave and principled to go the other way.
    Merkel was neither brace nor principled. Brave and principled would have been saying Germany would be taking more migrants and offering safe transport to get there. She took the path of least resistance instead and created a darkly Darwinian experiment of survival of the fittest that led to many deaths with no safe transit.

    Cameron was brave and principled.
    I think it rather telling, whether one supports Merkel's intentions or their consequences or not, that apparently cooperation between nations which is usually stated to be so vital went right out the window and it was deemed ok to act unilaterally in the way she did.
    I think PT is absolutely correct on this one. Merkel's behaviour was despicable.

    One point not noted was that Germany at the time had a shrinking population and a lot empty homes (unlike the UK) so had many facilities available.

    This was 2014:

    image
    She exposed the hypocrisy and empty rhetoric of lesser, narrow minded politicians. This is not my definition of despicable.
    She was the lesser, narrow minded politician.

    Did she offer to take refugees from camps at the front line?

    Did she offer safe transport and safe transit to a safe harbour?

    She did nothing.
    Except make it possible - in defiance of a rising tide of introverted populism - for 1m plus people fleeing destitution and violence to have the sort of life that you and I take for granted.
    Oh really?

    So did she offer safe transit for a million plus people?
    Did she have some selection criteria, or even lottery or any other metric to fairly determine who those million would be?
    Did she do so based on needs?

    Or did she walk away from making any decisions and did people smugglers and criminal gangs provide the transport for a million people leaving people to drown due to her inaction?

    Given your objections to eg private schools, I don't understand how you don't seethe with rage at how despicable her letting money and gangs determine who could migrate instead of fairness. Clearly your ideals on fairness only go so far.

    By saying that anyone who made it there could stay but there'd be no legal movement or safe transit and you'd have to pay people smugglers to get you there - was no more fair than a politician saying everyone should have a good education, so long as parents pay tuition fees to private schools and there will be no state schools.
    I do wonder about you sometimes. That is a bizarre take and a beyond bizarre analogy.
    What's confusing about it?

    Cameron bravely did the right thing to much opprobrium and criticism - the UK took in refugees directly from Turkey, giving them safe transit to get her. Educationally, that's similar to Comprehensive education that you support - getting it fairly rather than via connections or money.

    Merkel stepped back and said let others sort it out and walked off. She offered no safe transit and people smugglers stepped in to the void so the people who made it to Germany were those wealthy enough to pay smugglers or healthy enough to make it on their own back. The educational equivalent of private schools only.

    Why is it that with education you want it to be determined by the state "fairly" in your eyes - but for migration you think that it is to be commended allowing people smugglers and connections to determine who gets in without any safe and legal transit organised by the state?
    The analogy - Merkel's "private schools" solution to the migrant crisis vs Cameron's "bog standard comp" approach - is utterly ludicrous.

    I think you know this and are seeking to irritate rather than illuminate.

    I am therefore forced to cancel you again. Same terms as last time. 48 hours with potential rethink after 24.
    Before you cancel just answer one very simple question:

    Who provided more safe, state provided transit from Turkey: Merkel or Cameron?

    Are you afraid to admit the truth even to yourself.
    That seems almost completely irrelevant given that there were already hundreds of thousands of refugees in Europe at the height of the crisis in 2015. The immediate problem at the time was what to do with those who were already in Europe, and Merkel was the only one to offer more that mealy-mouthed platitudes. Cameron's offer of safe passage for a few thousand from Turkey was a drop in the ocean.
    No the hundreds of thousands in numbers surged AFTER Merkel unilaterally tore up the rulebook and said that she would accept people who make it there but not provide safe transport.

    But those hundreds of thousands either way were a drop in the ocean. There were millions of refugees. There were millions who ended in Turkey not hundreds of thousands. So what did Merkel offer to those millions beyond an incentive to pay people traffickers?

    Cameron offering safe transit and financial support to Turkey was far more honourable than Merkel encouraging criminal enterprises.
    No, you are misremembering. By September of 2015, over 300,000 refugees had already arrived in Europe, and it was only then that Merkel agreed that they could settle in Germany, thus solving what appeared to be a looming humanitarian catastrophe at the time. Cameron's settlement of a few thousand from Turkey was an insignificant gesture in comparison.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    Is there a market for what name Trump gives to KH ?

    Sleepy Joe and ...

    Shamela?
  • Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    It's a fucking pandemic. Of course it's devastating.

    If there weren't these job losses, you'd be screaming that the government was making mountains of molehills.

    Question: what would you have done differently to what Rishi Sunak has done to mitigate the hardship? I'm guessing "nothing much", because that is what we are hearing from the Labour Party. Nothing much.
    Expected would have been a better word to use to describe it. How the recovery is handled is crucial.
    Very true. However the scale of devastation makes a solid recovery by 2024 a very tough ask.

    By the way how is that trade deal with the EU coming along? Oh and Japan, cheese anyone?
    The pandemic is also going to bring about structural changes in working patterns, which might otherwise have been seen over a decade or two. There’s probably a decade’s worth of economic rebalancing that needs to happen, but for most people their quality of life will look more positive than the raw GDP statistics will indicate.
    The quality of life vs GDP trade-off will be fascinating.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    Foxy said:

    Ave_it said:

    We are officially in a recession.

    Rishi will sort it out!
    The Nigel Pearson of the Conservative Party.
    Does he punch a lot of MPs?
    It was a prediction, I was thinking more on the lines of, on the cusp of saving his team he got fired by his boss.

    I rate Nige. He was the brains behind Robson's "Great Escape" at the Baggies. I also thought it might get a reaction from Ave it.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Is there a market for what name Trump gives to KH ?

    Sleepy Joe and ...

    Phony Kamala apparently.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,574
    .

    Is there a market for what name Trump gives to KH ?

    Sleepy Joe and ...

    ... who gives a crap what he comes up with ?
  • EPGEPG Posts: 5,996
    Husband? So she doesn't just stand with Jewish people, she ... oh fill in the gap yourself, you rude readers!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    kinabalu said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK: number of asylum seekers by year

    image

    Are there any statistics as to where the claim of asylum was made?
    IIRC, between 75 and 80% of claims happen at the UK's international airports. So, if we assume that 30,000 asylum seekers arrive in the UK each year, that means around 6,000 come via the Channel.

    (It doesn't get much reported, but more of France's asylum seekers head North to Belgium, Holland and beyond than try and cross the Channel. While Sangrettes and the Calais jungle gets all the press, the reality is that the French government puts migrant camps by their international borders, makes conditions really shit, and then hope that as many as possible self-deport. They do this because it is politically popular in France.)
    Many votes in being "tough" on this issue. Merkel was imo brave and principled to go the other way.
    Merkel was neither brace nor principled. Brave and principled would have been saying Germany would be taking more migrants and offering safe transport to get there. She took the path of least resistance instead and created a darkly Darwinian experiment of survival of the fittest that led to many deaths with no safe transit.

    Cameron was brave and principled.
    I think it rather telling, whether one supports Merkel's intentions or their consequences or not, that apparently cooperation between nations which is usually stated to be so vital went right out the window and it was deemed ok to act unilaterally in the way she did.
    I think PT is absolutely correct on this one. Merkel's behaviour was despicable.

    One point not noted was that Germany at the time had a shrinking population and a lot empty homes (unlike the UK) so had many facilities available.

    This was 2014:

    image
    She exposed the hypocrisy and empty rhetoric of lesser, narrow minded politicians. This is not my definition of despicable.
    She was the lesser, narrow minded politician.

    Did she offer to take refugees from camps at the front line?

    Did she offer safe transport and safe transit to a safe harbour?

    She did nothing.
    Except make it possible - in defiance of a rising tide of introverted populism - for 1m plus people fleeing destitution and violence to have the sort of life that you and I take for granted.
    Oh really?

    So did she offer safe transit for a million plus people?
    Did she have some selection criteria, or even lottery or any other metric to fairly determine who those million would be?
    Did she do so based on needs?

    Or did she walk away from making any decisions and did people smugglers and criminal gangs provide the transport for a million people leaving people to drown due to her inaction?

    Given your objections to eg private schools, I don't understand how you don't seethe with rage at how despicable her letting money and gangs determine who could migrate instead of fairness. Clearly your ideals on fairness only go so far.

    By saying that anyone who made it there could stay but there'd be no legal movement or safe transit and you'd have to pay people smugglers to get you there - was no more fair than a politician saying everyone should have a good education, so long as parents pay tuition fees to private schools and there will be no state schools.
    I do wonder about you sometimes. That is a bizarre take and a beyond bizarre analogy.
    What's confusing about it?

    Cameron bravely did the right thing to much opprobrium and criticism - the UK took in refugees directly from Turkey, giving them safe transit to get her. Educationally, that's similar to Comprehensive education that you support - getting it fairly rather than via connections or money.

    Merkel stepped back and said let others sort it out and walked off. She offered no safe transit and people smugglers stepped in to the void so the people who made it to Germany were those wealthy enough to pay smugglers or healthy enough to make it on their own back. The educational equivalent of private schools only.

    Why is it that with education you want it to be determined by the state "fairly" in your eyes - but for migration you think that it is to be commended allowing people smugglers and connections to determine who gets in without any safe and legal transit organised by the state?
    The analogy - Merkel's "private schools" solution to the migrant crisis vs Cameron's "bog standard comp" approach - is utterly ludicrous.

    I think you know this and are seeking to irritate rather than illuminate.

    I am therefore forced to cancel you again. Same terms as last time. 48 hours with potential rethink after 24.
    Before you cancel just answer one very simple question:

    Who provided more safe, state provided transit from Turkey: Merkel or Cameron?

    Are you afraid to admit the truth even to yourself.
    No, I don't feel that I'm afraid to admit the truth even to myself. Although of course it's by definition possible.

    But anyway - that was better without the analogy. It's a shame the cancellation has already started otherwise we could have continued and just possibly got somewhere. Probably that Cameron was good on this issue but Merkel was different gravy.

    Ah well.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Nigelb said:

    .

    Is there a market for what name Trump gives to KH ?

    Sleepy Joe and ...

    ... who gives a crap what he comes up with ?
    Crooked Hillary was very good tbf, it definitely hurt her over the course of the campaign.
  • Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411

    Foxy said:

    Ave_it said:

    We are officially in a recession.

    Rishi will sort it out!
    The Nigel Pearson of the Conservative Party.
    Does he punch a lot of MPs?
    It was a prediction, I was thinking more on the lines of, on the cusp of saving his team he got fired by his boss.

    I rate Nige. He was the brains behind Robson's "Great Escape" at the Baggies. I also thought it might get a reaction from Ave it.
    Ave it no longer concerns himself with football and has now risen to the higher level of tiddlywinks
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069

    Foxy said:

    Ave_it said:

    We are officially in a recession.

    Rishi will sort it out!
    The Nigel Pearson of the Conservative Party.
    Does he punch a lot of MPs?
    It was a prediction, I was thinking more on the lines of, on the cusp of saving his team he got fired by his boss.

    I rate Nige. He was the brains behind Robson's "Great Escape" at the Baggies. I also thought it might get a reaction from Ave it.
    Are you an Ostrich?

    Big Nige would never need to pay for drinks in Leicester. A legend here, and despite his sacking for the racist sex orgy still on good terms with our owners.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    It's a fucking pandemic. Of course it's devastating.

    If there weren't these job losses, you'd be screaming that the government was making mountains of molehills.

    Question: what would you have done differently to what Rishi Sunak has done to mitigate the hardship? I'm guessing "nothing much", because that is what we are hearing from the Labour Party. Nothing much.
    Expected would have been a better word to use to describe it. How the recovery is handled is crucial.
    Very true. However the scale of devastation makes a solid recovery by 2024 a very tough ask.

    By the way how is that trade deal with the EU coming along? Oh and Japan, cheese anyone?
    The pandemic is also going to bring about structural changes in working patterns, which might otherwise have been seen over a decade or two. There’s probably a decade’s worth of economic rebalancing that needs to happen, but for most people their quality of life will look more positive than the raw GDP statistics will indicate.
    Personally I think the statistics will prove to be more positive than reality. I suspect technically we will be well out of recession by this time next year but on the ground aspirational types will be having their houses and cars repossessed, through circumstances that are out of their control.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,861
    moonshine said:

    Not to get ahead of ourselves. But who will the Republicans pick in 2024 against Harris then?

    Donald Trump.
  • Nigelb said:

    .

    Is there a market for what name Trump gives to KH ?

    Sleepy Joe and ...

    ... who gives a crap what he comes up with ?
    The names have been pretty effective so far.
  • Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    Has anyone on this site voted for Layla? :lol:
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    Ave_it said:

    Foxy said:

    Ave_it said:

    We are officially in a recession.

    Rishi will sort it out!
    The Nigel Pearson of the Conservative Party.
    Does he punch a lot of MPs?
    It was a prediction, I was thinking more on the lines of, on the cusp of saving his team he got fired by his boss.

    I rate Nige. He was the brains behind Robson's "Great Escape" at the Baggies. I also thought it might get a reaction from Ave it.
    Ave it no longer concerns himself with football and has now risen to the higher level of tiddlywinks
    Watford didn't concern themselves with football for the duration of the 2019/20 season either.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,861
    EPG said:

    Husband? So she doesn't just stand with Jewish people, she ... oh fill in the gap yourself, you rude readers!
    Having sex with your husband is not rude.
This discussion has been closed.