Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Senedd shake-up: what happens if Welsh Labour lose their majority? – politicalbetting.com

14567810»

Comments

  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,803
    MaxPB said:

    Heathrow airport directors need to be charged for negligence for this.
    Might have been a safety emergency (i.e. crush crowd).

    Home Office are more likely to be the problem here.
  • Options

    NEW THREAD

  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,007

    @Sean_F it's the Battle of Singapore by Peter Thompson, if you're interested.

    I'm just reading the chapters about the Japanese occupation of Singapore now.

    It is extremely disturbing reading.

    When you finish that, you must read Ian Toll's trilogy on the Pacific War. It's taken me two months to get through the entire three book series (and I have also been rather busy with other things), but it's genuinely excellent.
  • Options
    Charles said:

    kle4 said:

    TimT said:

    BBC rejects race complaint about use of ‘nitty-gritty’

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bbc-rejects-race-complaint-about-use-of-nitty-gritty-zmq96nzvq

    But MOTD aren't allowed to use it.

    TBH, I had no idea that anyone associated that term with racism. Can you be racist for using a term that you had no idea was racist?
    Don't use the word "spook" on American chat-rooms unless wearing flame-retardent clothing.
    Really? I thought it meant spy over there too, as in a CIA spook. Though IIRC the show Spooks was renamed to MI-5 for the american market.
    Another one to be careful of is "thug" - through usage it has become associated, in the US, with er.... pejorative, and inaccurate labelling of young black gentlemen.
    Wasn't that originally a somewhat 'eccentric' quasi religious group in India?
    Although I suppose that's just as bad!
    Malaysia I believe - the Thugees were followers of Kali
    The Thugs were Indians, in India, though certainly possible they had some adherents among Indian community in Malaya.

    Years ago read a fascinating book about the Thugs, based primarily on the records of British investigations and actions to first curb, them stomp them. Involved plenty of under-cover work, turning active Thugs into informants, and finally reforming them to curb their enthusiasm for Kali somewhat.

    Main result was greatly increased public safety and confidence when using main roads, which in turn was a major boon to commerce, communications and economic development.

    Lots of detail in the book on the Thug's modus operandi. Typically, a group of Thugs (generally an extended family) would join a group of travelers. Often by persuading them that there was safety in numbers.

    Then after several days on the road, after they'd gained the confidence of the rest of the party AND been able to scope out who had money & other valuables, and where, and were not in a position to be observed by outsiders, they would strike. Suddenly and without any warning.

    Then after they'd killed off the non-Thug portion of the company, they would expropriate their worldly goods, and generally bury their victims right in the road, so quickly and skillfully that the remains were rarely discovered. And nobody would know the crime had occurred, except that the victims never reached their destination.
  • Options
    Endillion said:

    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Just saw a poll that suggested 3% of people in the East Midlands would be very unlikely to have the jab rising to 14% in London. Pause for thought.

    Can only be explained by the higher EM population in London.
    Younger population too. Young people less keen to have the jab.
    Might have something to do with it. A quick search comes up with this:

    London's population is comparatively young; the average (median) age in London is 35.6, compared to 40.3 in the UK overall. More than one in 10 people living in Inner London (11.4%) are aged between 30 and 34. This compares to just 6.3% of those in the rest of England.

    A five year gap is actually larger than I'd expected or realised.
    It's always striking when you leave London, people look a lot older, whiter and fatter than you're used to in the Smoke.
    Yes, even going to somewhere like Essex or Kent is quite jarring for a Londoner.
    Isn't going to Essex jarring for everybody who isn't from Essex?
    Yes, but the real fear is crossing the river. That's a complete no-no, except for going to Brighton for the day or attending the racing at Epsom.
    I've observed that South Londoners are totally fine working, shopping and socialising in North London, even as they claim that the South is somehow vastly superior. No one I know from North London ever goes beyond the South Bank if they can possibly avoid it.
    Endillion said:

    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Just saw a poll that suggested 3% of people in the East Midlands would be very unlikely to have the jab rising to 14% in London. Pause for thought.

    Can only be explained by the higher EM population in London.
    Younger population too. Young people less keen to have the jab.
    Might have something to do with it. A quick search comes up with this:

    London's population is comparatively young; the average (median) age in London is 35.6, compared to 40.3 in the UK overall. More than one in 10 people living in Inner London (11.4%) are aged between 30 and 34. This compares to just 6.3% of those in the rest of England.

    A five year gap is actually larger than I'd expected or realised.
    It's always striking when you leave London, people look a lot older, whiter and fatter than you're used to in the Smoke.
    Yes, even going to somewhere like Essex or Kent is quite jarring for a Londoner.
    Isn't going to Essex jarring for everybody who isn't from Essex?
    Yes, but the real fear is crossing the river. That's a complete no-no, except for going to Brighton for the day or attending the racing at Epsom.
    I've observed that South Londoners are totally fine working, shopping and socialising in North London, even as they claim that the South is somehow vastly superior. No one I know from North London ever goes beyond the South Bank if they can possibly avoid it.
    That's my observation and experience too.
  • Options
    GaussianGaussian Posts: 793
    Foxy said:

    BBC News - Covid: Number of patients on ventilators passes 4,000 for first time
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55782716

    Certainly things are looking to get worse in the Midlands, with pressure on ICU to surge further, by stretching staff thinner and press-ganging staff from other areas.

    The forecast is for 700 covid inpatients in my Trust by next weekend, so 3 times the first wave. People are looking rather worn out by it all.
    Looking at the reported case data for Leicester, cases have been more or less constant in the 500s per week and 100,000 for nearly three weeks, whereas cases are falling >20% a week nationwide. Any idea what's causing that?
  • Options

    New Thread

  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,007

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    As I'm some way down the vaccination order, all I can offer from lowland East London is perception. Excel has opened as a mass vaccination centre and East Ham tube station has detailed instructions on how to get there via the DLR which is quite an easy journey.

    I had hoped we would see more local facilities - the local Church Hall for example - but for now it seems we will all have to try to get to Excel.

    Yes, what did happen to all these promised local vaccination places? Have they been put on hold until supply is better or has the centralising tendency triumphed and everything will be delivered via a smallish number of centres?
    Localised approach here in Lancashire and 85% of over 80's vaccinated and already well on with the 75 plus cohort. Can't understand the obsession with mega-centres.
    More efficient.

    I'd say that both approaches probably have their place, though the big vaccination hubs will come more and more into their own as the vaccine program works its way down the age cohorts. Working age recipients will, on average, be far more mobile, more receptive to early and late appointments, and better able to put up with waits in long chilly queues outside large buildings than the crocs.
    Here in LA, we have mega drive through vaccination centres. The one at the Dodger Stadium basiscally funnels you into a car park. You turn the engine off, and then a cart come alongside all the cars, vaccinating the occupants. People are required to then wait 15 minutes before driving off (to catch those who have reactions).

    When I drove past there, there must have been 2-3,000 cars in the system at any one time.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,736
    edited January 2021

    HYUFD said:

    Some encouraging news for Unionists in ST poll in that less than half of Scots want independence now including don't knows, more Northern Irish voters oppose a United Ireland than back it and the vast majority of English and Welsh voters wish to stay in the UK

    https://twitter.com/thesundaytimes/status/1353044013776035840?s=20

    BUT how would the concept of an independent Northern Ireland - independent of both UK and ROI - poll?

    Would be interesting to find out AND see the sub-samples on THAT.
    Upto now, no-one in Northern Ireland has taken the idea of an independent country seriously. A benign scenario, I think, is that NI over time gets more and more anchored into the Irish and EU sphere, while nominally remaining part of the UK. People will eventually say, this is an anachronism, let's move properly into the Republic. It avoids early and divisive border polls. Problem with this approach is the lack of democratic accountability, seeing no-one was asked whether they wanted this. Unionists will feel particularly aggrieved, but here's the thing. It wouldn't be Republicans that are the handmaiden of a United Ireland. It would be their very own DUP working in cahoots with the UK government.

    There are other scenarios that are less benign, unfortunately.
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I'd missed this - is it appropriate for an "expert" to block other experts?


    No.
    Yes, of course it is. It's entirely her choice.
    Sure. But for a professional, it is NOT a good look, and thus probably a bad choice by (and for) her.
    If you like.
    In balance I would point out that Twitter is cesspit and people, women especially, have to put up with a lot that they shouldn't have to.
    What looks like a hair-trigger overreaction in a couple of screenshots might actually be the culmination of a long and problematic pattern of behaviour. I don't know, and probably most on here don't either. We shouldn't moralise about people excluding themselves from certain conversations, they are the best judge of what they want.
    Or, more likely, it's a hair-trigger reaction for her being called out on the rubbish in her original tweet.
    Possibly, but once again it's her choice.
    Who said it wasn't? People are questioning the optics of that choice.
    It's nothing to do with anyone. Even if you think you know the full story, and you don't. There's no "optics". It's just nothing to do with you.
This discussion has been closed.