That is quite depressing. It could also be the end of the Tories, for now. If we grow four times slower than Germany, half the speed of France, voters WILL notice. The contrast will be painful
Tbf, the IMF forecasts on the UK economy have been fucking terrible for about a decade, coincidentally ever since Cameron and Osborne completely disregarded IMF policy advice on austerity and comprehensively proved them wrong about it.
But the focus of that tweet is not the IMF forecasts for Britain. He's using the official OBR forecasts for Britain, then using the IMF to compare these with other nations
The OBR thinks we are going to stagnate from 2023 onwards. That is what depresses me. Let's hope they are also wrong
That's an inevitability of the 25% corporation tax rate and eliminating the investment deduction. It is seriously, seriously awful policy. If it isn't reversed then we're in serious trouble. However, the population growth stats in the EFO are a bit off, they have assumed no reduction in population for 2020 and 2021 which is mad.
There are no forecasters who believe that changes like the corporation tax rise would take more off GDP over the next five years than the effects of Brexit, or anything even remotely in the same ballpark, as far as I know of it.
It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.
It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.
How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
Except that you're missing two very important points.
Even if the price goes up to match the amount of tax that would have been due they're no worse off. If the price goes up by less than the tax that would have been due they're still better off.
Tax and house prices are not the same thing. Tax needs paying up front 100% and doesn't count towards your mortgage equity. If the price goes up then the amount you would have put up front in tax can be contributed towards your equity in your deposit.
In neither scenario are you worse off by not having to pay the tax. The idea you're better off with lower house prices but tax on top is entirely myopic.
As you profess to be a libertarian I find your fondness for government intervention in free market price discovery a bit surprising.
House prices are simply a function of the affordability as defined by the monthly payment, that has been reduced by a deliberate and calculated reduction in interest rates in order to reduce the cost of borrowing.
The government consistently uses whatever trick it has to push house prices up, be that help to buy or the stamp duty holiday. While reducing the monthly payment via reducing interest rates.
This helps maintain high prices that benefits existing homeowners while new homeowners ultimately pay more over a greater number of years.
It is a racket at best, a ponzi scheme at worst. And it will end in tears sooner or later.
How is not taxing buyers as much an intervention in free market price discovery? Taxes are interfering.
It is not true to say that house prices have gone up due to low interest rates. The price rises occurred before interest rates fell to this level.
Your infographic is interesting but absolutely misleading. The rise in prices occurred in the 2000s when the interest rate was much higher than it is now. The fall in interest rates came afterwards but house prices have relatively stabilised.
House prices rose 7% in 2020, while CPI was estimated at 0.8%. In what way, shape or form, would you say property prices have "stabilised".
A Tory frontbencher called Harriet Harman a cow during the 1996 emergency statement on BSE.
Betty Boothroyd was unamused both with the language and with his less than apologetic statement, ‘I called the honourable member a stupid cow. If that is unparliamentary I withdraw it.’
Just before he was inaugurated President in 1861, Abraham Lincoln asked Congressman Thaddeus Stephens if a certain politico being considered for a cabinet position was corrupt. "Well," Stevens replied, "I don't think he'd try to steal a hot stove."
Lincoln was so amused by this, that he couldn't help repeating it, so it quickly got to ears of the politico in question, who naturally was quite offended, and complained to Lincoln. So the next time Abe met with Thad, he asked the Congressman if he would retract his remark?
"Ok," Stevens said, "come to think of it, I think that he probably WOULD steal a hot stove!"
Simon Cameron, Lincoln's first Secretary of War, correct?
Yes. Lincoln had to replace Cameron at the War Dept. (with Edwin Stanton) but Abe let him down easy (thus retaining his political support) by making him US Minister to Russia, which was about as far as he could send him from Washington DC.
The Scottish Greens may back the Scottish Tories' VONC
Swinney could be in trouble
The Scottish Greens are the only real option for a pro-independence protest vote so they would benefit from disarray in the SNP.
Good point. Also, the Greens love to hold the moral high ground, and gaze down at everyone else, and it's pretty clear where that is, here
If they DON'T support the VONC then they will look like SNP puppets. Could be costly
If the Greens were serious they'd be directing their ire at China, which burns more coal than the rest of the world put together and is responsible for 26% of global emissions.
But, they're much more interested in the trendy hippie anti-capitalist anti-western "alternative" lifestyle sort of thing.
I'm not sure what you think the Green Party can do about China's carbon emissions...
It can pressure the UK Government to put pressure on China, it can raise its profile in the media, it can put banners on Chinese brands and companies, it can implore celebrities to critique its approach, it can put pressure on western companies and firm to avoid doing business with them. It can do what Greenpeace did over Japanese whalers and draw attention to bad practices and create embarrassments.
Well that's because governors have control over covid regulations. MPs don't.
I say we eliminate all local government and make MPs responsible for their own constituencies, except for reserved matters like defence and foreign affairs, with broad standards set at Westminster but otherwise staying out of the MPs' fiefdom.
The Scottish Greens may back the Scottish Tories' VONC
Swinney could be in trouble
The Scottish Greens are the only real option for a pro-independence protest vote so they would benefit from disarray in the SNP.
Good point. Also, the Greens love to hold the moral high ground, and gaze down at everyone else, and it's pretty clear where that is, here
If they DON'T support the VONC then they will look like SNP puppets. Could be costly
If the Greens were serious they'd be directing their ire at China, which burns more coal than the rest of the world put together and is responsible for 26% of global emissions.
But, they're much more interested in the trendy hippie anti-capitalist anti-western "alternative" lifestyle sort of thing.
I'm not sure what you think the Green Party can do about China's carbon emissions...
It can pressure the UK Government to put pressure on China, it can raise its profile in the media, it can put banners on Chinese brands and companies, it can implore celebrities to critique its approach, it can put pressure on western companies and firm to avoid doing business with them. It can do what Greenpeace did over Japanese whalers and draw attention to bad practices and create embarrassments.
Lots of things, in fact.
Does the Green Party not do these things already?
I must admit I am not very knowledgeable on the activities of the Green Party but I'm willing to bet you're not either.
It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.
It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.
How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
All of these government 'initiatives' - Help to Buy, LISAs and stamp duty cuts - simply push up prices as described previously.
What we need is to 'encourage' the Buy To Let and other multiple home owner community to release their properties with a fair and equitable tax system on these people, who have had so many tax breaks in the past: - 5% stamp duty loading on acquisition of a second/BTL property (I know we have 3% now) - 3% capital charge PER YEAR - no tax relief on interest paid to buy BTL - double Council Tax on a second property - any capital gain taxed at 40%
That will 'encourage' these people to release these properties! Lots more supply. Prices fall, chance for renters and other aspirant buyers to buy.
Let's do it!
We did this last week.
As a policy, that will do untold damage to the marginal and less well-off members of the community, particularly very significant numbers who cannot access credit.
And in favour of relatively richer people.
It is crazy.
The unholy alliance between the rich and the poor.
The obvious solution has and always will be to increase interest rates slowly to c.3-4% to reduce the profitability of BTL.
Where will the human beings you are proposing to make homeless live?
Houses don't disappear when a landlord sells a property - some else buys it.
The Scottish Greens may back the Scottish Tories' VONC
Swinney could be in trouble
The Scottish Greens are the only real option for a pro-independence protest vote so they would benefit from disarray in the SNP.
I think that's more on paper that it is in reality.
My impression (anecdata alert) is that the majority of the pro-indy voters who are disillusioned with the SNP have little inclination to drift to the Greens.
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
This all sounds like the same old Palace clique deploying the same basic line they used against Princess Diana. Fact they believe their own press releases does NOT make them (to coin a phrase) "fair and balanced".
What IS interesting, is that they are using the same basic line as we deployed by their chinless wonder predecessors in the Palace a generation ago versus Princess Diana. AND with a very similar degree of obvious ineptitude.
Meaning they are HELPING rather than hurting Meghan, methinks.
I was in short trousers when all the Princess Di stuff was kicking off, so will take your word for it.
To be honest, I think Meghan's press releases (or those put out via her 'friends') are doing the job for the palace clique. If I were them, I'd retain a dignified silence. There does appear to be a bit of a briefing war going on, I admit, which makes me wonder what bombshell is going to turn up tomorrow.
The Scottish Greens may back the Scottish Tories' VONC
Swinney could be in trouble
The Scottish Greens are the only real option for a pro-independence protest vote so they would benefit from disarray in the SNP.
Good point. Also, the Greens love to hold the moral high ground, and gaze down at everyone else, and it's pretty clear where that is, here
If they DON'T support the VONC then they will look like SNP puppets. Could be costly
If the Greens were serious they'd be directing their ire at China, which burns more coal than the rest of the world put together and is responsible for 26% of global emissions.
But, they're much more interested in the trendy hippie anti-capitalist anti-western "alternative" lifestyle sort of thing.
I'm not sure what you think the Green Party can do about China's carbon emissions...
It can pressure the UK Government to put pressure on China, it can raise its profile in the media, it can put banners on Chinese brands and companies, it can implore celebrities to critique its approach, it can put pressure on western companies and firm to avoid doing business with them. It can do what Greenpeace did over Japanese whalers and draw attention to bad practices and create embarrassments.
Lots of things, in fact.
Does the Green Party not do these things already?
I must admit I am not very knowledgeable on the activities of the Green Party but I'm willing to bet you're not either.
I'm aware of their position on trans issues, UBI, large pay rises for public sector workers, and the EU. They're very public about all of that.
I haven't seen a snip about China. Given you and I are both pretty politically engaged people I'd say either they're not running such a campaign or they're doing it very badly.
Their website (google "green party campaigns") still trails the Paris conference and critiques David Cameron and George Osborne's policies, which means that page was last updated in mid-2015:
That is quite depressing. It could also be the end of the Tories, for now. If we grow four times slower than Germany, half the speed of France, voters WILL notice. The contrast will be painful
Tbf, the IMF forecasts on the UK economy have been fucking terrible for about a decade, coincidentally ever since Cameron and Osborne completely disregarded IMF policy advice on austerity and comprehensively proved them wrong about it.
But the focus of that tweet is not the IMF forecasts for Britain. He's using the official OBR forecasts for Britain, then using the IMF to compare these with other nations
The OBR thinks we are going to stagnate from 2023 onwards. That is what depresses me. Let's hope they are also wrong
That's an inevitability of the 25% corporation tax rate and eliminating the investment deduction. It is seriously, seriously awful policy. If it isn't reversed then we're in serious trouble. However, the population growth stats in the EFO are a bit off, they have assumed no reduction in population for 2020 and 2021 which is mad.
There are no forecasters who believe that changes like the corporation tax rise would take more off GDP over the next five years than the effects of Brexit, or anything even remotely in the same ballpark, as far as I know of it.
Brexit (that is, greater trading friction across the English Channel with continental Europe) can be offset by liberal regulatory reform, increased political flexibility to "events", increased skilled immigration, and a very favourable climate to investment and start-ups, particularly since our economy will re-kilter over time, and a greater focus on niche specialisms and R&D.
So far, I've only seen serious evidence of two of those. The Government has to do better.
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
This all sounds like the same old Palace clique deploying the same basic line they used against Princess Diana. Fact they believe their own press releases does NOT make them (to coin a phrase) "fair and balanced".
What IS interesting, is that they are using the same basic line as we deployed by their chinless wonder predecessors in the Palace a generation ago versus Princess Diana. AND with a very similar degree of obvious ineptitude.
Meaning they are HELPING rather than hurting Meghan, methinks.
I was in short trousers when all the Princess Di stuff was kicking off, so will take your word for it.
To be honest, I think Meghan's press releases (or those put out via her 'friends') are doing the job for the palace clique. If I were them, I'd retain a dignified silence. There does appear to be a bit of a briefing war going on, I admit, which makes me wonder what bombshell is going to turn up tomorrow.
The Telegraph claims it will be a substantive accusation of racism, or at least a major hint that way. This would be damaging, but it depends who it is aimed at
It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.
It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.
How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
Except that you're missing two very important points.
Even if the price goes up to match the amount of tax that would have been due they're no worse off. If the price goes up by less than the tax that would have been due they're still better off.
Tax and house prices are not the same thing. Tax needs paying up front 100% and doesn't count towards your mortgage equity. If the price goes up then the amount you would have put up front in tax can be contributed towards your equity in your deposit.
In neither scenario are you worse off by not having to pay the tax. The idea you're better off with lower house prices but tax on top is entirely myopic.
As you profess to be a libertarian I find your fondness for government intervention in free market price discovery a bit surprising.
House prices are simply a function of the affordability as defined by the monthly payment, that has been reduced by a deliberate and calculated reduction in interest rates in order to reduce the cost of borrowing.
The government consistently uses whatever trick it has to push house prices up, be that help to buy or the stamp duty holiday. While reducing the monthly payment via reducing interest rates.
This helps maintain high prices that benefits existing homeowners while new homeowners ultimately pay more over a greater number of years.
It is a racket at best, a ponzi scheme at worst. And it will end in tears sooner or later.
How is not taxing buyers as much an intervention in free market price discovery? Taxes are interfering.
It is not true to say that house prices have gone up due to low interest rates. The price rises occurred before interest rates fell to this level.
Your infographic is interesting but absolutely misleading. The rise in prices occurred in the 2000s when the interest rate was much higher than it is now. The fall in interest rates came afterwards but house prices have relatively stabilised.
House prices rose 7% in 2020, while CPI was estimated at 0.8%. In what way, shape or form, would you say property prices have "stabilised".
Because there's fluctuations from year to year, over the course of the past decade prices have risen a fraction of what they had the decade before.
Have a look at the rise of house prices from 1997-2017 prior to interest rates falling, and contrast that with changes in the past decade.
Incidentally the infographic contained more nonsense. UK household income was not over 20k in 1990 in 1990 pounds. 20k is real household income in today's money after adjusting for inflation. People in 1990 weren't paying their mortgage with inflated cash in today's money. You need to look at actual nominal income in 1990 which isn't the figure on the chart.
We are 17th for cases and 14th for deaths. Vaccination REALLY works (as does strict lockdown)
I agree completely. I just hope the success of the vaccine programme means the lockdown will be over pretty soon and we won't have to do any of this ever again. No masks, no lockdown, no social distancing once it's over.
We are 17th for cases and 14th for deaths. Vaccination REALLY works (as does strict lockdown)
I agree completely. I just hope the success of the vaccine programme means the lockdown will be over pretty soon and we won't have to do any of this ever again. No masks, no lockdown, no social distancing once it's over.
I've been pessimistic about this pandemic since late January 2020. For the first time I am quietly optimistic that we really are through the worst, and from here on we heal
A Tory frontbencher called Harriet Harman a cow during the 1996 emergency statement on BSE.
Betty Boothroyd was unamused both with the language and with his less than apologetic statement, ‘I called the honourable member a stupid cow. If that is unparliamentary I withdraw it.’
Just before he was inaugurated President in 1861, Abraham Lincoln asked Congressman Thaddeus Stephens if a certain politico being considered for a cabinet position was corrupt. "Well," Stevens replied, "I don't think he'd try to steal a hot stove."
Lincoln was so amused by this, that he couldn't help repeating it, so it quickly got to ears of the politico in question, who naturally was quite offended, and complained to Lincoln. So the next time Abe met with Thad, he asked the Congressman if he would retract his remark?
"Ok," Stevens said, "come to think of it, I think that he probably WOULD steal a hot stove!"
Simon Cameron, Lincoln's first Secretary of War, correct?
Ah, Thaddeus Stephens. Played magnificently in the film Lincoln by Tommy Lee Jones, who obviously enjoyed himself tremendously.
We are 17th for cases and 14th for deaths. Vaccination REALLY works (as does strict lockdown)
I agree completely. I just hope the success of the vaccine programme means the lockdown will be over pretty soon and we won't have to do any of this ever again. No masks, no lockdown, no social distancing once it's over.
I've been pessimistic about this pandemic since late January 2020. For the first time I am quietly optimistic that we really are through the worst, and from here on we heal
I’ve just been doing some rapid sums, and the DfE have got their figures wrong on school holidays (amazingly, a bunch of innumerate idiots can’t add up).
If we assume - and I think this is a very safe assumption, if only because it includes three bank holidays - that the Christmas/New Year break is sacrosanct, it is totally impossible to have two eight week terms plus a two week half term in October without starting the school year midway through August.
Which again, is not necessarily a stupid idea, although it would further complicate teacher contracts which currently run 1st Sept-31st Aug. But the proposals as they have been described don’t match this funny thing called the calendar.
Quick check indicates that at least some of the schools who experimented with the idea in the early 2000s reverted back to the traditional year structure.
Part of the problem then, as I recall, was that it put them out of step with everyone else which was very unpopular with parents trying to book holidays,
Definitely didn't help. But there are a couple of other things- The key one is that everyone in schools is a dribbling fool by the end of a 7-8 week half-term, due to exhaustion. You could put them in the DfE and nobody could tell the difference. (If it were up to me, I'd move the start of the autumn term back a week and have two week-long breaks; one in early October and the other in mid-November). We really don't want every term to be like that.
The other populist one is that it would utter bork the family holiday business. It's bad enough when everyone with kids has a summer holiday in a six week window, but this scheme would cut that to four. And, whilst nobody wants to be the first to raise it, it's the populist thing that will kill this scheme.
Two things:
1) I think with longer breaks in between, eight week terms are manageable. I’m no more tired in October than I usually am in February, but with only the one-week window in October I’m fading fast by the start of December,
2) No matter how exhausted I get, no matter how much of a dribbling idiot, I would still not be in any way remotely on the level of civil servants in the DFE. These are people who would have seen the first schedule of Berliner Brandenburg as a triumph. Heck, they don’t even know how many weeks there are in a month.
I went to school in Atlanta, with no half terms and only a week at Christmas and Easter, 3 months in the summer. It took just a couple of terms to adapt, there is nothing sacrosanct about the current school year.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Hmm. Not saying you are wrong, but one of the take home messages of, IIRC, Laura Spinney's book on it was that the Flu 1918-19 was pretty much erased, or at least suppressed, from collective memory. Mind, possibly because it was part and parcel of the Great War.
The other thing to say on holidays of course is that whatever happens with schools it is very long overdue to have reform of the Parliamentary calendar so they are sitting a lot more - even if they do more committee work and fewer debates in the chamber.
Moreover, it is high time there was a minimum attendance requirement. Sinn Fein are a slightly special case but the likes of Jared O’Mara just took the piss.
How do you expect me to manage my 52 Non- Executive Directorships, the after dinner speeches and attend the HoC for more than a day a month? There are only so many days in a year!
It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.
It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.
How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
Except that you're missing two very important points.
Even if the price goes up to match the amount of tax that would have been due they're no worse off. If the price goes up by less than the tax that would have been due they're still better off.
Tax and house prices are not the same thing. Tax needs paying up front 100% and doesn't count towards your mortgage equity. If the price goes up then the amount you would have put up front in tax can be contributed towards your equity in your deposit.
In neither scenario are you worse off by not having to pay the tax. The idea you're better off with lower house prices but tax on top is entirely myopic.
As you profess to be a libertarian I find your fondness for government intervention in free market price discovery a bit surprising.
House prices are simply a function of the affordability as defined by the monthly payment, that has been reduced by a deliberate and calculated reduction in interest rates in order to reduce the cost of borrowing.
The government consistently uses whatever trick it has to push house prices up, be that help to buy or the stamp duty holiday. While reducing the monthly payment via reducing interest rates.
This helps maintain high prices that benefits existing homeowners while new homeowners ultimately pay more over a greater number of years.
It is a racket at best, a ponzi scheme at worst. And it will end in tears sooner or later.
How is not taxing buyers as much an intervention in free market price discovery? Taxes are interfering.
It is not true to say that house prices have gone up due to low interest rates. The price rises occurred before interest rates fell to this level.
Your infographic is interesting but absolutely misleading. The rise in prices occurred in the 2000s when the interest rate was much higher than it is now. The fall in interest rates came afterwards but house prices have relatively stabilised.
House prices rose 7% in 2020, while CPI was estimated at 0.8%. In what way, shape or form, would you say property prices have "stabilised".
Because there's fluctuations from year to year, over the course of the past decade prices have risen a fraction of what they had the decade before.
Have a look at the rise of house prices from 1997-2017 prior to interest rates falling, and contrast that with changes in the past decade.
Incidentally the infographic contained more nonsense. UK household income was not over 20k in 1990 in 1990 pounds. 20k is real household income in today's money after adjusting for inflation. People in 1990 weren't paying their mortgage with inflated cash in today's money. You need to look at actual nominal income in 1990 which isn't the figure on the chart.
When you say there are fluctuations from year on year, can you tell me the last time house prices fell relative to earnings? How many years out of the last ten have house prices fluctuated "down"?
It's a really easy wheeze.
Government controls the cost of borrowing via interest rates. Reduce the interest rates and the property becomes more affordable, however this enables prices to rise - aided by help to buy etc. Existing owners benefit from increased prices, equity etc. New buyers don't feel the pain because their monthly repayment remains the same while the amount they are borrowing increases exponentially.
Except of course it is a house of cards and keeping interest rates artificially low has led to an enormous rise in the gap between rich and poor. Whereas in 1990 you needed to save for a deposit for three or four years nowadays unless you have bank of mum and dad (and mum and dad are rich) then forget about it.
The housing market is an enormous bubble that successive governments, both Labour and Conservative, have had to use every mechanism at their disposal to inflate, because the alternative would be to crash the entire economy.
For decades now governments have intervened to prop up house prices. House prices as they stand now are a direct function of deliberate government policy on interest rates as well as artificial demand side policies such as help to buy,
Now, that may be a good thing, or it may be a bad thing. But as a supposed libertarian, I find it odd that you support such extensive government intervention.
We are 17th for cases and 14th for deaths. Vaccination REALLY works (as does strict lockdown)
I agree completely. I just hope the success of the vaccine programme means the lockdown will be over pretty soon and we won't have to do any of this ever again. No masks, no lockdown, no social distancing once it's over.
I've been pessimistic about this pandemic since late January 2020. For the first time I am quietly optimistic that we really are through the worst, and from here on we heal
What worries me now is the economy. Hey ho
Did you ever meet that Eadric chap? He was very pessimistic too.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Somewhat counter-intuitively, there's very little record of the 1918-1920 flu in popular culture of the time and the two big post-war flu pandemics (57-58 and 68-69) appear to have been all but forgotten.
The other thing to say on holidays of course is that whatever happens with schools it is very long overdue to have reform of the Parliamentary calendar so they are sitting a lot more - even if they do more committee work and fewer debates in the chamber.
Moreover, it is high time there was a minimum attendance requirement. Sinn Fein are a slightly special case but the likes of Jared O’Mara just took the piss.
How do you expect me to manage my 52 Non- Executive Directorships, the after dinner speeches and attend the HoC for more than a day a month? There are only so many days in a year!
If they’re making that much money, they can manage without a salary and expenses for being an MP, can’t they?
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Hmm. Not saying you are wrong, but one of the take home messages of, IIRC, Laura Spinney's book on it was that the Flu 1918-19 was pretty much erased, or at least suppressed, from collective memory. Mind, possibly because it was part and parcel of the Great War.
I believe SeanT, once of this parish, wrote of this tendency: we forget about plagues BECAUSE they are so awful, worse than war. We strive to erase them. Which means we have to relearn the lessons when they recur. eg Masks
However I reckon social media has made this impossible, and, yes, Covid is not "helpfully" overshadowed by a truly terrible war
So we will try to "forget" Covid, but we will not succeed. There will be an orgy of pleasure-seeking, however, just as there was in the 1920s
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Somewhat counter-intuitively, there's very little record of the 1918-1920 flu in popular culture of the time and the two big post-war flu pandemics (57-58 and 68-69) appear to have been all but forgotten.
My Mum and her Mother were both quite ill one Christmas (I guess it must've been 1968) with the Hong Kong flu - although Mum had forgotten all about this until a neighbour in her village happened to mention it. As you say, it's been virtually erased from our collective consciousness.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Horrible winter. The US election, second lockdown, the B117, the transition cliff edge, the Capitol Insurrection, third lockdown. Let’s not count any chickens re Covid but I can say one thing for certain - the days will be getting longer for at least 3 1/2 months.
The other thing to say on holidays of course is that whatever happens with schools it is very long overdue to have reform of the Parliamentary calendar so they are sitting a lot more - even if they do more committee work and fewer debates in the chamber.
Moreover, it is high time there was a minimum attendance requirement. Sinn Fein are a slightly special case but the likes of Jared O’Mara just took the piss.
How do you expect me to manage my 52 Non- Executive Directorships, the after dinner speeches and attend the HoC for more than a day a month? There are only so many days in a year!
If they’re making that much money, they can manage without a salary and expenses for being an MP, can’t they?
I'd rather they binned the extra curricular nonsense and worked full time as an MP on a sensible salary plus reasonable expenses.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
When danger reared its ugly head, Sir @eadric bravely turned and fled...
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Horrible winter. The US election, second lockdown, the B117, the transition cliff edge, the Capitol Insurrection, third lockdown. Let’s not count any chickens re Covid but I can say one thing for certain - the days will be getting longer for at least 3 1/2 months.
Several people have commented to me that having an end date makes it seem longer. 21st June seems a million years away....
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Somewhat counter-intuitively, there's very little record of the 1918-1920 flu in popular culture of the time and the two big post-war flu pandemics (57-58 and 68-69) appear to have been all but forgotten.
Yes, I thoroughly expect us all to engage in an effort of voluntary amnesia to avoid ever having to think about this shitty period again once we've left it.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Hmm. Not saying you are wrong, but one of the take home messages of, IIRC, Laura Spinney's book on it was that the Flu 1918-19 was pretty much erased, or at least suppressed, from collective memory. Mind, possibly because it was part and parcel of the Great War.
I believe SeanT, once of this parish, wrote of this tendency: we forget about plagues BECAUSE they are so awful, worse than war. We strive to erase them. Which means we have to relearn the lessons when they recur. eg Masks
However I reckon social media has made this impossible, and, yes, Covid is not "helpfully" overshadowed by a truly terrible war
So we will try to "forget" Covid, but we will not succeed. There will be an orgy of pleasure-seeking, however, just as there was in the 1920s
And of course BannedinnParis and BlackRook have just mentioned the flus of thje 1950s and 1960s - but less could then be done and less was done, so perhaps less impact, who knows?
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
I've learnt a valuable life lesson tonight. Apparently you must have at least 2 years worth of experience in a role in order to be eligible to apply for an "entry level" role of the same nature. Cool.
This could be a very good week - although I don't think it is legally obliged so early, we might get some publication of notices of election for May. Happy times.
What’s missing in the Scottish political scene is a centre right pro Independence Party. Maybe the ISP will become that party, if they get any publicity or a high profile politician crosses the floor.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Horrible winter. The US election, second lockdown, the B117, the transition cliff edge, the Capitol Insurrection, third lockdown. Let’s not count any chickens re Covid but I can say one thing for certain - the days will be getting longer for at least 3 1/2 months.
Several people have commented to me that having an end date makes it seem longer. 21st June seems a million years away....
But Easter doesn't, and after that we can work from one stepping stone to the next.
Now, what we could really do with is a repetition of last Spring's weather. If we get that and then the first proper phase of unlocking's done on time on April 12th, then the rest of the period to June 21st should feel as though it's passing much more quickly and easily, I suspect.
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
For all that "The Crown" is criticised for it's lack of authenticity, (I wouldn't really know, so it is pretty much told me all I know about the Royal Family), William's behaviour is in keeping with QEIIs as Harry's is to Margaret, dont you think? William is the anointed one who can't show emotion/give opinions - Harry as the younger sibling, will always be overlooked, but has the freedom to rebel
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Horrible winter. The US election, second lockdown, the B117, the transition cliff edge, the Capitol Insurrection, third lockdown. Let’s not count any chickens re Covid but I can say one thing for certain - the days will be getting longer for at least 3 1/2 months.
Several people have commented to me that having an end date makes it seem longer. 21st June seems a million years away....
They have a point. 3 1/2 months ago the biggest arguments on here were with HYUFD about Trafalgar Group’s polling. That feels like aeons ago.
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
A fair analysis. Harry needs to find something positive to DO and in short order. Or he will be seen as a guy monetising his own misery and his mother's death, at the expense of his family. He's pretty close now
I am sure Meghan Markle can look after herself, and good luck to her
I still feel sorry for him, tho. That little kid walking behind his mum's coffin, in front of a million people in the streets of London, and a billion around the world
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
I'm a bit more sympathetic, but the not staying away from the press thing is hard to not question. PhilipThompson equated complaints of such to demanding he not talk about the royal family, but I don't really think that is it. He has a lot of things he apparently wants to talk about, and he and his wife probably have plenty to offer people. So why the focus on the royal stuff almost exclusively?
Yes there's leaks, which are stupid, against his wife at the moment, but that's something neither side is able to claim the moral high ground on as its being going on for ages with 'reports' from 'friends' and unnamed officials and the like. Both sides will use the exact same defence, of not being silent while the other side trashes them, so there's no end there. One side or another needs to not just claim the moral high ground, but actually have it by ending the stupid circle jerk.
Phillip's funeral, when it comes, will be quite the awkward affair.
What’s missing in the Scottish political scene is a centre right pro Independence Party. Maybe the ISP will become that party, if they get any publicity or a high profile politician crosses the floor.
It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to remind the SNP that they don't have any god-given right to hoover up the pro-indy vote. The Greens are too small and too much the junior party in that relationship to really put that sort of pressure on the SNP.
And to be honest I've always thought the likelihood of Scottish independence would be best served by multiple strong indy voices in the parliament. Too much "SNP vs. the rest" is not the best way to make the argument for independence. 3 indy parties (say) versus 3 unionist parties, better balance to the debate.
Do you think there's any decent chance of a name going over to the ISP?
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
For all that "The Crown" is criticised for it's lack of authenticity, (I wouldn't really know, so it is pretty much told me all I know about the Royal Family), William's behaviour is in keeping with QEIIs as Harry's is to Margaret, dont you think? William is the anointed one who can't show emotion/give opinions - Harry as the younger sibling, will always be overlooked, but has the freedom to rebel
The Crown should be criticised for being too boring even for this monarchist to watch, not its inauthenticity.
But Will does appear to be the aloof, controlled one in the image of his grandmother. For another royal comparison, the Kim Jong Un to Elizabeth's Kim Il Sung?
I've learnt a valuable life lesson tonight. Apparently you must have at least 2 years worth of experience in a role in order to be eligible to apply for an "entry level" role of the same nature. Cool.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Horrible winter. The US election, second lockdown, the B117, the transition cliff edge, the Capitol Insurrection, third lockdown. Let’s not count any chickens re Covid but I can say one thing for certain - the days will be getting longer for at least 3 1/2 months.
Several people have commented to me that having an end date makes it seem longer. 21st June seems a million years away....
But Easter doesn't, and after that we can work from one stepping stone to the next.
Now, what we could really do with is a repetition of last Spring's weather. If we get that and then the first proper phase of unlocking's done on time on April 12th, then the rest of the period to June 21st should feel as though it's passing much more quickly and easily, I suspect.
Absolutely. Get to the 29th, and then Easter, and then hopefully the 12th and even if things are completely open, with fine weather and some socialising, coupled with (again hopefully) successful vaccination programme and (again hopefully) continued falls in hospitalisations and deaths, it will feel very different.
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
Yes, but we are all individuals. The fact that William has reacted differently to childhood traumas does not diminish the reality of Harry's experiences.
Harry has the problem of all second sons in an archaic system of primogenture. It seems to me that though all his life he has been searching for a meaningful role. He found it for a while in the army, providing him with the family support that he never had previously. Once that was over, like many ex soldiers he was lost.
It took him a while to find that family that he never had. He looks happier than ever in his life. Good luck to him, he has earned it.
The only way they can survive - in their accustomed style - is by monetising the terrible relationship with the Royal Family. Turning grievance and gossip into cash. So endless Oprah interviews and more "revelations"?
But that cannot continue indefintely, they will run out of material. Her looks - she remains very lovely, despite being 40 - will eventually fade, his vulnerable boyishness - which he still has - will also dwindle.
I wonder if at that point they will twist the narrative, and reach out for a grand reconciliation. More time in the UK. Big hugs by the brothers. That keeps their story going, keeps itinteresting, and also means money and help. If GPT3, sorry, a good fiction writer was telling their story, that is the obvious big upcoming plot twist. About 3 years away
Or Granny's death, if that comes earlier. I think he has had a tough life. Those truly shocking scenes where he and his brother had to follow their mother's coffin through the streets look beyond belief in retrospect. Frankly child abuse. His hatred of our press is understandable. I hope he finds some happiness but its not a matter that affects the UK greatly.
Good point about the funeral. I watched it on the Mall. Amazing scenes, and looking back, it does seem rather cruel in retrospect
They are like a Greek myth, the Royal Family. Cruelty and sex, power and hallucinations
Philip's mother is a good part of a Greek tragedy story, too. A chain-smoking Greek orthodox nun, haunting and wondering the corridors of Buckingham Palace in the late 'sixties like a spectre, exiled from her home by her family's acquiescence in the coup there.
But also a woman who saved a Jewish family from the Nazis in Athens and who is recognised as one of the Righteous at Vad Yashem. That takes some courage: physical, mental, moral. We have forgotten what real virtue means - and it usually involves putting others, rather than oneself, first.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Horrible winter. The US election, second lockdown, the B117, the transition cliff edge, the Capitol Insurrection, third lockdown. Let’s not count any chickens re Covid but I can say one thing for certain - the days will be getting longer for at least 3 1/2 months.
Good old celestial mechanics, it won't let us down at least.
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
For all that "The Crown" is criticised for it's lack of authenticity, (I wouldn't really know, so it is pretty much told me all I know about the Royal Family), William's behaviour is in keeping with QEIIs as Harry's is to Margaret, dont you think? William is the anointed one who can't show emotion/give opinions - Harry as the younger sibling, will always be overlooked, but has the freedom to rebel
The Crown should be criticised for being too boring even for this monarchist to watch, not its inauthenticity.
But Will does appear to be the aloof, controlled one in the image of his grandmother. For another royal comparison, the Kim Jong Un to Elizabeth's Kim Il Sung?
"boring"? Really?
It sometimes gets a bit detailed, but it is generally excellent, and sometimes brilliant. The first series in particular - Churchill, the Smog, Margaret - was amazingly well done
I'd put the latest series second. Superb TV
It has, by the by, further elevated the British Royal Family to being the most famous family in the world (if they weren't already), by an enormous distance. No one else comes close. Not necessarily where the Royals want to be be, but good for box office and British tourism. Everyone is invested in this narrative. The whole world has binge-watched
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
I'm a bit more sympathetic, but the not staying away from the press thing is hard to not question. PhilipThompson equated complaints of such to demanding he not talk about the royal family, but I don't really think that is it. He has a lot of things he apparently wants to talk about, and he and his wife probably have plenty to offer people. So why the focus on the royal stuff almost exclusively?
Yes there's leaks, which are stupid, against his wife at the moment, but that's something neither side is able to claim the moral high ground on as its being going on for ages with 'reports' from 'friends' and unnamed officials and the like. Both sides will use the exact same defence, of not being silent while the other side trashes them, so there's no end there. One side or another needs to not just claim the moral high ground, but actually have it by ending the stupid circle jerk.
Phillip's funeral, when it comes, will be quite the awkward affair.
Exactly. They had everything going for them; public onside, freedom to carve out a role as they saw fit. Yes, the tabloids can be harsh, but she's a Hollywood actress ffs, she should be used to it. I'm not buying the hordes of racists at the gate argument either, although if Leon is to believe they haven't played their last card there.
Harry was a few years younger than his brother when Diana passed away, which I understand can make a big difference. There's probably something in not being the heir, and not having that purpose in life like his brother too. Bad actors can take advantage of that, but he really should grow up and stop playing the victim.
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
A fair analysis. Harry needs to find something positive to DO and in short order. Or he will be seen as a guy monetising his own misery and his mother's death, at the expense of his family. He's pretty close now
I am sure Meghan Markle can look after herself, and good luck to her
I still feel sorry for him, tho. That little kid walking behind his mum's coffin, in front of a million people in the streets of London, and a billion around the world
By keeping a stiff Royal upper lip and being made to traipse after their recently deceased mother's coffin in front of the entire world must have been a mind-**** of the highest order. Prince Charles should hang his head in shame for that single dereliction of parental duty.
A year ago yesterday, I did my most recent "inter-city" rail journey, Aberdeen to Inverness. Also the last time I "coloured in" a newly traversed section of track on my Baker GB Railway Atlas.
Covid severely fucked up my attempt to finish off the official GB "National Rail" network in 2020! Especially when I just had two trains left to do (both from Inverness, incidentally!).
Anyway, my railway Bouquet-list includes:
Inverness to Kyle of Lochalsh Inverness to Thurso/Wick
and also:
The Sunday-only "Dale Rail" from Clitheroe to Hellifield The Manchester Metrolink branch to Trafford Centre (only open from Mother's Day last year - the day before lockdown!)
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
For all that "The Crown" is criticised for it's lack of authenticity, (I wouldn't really know, so it is pretty much told me all I know about the Royal Family), William's behaviour is in keeping with QEIIs as Harry's is to Margaret, dont you think? William is the anointed one who can't show emotion/give opinions - Harry as the younger sibling, will always be overlooked, but has the freedom to rebel
The Crown should be criticised for being too boring even for this monarchist to watch, not its inauthenticity.
But Will does appear to be the aloof, controlled one in the image of his grandmother. For another royal comparison, the Kim Jong Un to Elizabeth's Kim Il Sung?
"boring"? Really?
It sometimes gets a bit detailed, but it is generally excellent, and sometimes brilliant. The first series in particular - Churchill, the Smog, Margaret - was amazingly well done
I'd put the latest series second. Superb TV
It has, by the by, further elevated the British Royal Family to being the most famous family in the world (if they weren't already), by an enormous distance. No one else comes close. Not necessarily where the Royals want to be be, but good for box office and British tourism. Everyone is invested in this narrative. The whole world has binge-watched
I think I just got sick and tired of watching Prince Phillip whinge incessantly through the first series so I couldn't get through it.
I've learnt a valuable life lesson tonight. Apparently you must have at least 2 years worth of experience in a role in order to be eligible to apply for an "entry level" role of the same nature. Cool.
Ah mate it's a fucking nightmare, I remember at the start of my career I had to have a portfolio of homebrew games that I'd developed myself before I even got through screening rounds at some publishers. It felt like employers wanted to hire the finished article for junior roles and eventually I decided to own having no work experience and wrote my cover letters on the basis of wanting to continually learn new methods and best practices and to start our my career at their place and become someone that has a very good level of business impact within a year. Once I owned it I got a surprisingly decent number of responses.
Sadly that was 12 years ago and I think now with automated screening systems I wouldn't have made it through that in the first place for most companies. It's actually something I think needs serious reform.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Somewhat counter-intuitively, there's very little record of the 1918-1920 flu in popular culture of the time and the two big post-war flu pandemics (57-58 and 68-69) appear to have been all but forgotten.
My Mum and her Mother were both quite ill one Christmas (I guess it must've been 1968) with the Hong Kong flu - although Mum had forgotten all about this until a neighbour in her village happened to mention it. As you say, it's been virtually erased from our collective consciousness.
The "Roaring '20s" are generally considered part of the aftermath of World War I, resulting from the high level of social stress & transformation caused by global, total warfare.
However, am thinking that the Spanish Flu Pandemic may have played just as great a role. Especially in countries - the USA in particular - where the costs of WWI in sweat, blood, tears & treasure were NOT huge, but where the pandemic was widespread & deadly across America.
WWI trumped the Spanish Flu in modern memory, right from the start, and continues to do so a century later.
As for THIS pandemic, well, don't think there is an alternative, comparable trauma, at least not for most of the world.
It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.
It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.
How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
Except that you're missing two very important points.
Even if the price goes up to match the amount of tax that would have been due they're no worse off. If the price goes up by less than the tax that would have been due they're still better off.
Tax and house prices are not the same thing. Tax needs paying up front 100% and doesn't count towards your mortgage equity. If the price goes up then the amount you would have put up front in tax can be contributed towards your equity in your deposit.
In neither scenario are you worse off by not having to pay the tax. The idea you're better off with lower house prices but tax on top is entirely myopic.
As you profess to be a libertarian I find your fondness for government intervention in free market price discovery a bit surprising.
House prices are simply a function of the affordability as defined by the monthly payment, that has been reduced by a deliberate and calculated reduction in interest rates in order to reduce the cost of borrowing.
The government consistently uses whatever trick it has to push house prices up, be that help to buy or the stamp duty holiday. While reducing the monthly payment via reducing interest rates.
This helps maintain high prices that benefits existing homeowners while new homeowners ultimately pay more over a greater number of years.
It is a racket at best, a ponzi scheme at worst. And it will end in tears sooner or later.
How is not taxing buyers as much an intervention in free market price discovery? Taxes are interfering.
It is not true to say that house prices have gone up due to low interest rates. The price rises occurred before interest rates fell to this level.
Your infographic is interesting but absolutely misleading. The rise in prices occurred in the 2000s when the interest rate was much higher than it is now. The fall in interest rates came afterwards but house prices have relatively stabilised.
House prices rose 7% in 2020, while CPI was estimated at 0.8%. In what way, shape or form, would you say property prices have "stabilised".
Because there's fluctuations from year to year, over the course of the past decade prices have risen a fraction of what they had the decade before.
Have a look at the rise of house prices from 1997-2017 prior to interest rates falling, and contrast that with changes in the past decade.
Incidentally the infographic contained more nonsense. UK household income was not over 20k in 1990 in 1990 pounds. 20k is real household income in today's money after adjusting for inflation. People in 1990 weren't paying their mortgage with inflated cash in today's money. You need to look at actual nominal income in 1990 which isn't the figure on the chart.
When you say there are fluctuations from year on year, can you tell me the last time house prices fell relative to earnings? How many years out of the last ten have house prices fluctuated "down"?
It's a really easy wheeze.
Government controls the cost of borrowing via interest rates. Reduce the interest rates and the property becomes more affordable, however this enables prices to rise - aided by help to buy etc. Existing owners benefit from increased prices, equity etc. New buyers don't feel the pain because their monthly repayment remains the same while the amount they are borrowing increases exponentially.
Except of course it is a house of cards and keeping interest rates artificially low has led to an enormous rise in the gap between rich and poor. Whereas in 1990 you needed to save for a deposit for three or four years nowadays unless you have bank of mum and dad (and mum and dad are rich) then forget about it.
The housing market is an enormous bubble that successive governments, both Labour and Conservative, have had to use every mechanism at their disposal to inflate, because the alternative would be to crash the entire economy.
For decades now governments have intervened to prop up house prices. House prices as they stand now are a direct function of deliberate government policy on interest rates as well as artificial demand side policies such as help to buy,
Now, that may be a good thing, or it may be a bad thing. But as a supposed libertarian, I find it odd that you support such extensive government intervention.
Martin asked: "Are you really helping struggling buyers, or are you just stoking the house price market? Let me give you some numbers – before stamp duty [the holiday] the average house price was £252,000. Now it's £269,000. So that's £17,000 more. The stamp duty saving on that is £2,600 – over the life of a mortgage someone's paying £27,000 more.
"Is intervening in the housing market like this really a help, or does it actually harm first-time buyers and others when they're trying to buy property? Is house price inflation really a good thing?"
Sunak replied: "Why did we do what we did? Well it's because there are over half a million jobs that are supported by the housing sector and given the situation that we face I wanted to try and make sure that activity in that really critical sector, carried on so that those jobs could be protected. That has worked."
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
For all that "The Crown" is criticised for it's lack of authenticity, (I wouldn't really know, so it is pretty much told me all I know about the Royal Family), William's behaviour is in keeping with QEIIs as Harry's is to Margaret, dont you think? William is the anointed one who can't show emotion/give opinions - Harry as the younger sibling, will always be overlooked, but has the freedom to rebel
The Crown should be criticised for being too boring even for this monarchist to watch, not its inauthenticity.
But Will does appear to be the aloof, controlled one in the image of his grandmother. For another royal comparison, the Kim Jong Un to Elizabeth's Kim Il Sung?
William is under-estimated. He will be a good, solid King of Great Britain and her attending statelets. If you think about it, he hasn't put a foot wrong - in a hideously difficult job.
Yes he's rich and privileged and got to marry a genuinely lovely woman thereby but who would really want his boring, repetitive life?
Yet he acquits himself well, day in, day out, And he is now charged with handling a wildcat younger brother who he obviously loves. but who is determined to take some incoherent "revenge" on their shared family
Tough gig. Well done.
Without William and Kate (also flawlessly behaved), the monarchy would definitely be in a tight spot
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Somewhat counter-intuitively, there's very little record of the 1918-1920 flu in popular culture of the time and the two big post-war flu pandemics (57-58 and 68-69) appear to have been all but forgotten.
My Mum and her Mother were both quite ill one Christmas (I guess it must've been 1968) with the Hong Kong flu - although Mum had forgotten all about this until a neighbour in her village happened to mention it. As you say, it's been virtually erased from our collective consciousness.
The "Roaring '20s" are generally considered part of the aftermath of World War I, resulting from the high level of social stress & transformation caused by global, total warfare.
However, am thinking that the Spanish Flu Pandemic may have played just as great a role. Especially in countries - the USA in particular - where the costs of WWI in sweat, blood, tears & treasure were NOT huge, but where the pandemic was widespread & deadly across America.
WWI trumped the Spanish Flu in modern memory, right from the start, and continues to do so a century later.
As for THIS pandemic, well, don't think there is an alternative, comparable trauma, at least not for most of the world.
Certainly it is a different time, despite its crappier elements a really good time comparitively, so that trauma aspect is probably spot on.
I sometimes reflect on one major change of life which is infant mortality. I cannot even contemplate what it must have felt like to face pregnancy and birth, often a great many times, when so many children would not survive to adulthood even if you both made it through the birth.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Somewhat counter-intuitively, there's very little record of the 1918-1920 flu in popular culture of the time and the two big post-war flu pandemics (57-58 and 68-69) appear to have been all but forgotten.
My Mum and her Mother were both quite ill one Christmas (I guess it must've been 1968) with the Hong Kong flu - although Mum had forgotten all about this until a neighbour in her village happened to mention it. As you say, it's been virtually erased from our collective consciousness.
The "Roaring '20s" are generally considered part of the aftermath of World War I, resulting from the high level of social stress & transformation caused by global, total warfare.
However, am thinking that the Spanish Flu Pandemic may have played just as great a role. Especially in countries - the USA in particular - where the costs of WWI in sweat, blood, tears & treasure were NOT huge, but where the pandemic was widespread & deadly across America.
WWI trumped the Spanish Flu in modern memory, right from the start, and continues to do so a century later.
As for THIS pandemic, well, don't think there is an alternative, comparable trauma, at least not for most of the world.
We were warned, we had SARS, MERS, Ebola, Zika all in very recent memory. Bill Gates gave a TED talk on it in 2015. They made a Gwyneth Paltrow/Matt Damon vehicle about it. But still we weren’t prepared.
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
For all that "The Crown" is criticised for it's lack of authenticity, (I wouldn't really know, so it is pretty much told me all I know about the Royal Family), William's behaviour is in keeping with QEIIs as Harry's is to Margaret, dont you think? William is the anointed one who can't show emotion/give opinions - Harry as the younger sibling, will always be overlooked, but has the freedom to rebel
The Crown should be criticised for being too boring even for this monarchist to watch, not its inauthenticity.
But Will does appear to be the aloof, controlled one in the image of his grandmother. For another royal comparison, the Kim Jong Un to Elizabeth's Kim Il Sung?
William is under-estimated. He will be a good, solid King of Great Britain and her attending statelets. If you think about it, he hasn't put a foot wrong - in a hideously difficult job.
Yes he's rich and privileged and got to marry a genuinely lovely woman thereby but who would really want his boring, repetitive life?
Yet he acquits himself well, day in, day out, And he is now charged with handling a wildcat younger brother who he obviously loves. but who is determined to take some incoherent "revenge" on their shared family
Tough gig. Well done.
Without William and Kate (also flawlessly behaved), the monarchy would definitely be in a tight spot
Would be pretty hilarious to discover, post reign, that in private it was like Caligula or Tiberius at Capri.
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
Horrible winter. The US election, second lockdown, the B117, the transition cliff edge, the Capitol Insurrection, third lockdown. Let’s not count any chickens re Covid but I can say one thing for certain - the days will be getting longer for at least 3 1/2 months.
Several people have commented to me that having an end date makes it seem longer. 21st June seems a million years away....
But Easter doesn't, and after that we can work from one stepping stone to the next.
Now, what we could really do with is a repetition of last Spring's weather. If we get that and then the first proper phase of unlocking's done on time on April 12th, then the rest of the period to June 21st should feel as though it's passing much more quickly and easily, I suspect.
Absolutely. Get to the 29th, and then Easter, and then hopefully the 12th and even if things are completely open, with fine weather and some socialising, coupled with (again hopefully) successful vaccination programme and (again hopefully) continued falls in hospitalisations and deaths, it will feel very different.
The last thing I'm really concerned about (save for the possibility of imported mutant superCovid, which I'm less worried about than I was since we've observed a whole series of mutations that have all yielded similar results,) is whether the schools cause enough of a disease spike to frighten the Government and get it to extend the lockdown.
If we can get past the schools opening up without a disaster and reach step 2 on time on April 12th, then I think it's all but over. There'll be improving weather and, at last, more to leave the flat for at weekends other than going to the supermarket or out running round in circles. Come May 17th, things will be substantially back to normal. June 21st is an important symbolic end date, though in practice it's only really significant if you're organising a big wedding or you're desperate to go to a nightclub.
I was still very nervous up until a couple of weeks ago, but now I'm starting to feel like we really are getting there.
More anecdotals, I've a close family member who has had dealings with William's professional staff via work. My impression is the staff in question isn't the type to throw out these sort of allegations lightly. Ok, Meghan probably isn't the only primadonna member of the Royal family, but the reality of the situation contrasts hugely with the image the Sussex's are trying to project (and the reality of William/Kate - by all accounts unflashy and hard working).
As Charles mentioned a few days ago, Harry strikes me a a bit of a lost soul who has never really dealt with the loss of his mother and was probably most at home in the Army, where he couldn't stay put due to circumstances beyond his control. Enter Meghan, and in the space of a few years there's a kid on the scene, Harry is physically, financially isolated and estranged from his family - especially his brother. I'm very concerned for him.
In life we tend to play out the psychodramas of our childhood.
It is the oldest story in psychology, the oedipus one. In Meghan Harry has found a substitute for his mum and he will not let that go, he will do anything for her, because keeping her safe eases the psychological wound the poor chap still carries from being a child and unable to protect his mother. Hence "Meghan gets what she wants." Of course she does. She's his mother, only now he's a grown man with enormous wealth and power and he can protect her in a way he never could protect his mum as a child.
So in my opinion this story has little to do with racism or even "the institution" that the monarchy is. It is just childhood trauma being played out, unfortunately, on the front pages, due to the fame of the individuals involved. And we should cut them all some slack.
Harry would do well to read Larkin's "this be the verse"... for that reason I feel nothing but sympathy for him (and Meghan - they are clearly deeply wounded individuals). But at the same time he should take his money and lead a peaceful, quiet life away from the spotlight, rather than weaponising it against his geriatric gran and using the very media he professes to hate to attack his own family. He has chosen a very self-destructive path and I feel nothing but sadness for the whole family.
Good analysis.
Harry was not an only child. He has a brother who also lost his mother tragically young and also had to do the walk and endure the loss and the grief. Imagine how he feels seeing his younger brother take ownership of their mother's memory hawking her story and how he doesn't want his wife to endure the same and his mental health to make money and giving the impression he is the only true custodian of her memory.
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
For all that "The Crown" is criticised for it's lack of authenticity, (I wouldn't really know, so it is pretty much told me all I know about the Royal Family), William's behaviour is in keeping with QEIIs as Harry's is to Margaret, dont you think? William is the anointed one who can't show emotion/give opinions - Harry as the younger sibling, will always be overlooked, but has the freedom to rebel
The Crown should be criticised for being too boring even for this monarchist to watch, not its inauthenticity.
But Will does appear to be the aloof, controlled one in the image of his grandmother. For another royal comparison, the Kim Jong Un to Elizabeth's Kim Il Sung?
"boring"? Really?
It sometimes gets a bit detailed, but it is generally excellent, and sometimes brilliant. The first series in particular - Churchill, the Smog, Margaret - was amazingly well done
I'd put the latest series second. Superb TV
It has, by the by, further elevated the British Royal Family to being the most famous family in the world (if they weren't already), by an enormous distance. No one else comes close. Not necessarily where the Royals want to be be, but good for box office and British tourism. Everyone is invested in this narrative. The whole world has binge-watched
Very surprised to hear it described as boring. I watched all four series in the last three months or so and thought it was great entertainment
My personal view at the moment is that absolutely must not let the medical establishment pressure politicians into lockdown next winter for flu.
I'm prepared to keep a bit of an open mind on this, but it feels to me like we would get into a situation where we never really have a normal society again because we live in fear of flu which we have lived with for tens of thousands of years.
This was a one off pandemic. Once in a decades event. We cannot allow it to change our long held attitude to flu and other winter illnesses.
A year ago yesterday, I did my most recent "inter-city" rail journey, Aberdeen to Inverness. Also the last time I "coloured in" a newly traversed section of track on my Baker GB Railway Atlas.
Covid severely fucked up my attempt to finish off the official GB "National Rail" network in 2020! Especially when I just had two trains left to do (both from Inverness, incidentally!).
Anyway, my railway Bouquet-list includes:
Inverness to Kyle of Lochalsh Inverness to Thurso/Wick
and also:
The Sunday-only "Dale Rail" from Clitheroe to Hellifield The Manchester Metrolink branch to Trafford Centre (only open from Mother's Day last year - the day before lockdown!)
The Inverness to Kyle train journey is one I did last summer. It's gorgeous: a real treat
The only better journey I have done, in the UK, is one I did on that same trip. Mallaig to Fort William, by steam. It is sublime. One of the greatest train journeys in the world, for sure, even if it only lasts an hour or two.
What I didn't know - until then - is just how filthy steam trains are. I always imagined they puffed out, well, STEAM. They don't. It is smoke and steam, mixed with soot, which gently rains on everything behind. By the end of the journey, when we arrived in Fort William - windows open to the wonderful Highlands sunset - everyone and everything was covered with a fine layer of dirt.
My personal view at the moment is that absolutely must not let the medical establishment pressure politicians into lockdown next winter for flu.
I'm prepared to keep a bit of an open mind on this, but it feels to me like we would get into a situation where we never really have a normal society again because we live in fear of flu which we have lived with for tens of thousands of years.
This was a one off pandemic. Once in a decades event. We cannot allow it to change our long held attitude to flu and other winter illnesses.
We can take more precautions wintertime and wash our hands more, but flu is not going away and thus in the balancing assessment a coronavirus like reaction, or even partial reaction, would almost certainly be disproportionate.
The big news today should be the release of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe from an Iranian prison and the hope that the government can stop the Iranians putting her before another court, as they are promising to do, and extending her and her family's agony.
Her husband lives in West Hampstead and there were regular events in Fortune Green highlighting her case. Tulip Siddiq deserves credit for the hard work she has put in for this family. Boris does not.
Here is a a woman (and husband and young daughter) who really have suffered. Her release ought to be much bigger news than it will be because too many of the public and media are obsessed with privileged people claiming victimhood over trivialities as some sort of badge of honour.
The "woe is me" culture we seem to have developed is quite nauseating. People suffer and those who do need help. But suffering is not a virtue, it does not make one morally better than anyone else, it should not make one immune from criticism and being a " victim" should not, in a well ordered society or life, be something to aspire to.
I really hope the Iranians show some mercy and Nazanin can be reunited ASAP with her family.
In other cases (in citizens of other countries) their mercy follows quickly once the cheque clears
It's a policy that has jacked up house prices and made it harder for people who actually need to buy houses to buy them (it's done a great job for those already owning them, which is pointless, they already own a home) vs a policy to pay our nursing staff properly for a job they've done superbly and without complaint over the last year and beyond.
It's obvious to anyone what a better use of the money was.
How does removing a tax on buyers make it harder for a buyer to buy their house? 🙄
Because the sellers simply raise their prices, which they can. Because the buyers aren't buying with their own money, they're buying with a maxed out mortgage. Combine that with a reduction in interest rates and all you've done is raise the price of property while forcing new buyers to take on more debt. That is exactly what has happened.
Except that you're missing two very important points.
Even if the price goes up to match the amount of tax that would have been due they're no worse off. If the price goes up by less than the tax that would have been due they're still better off.
Tax and house prices are not the same thing. Tax needs paying up front 100% and doesn't count towards your mortgage equity. If the price goes up then the amount you would have put up front in tax can be contributed towards your equity in your deposit.
In neither scenario are you worse off by not having to pay the tax. The idea you're better off with lower house prices but tax on top is entirely myopic.
As you profess to be a libertarian I find your fondness for government intervention in free market price discovery a bit surprising.
House prices are simply a function of the affordability as defined by the monthly payment, that has been reduced by a deliberate and calculated reduction in interest rates in order to reduce the cost of borrowing.
The government consistently uses whatever trick it has to push house prices up, be that help to buy or the stamp duty holiday. While reducing the monthly payment via reducing interest rates.
This helps maintain high prices that benefits existing homeowners while new homeowners ultimately pay more over a greater number of years.
It is a racket at best, a ponzi scheme at worst. And it will end in tears sooner or later.
How is not taxing buyers as much an intervention in free market price discovery? Taxes are interfering.
It is not true to say that house prices have gone up due to low interest rates. The price rises occurred before interest rates fell to this level.
Your infographic is interesting but absolutely misleading. The rise in prices occurred in the 2000s when the interest rate was much higher than it is now. The fall in interest rates came afterwards but house prices have relatively stabilised.
House prices rose 7% in 2020, while CPI was estimated at 0.8%. In what way, shape or form, would you say property prices have "stabilised".
Because there's fluctuations from year to year, over the course of the past decade prices have risen a fraction of what they had the decade before.
Have a look at the rise of house prices from 1997-2017 prior to interest rates falling, and contrast that with changes in the past decade.
Incidentally the infographic contained more nonsense. UK household income was not over 20k in 1990 in 1990 pounds. 20k is real household income in today's money after adjusting for inflation. People in 1990 weren't paying their mortgage with inflated cash in today's money. You need to look at actual nominal income in 1990 which isn't the figure on the chart.
When you say there are fluctuations from year on year, can you tell me the last time house prices fell relative to earnings? How many years out of the last ten have house prices fluctuated "down"?
It's a really easy wheeze.
Government controls the cost of borrowing via interest rates. Reduce the interest rates and the property becomes more affordable, however this enables prices to rise - aided by help to buy etc. Existing owners benefit from increased prices, equity etc. New buyers don't feel the pain because their monthly repayment remains the same while the amount they are borrowing increases exponentially.
Except of course it is a house of cards and keeping interest rates artificially low has led to an enormous rise in the gap between rich and poor. Whereas in 1990 you needed to save for a deposit for three or four years nowadays unless you have bank of mum and dad (and mum and dad are rich) then forget about it.
The housing market is an enormous bubble that successive governments, both Labour and Conservative, have had to use every mechanism at their disposal to inflate, because the alternative would be to crash the entire economy.
For decades now governments have intervened to prop up house prices. House prices as they stand now are a direct function of deliberate government policy on interest rates as well as artificial demand side policies such as help to buy,
Now, that may be a good thing, or it may be a bad thing. But as a supposed libertarian, I find it odd that you support such extensive government intervention.
The last time house prices fell relative to earnings was 2019.
Three of the last 10 years house prices fluctuated down relative to earnings.
Again house price rises preceded interest rates falls. The price earnings ratio reached roughly its current level in 2007. In July 2007 base rate was 5.75%
As a libertarian I want to see the government get out of housing. Let anyone build whatever they want on any land. Abolish planning consent requirements. House prices would come down to market levels then.
The big news today should be the release of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe from an Iranian prison and the hope that the government can stop the Iranians putting her before another court, as they are promising to do, and extending her and her family's agony.
Her husband lives in West Hampstead and there were regular events in Fortune Green highlighting her case. Tulip Siddiq deserves credit for the hard work she has put in for this family. Boris does not.
Here is a a woman (and husband and young daughter) who really have suffered. Her release ought to be much bigger news than it will be because too many of the public and media are obsessed with privileged people claiming victimhood over trivialities as some sort of badge of honour.
The "woe is me" culture we seem to have developed is quite nauseating. People suffer and those who do need help. But suffering is not a virtue, it does not make one morally better than anyone else, it should not make one immune from criticism and being a " victim" should not, in a well ordered society or life, be something to aspire to.
I really hope the Iranians show some mercy and Nazanin can be reunited ASAP with her family.
In other cases (in citizens of other countries) their mercy follows quickly once the cheque clears
My personal view at the moment is that absolutely must not let the medical establishment pressure politicians into lockdown next winter for flu.
I'm prepared to keep a bit of an open mind on this, but it feels to me like we would get into a situation where we never really have a normal society again because we live in fear of flu which we have lived with for tens of thousands of years.
This was a one off pandemic. Once in a decades event. We cannot allow it to change our long held attitude to flu and other winter illnesses.
My personal view at the moment is that absolutely must not let the medical establishment pressure politicians into lockdown next winter for flu.
I'm prepared to keep a bit of an open mind on this, but it feels to me like we would get into a situation where we never really have a normal society again because we live in fear of flu which we have lived with for tens of thousands of years.
This was a one off pandemic. Once in a decades event. We cannot allow it to change our long held attitude to flu and other winter illnesses.
We can take more precautions wintertime and wash our hands more, but flu is not going away and thus in the balancing assessment a coronavirus like reaction, or even partial reaction, would almost certainly be disproportionate.
Yep.
A winter campaign on washing hands and getting plenty of fresh air (and of course the flu vaccine) should be viewed as a proportionate response. More people encouraged not to go to work with bad colds or flu might help as was discussed on here a day or two ago.
A year ago yesterday, I did my most recent "inter-city" rail journey, Aberdeen to Inverness. Also the last time I "coloured in" a newly traversed section of track on my Baker GB Railway Atlas.
Covid severely fucked up my attempt to finish off the official GB "National Rail" network in 2020! Especially when I just had two trains left to do (both from Inverness, incidentally!).
Anyway, my railway Bouquet-list includes:
Inverness to Kyle of Lochalsh Inverness to Thurso/Wick
and also:
The Sunday-only "Dale Rail" from Clitheroe to Hellifield The Manchester Metrolink branch to Trafford Centre (only open from Mother's Day last year - the day before lockdown!)
The Inverness to Kyle train journey is one I did last summer. It's gorgeous: a real treat
The only better journey I have done, in the UK, is one I did on that same trip. Mallaig to Fort William, by steam. It is sublime. One of the greatest train journeys in the world, for sure, even if it only lasts an hour or two.
What I didn't know - until then - is just how filthy steam trains are. I always imagined they puffed out, well, STEAM. They don't. It is smoke and steam, mixed with soot, which gently rains on everything behind. By the end of the journey, when we arrived in Fort William - windows open to the wonderful Highlands sunset - everyone and everything was covered with a fine layer of dirt.
Welcome to my steam train world of the fifties and sixties
A year ago yesterday, I did my most recent "inter-city" rail journey, Aberdeen to Inverness. Also the last time I "coloured in" a newly traversed section of track on my Baker GB Railway Atlas.
Covid severely fucked up my attempt to finish off the official GB "National Rail" network in 2020! Especially when I just had two trains left to do (both from Inverness, incidentally!).
Anyway, my railway Bouquet-list includes:
Inverness to Kyle of Lochalsh Inverness to Thurso/Wick
and also:
The Sunday-only "Dale Rail" from Clitheroe to Hellifield The Manchester Metrolink branch to Trafford Centre (only open from Mother's Day last year - the day before lockdown!)
The Inverness to Kyle train journey is one I did last summer. It's gorgeous: a real treat
The only better journey I have done, in the UK, is one I did on that same trip. Mallaig to Fort William, by steam. It is sublime. One of the greatest train journeys in the world, for sure, even if it only lasts an hour or two.
What I didn't know - until then - is just how filthy steam trains are. I always imagined they puffed out, well, STEAM. They don't. It is smoke and steam, mixed with soot, which gently rains on everything behind. By the end of the journey, when we arrived in Fort William - windows open to the wonderful Highlands sunset - everyone and everything was covered with a fine layer of dirt.
My mother always mentions the dirt when recalling the steam trains of her youth
A year ago yesterday, I did my most recent "inter-city" rail journey, Aberdeen to Inverness. Also the last time I "coloured in" a newly traversed section of track on my Baker GB Railway Atlas.
Covid severely fucked up my attempt to finish off the official GB "National Rail" network in 2020! Especially when I just had two trains left to do (both from Inverness, incidentally!).
Anyway, my railway Bouquet-list includes:
Inverness to Kyle of Lochalsh Inverness to Thurso/Wick
and also:
The Sunday-only "Dale Rail" from Clitheroe to Hellifield The Manchester Metrolink branch to Trafford Centre (only open from Mother's Day last year - the day before lockdown!)
The Inverness to Kyle train journey is one I did last summer. It's gorgeous: a real treat
The only better journey I have done, in the UK, is one I did on that same trip. Mallaig to Fort William, by steam. It is sublime. One of the greatest train journeys in the world, for sure, even if it only lasts an hour or two.
What I didn't know - until then - is just how filthy steam trains are. I always imagined they puffed out, well, STEAM. They don't. It is smoke and steam, mixed with soot, which gently rains on everything behind. By the end of the journey, when we arrived in Fort William - windows open to the wonderful Highlands sunset - everyone and everything was covered with a fine layer of dirt.
Smuts in one's eyes as well, a regular part of train travel back then.
A year ago yesterday, I did my most recent "inter-city" rail journey, Aberdeen to Inverness. Also the last time I "coloured in" a newly traversed section of track on my Baker GB Railway Atlas.
Covid severely fucked up my attempt to finish off the official GB "National Rail" network in 2020! Especially when I just had two trains left to do (both from Inverness, incidentally!).
Anyway, my railway Bouquet-list includes:
Inverness to Kyle of Lochalsh Inverness to Thurso/Wick
and also:
The Sunday-only "Dale Rail" from Clitheroe to Hellifield The Manchester Metrolink branch to Trafford Centre (only open from Mother's Day last year - the day before lockdown!)
The Inverness to Kyle train journey is one I did last summer. It's gorgeous: a real treat
The only better journey I have done, in the UK, is one I did on that same trip. Mallaig to Fort William, by steam. It is sublime. One of the greatest train journeys in the world, for sure, even if it only lasts an hour or two.
What I didn't know - until then - is just how filthy steam trains are. I always imagined they puffed out, well, STEAM. They don't. It is smoke and steam, mixed with soot, which gently rains on everything behind. By the end of the journey, when we arrived in Fort William - windows open to the wonderful Highlands sunset - everyone and everything was covered with a fine layer of dirt.
Welcome to my steam train world of the fifties and sixties
They look romantic but in reality they are a bit disgusting. Filthy. Good riddance
Comments
https://twitter.com/UKCovid19Stats/status/1368659230769741833
Lots of things, in fact.
I must admit I am not very knowledgeable on the activities of the Green Party but I'm willing to bet you're not either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archibald_Clark_Kerr,_1st_Baron_Inverchapel
Don’t look at the link - read the article.
And don’t, whatever you do, post the name here!
My impression (anecdata alert) is that the majority of the pro-indy voters who are disillusioned with the SNP have little inclination to drift to the Greens.
To be honest, I think Meghan's press releases (or those put out via her 'friends') are doing the job for the palace clique. If I were them, I'd retain a dignified silence. There does appear to be a bit of a briefing war going on, I admit, which makes me wonder what bombshell is going to turn up tomorrow.
I haven't seen a snip about China. Given you and I are both pretty politically engaged people I'd say either they're not running such a campaign or they're doing it very badly.
Their website (google "green party campaigns") still trails the Paris conference and critiques David Cameron and George Osborne's policies, which means that page was last updated in mid-2015:
https://www.greenparty.org.uk/get-involved/climate-sense-campaign.html
So far, I've only seen serious evidence of two of those. The Government has to do better.
Have a look at the rise of house prices from 1997-2017 prior to interest rates falling, and contrast that with changes in the past decade.
Incidentally the infographic contained more nonsense. UK household income was not over 20k in 1990 in 1990 pounds. 20k is real household income in today's money after adjusting for inflation. People in 1990 weren't paying their mortgage with inflated cash in today's money. You need to look at actual nominal income in 1990 which isn't the figure on the chart.
https://twitter.com/kieran_hurley/status/1368663086937370624?s=21
What worries me now is the economy. Hey ho
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9-tCvkYeRo
"Why either, as the fancy takes me, to be sure"
I think inflation should be kept 2-3%
https://twitter.com/fact_covid/status/1368659616851189761?s=20
Jesus, what a fucking winter. Jesus, what a fucking year.
I just want to forget it ever happened. Pretend we're back in 2019. Draw a veil.
But I don't believe we will be able to forget Covid, it will leave a scar everywhere, it is burned into our collective consciousness.
I wonder if it might also be a little unifying? We are the generations that experienced Covid, as our grandparents experienced the war. "What did you do in the Year of Plague 2020?" will be a question asked of many, for decades.
It's a really easy wheeze.
Government controls the cost of borrowing via interest rates.
Reduce the interest rates and the property becomes more affordable, however this enables prices to rise - aided by help to buy etc.
Existing owners benefit from increased prices, equity etc. New buyers don't feel the pain because their monthly repayment remains the same while the amount they are borrowing increases exponentially.
Except of course it is a house of cards and keeping interest rates artificially low has led to an enormous rise in the gap between rich and poor. Whereas in 1990 you needed to save for a deposit for three or four years nowadays unless you have bank of mum and dad (and mum and dad are rich) then forget about it.
The housing market is an enormous bubble that successive governments, both Labour and Conservative, have had to use every mechanism at their disposal to inflate, because the alternative would be to crash the entire economy.
For decades now governments have intervened to prop up house prices. House prices as they stand now are a direct function of deliberate government policy on interest rates as well as artificial demand side policies such as help to buy,
Now, that may be a good thing, or it may be a bad thing. But as a supposed libertarian, I find it odd that you support such extensive government intervention.
But I find it unlikely we'll be facing much deflation before long.
"What's a TV?"
Someone should ask him a version of this one.......
New guy moves into the neighbourhood.
The neighbours are curious. One asks him, in various ways... which foot do you kick with etc etc. The new guy doesn't understand.
Finally.
"Are you a Protestant or a Catholic?"
"Neither. I'm a Hindu/Muslim/Pagan {delete as appropriate}"
The neighbour looks crafty and leans closer
"To be sure. To be sure. But are you a Protestant {insert religion} or a Catholic {insert religion}?"
However I reckon social media has made this impossible, and, yes, Covid is not "helpfully" overshadowed by a truly terrible war
So we will try to "forget" Covid, but we will not succeed. There will be an orgy of pleasure-seeking, however, just as there was in the 1920s
https://unherd.com/2020/05/why-we-remember-wars-but-forget-plagues/
https://youtu.be/BZwuTo7zKM8
Might William not feel pretty pissed off at Harry? Just because he doesn't show and talk about his loss and grief for the benefit of his favourite chat show host does not mean that he does not feel and has not felt it quite as keenly. He might be just as keen to protect his wife and mother of his children from unfair accusations (and Kate faced plenty of those too).
All of us have suffered grievous loss and pain and suffering in our lives. All of us have to get on with life, to get past it, to endure and - most of us - without the inestimable advantages which this family have. I find something very tiresome in having two people on the cusp of middle age endlessly wailing about how tough their life is / has been and seeking revenge on their families - in order to make even more money than they already have, when the reality is that they have a pretty easy life by comparison with most. If Harry hates the press he should stop courting it. The fact that he cannot stay away from it suggests something rather more calculating - and rather less simpatico - than the poor lost boy wanting to be left alone.
Now, what we could really do with is a repetition of last Spring's weather. If we get that and then the first proper phase of unlocking's done on time on April 12th, then the rest of the period to June 21st should feel as though it's passing much more quickly and easily, I suspect.
I am sure Meghan Markle can look after herself, and good luck to her
I still feel sorry for him, tho. That little kid walking behind his mum's coffin, in front of a million people in the streets of London, and a billion around the world
Yes there's leaks, which are stupid, against his wife at the moment, but that's something neither side is able to claim the moral high ground on as its being going on for ages with 'reports' from 'friends' and unnamed officials and the like. Both sides will use the exact same defence, of not being silent while the other side trashes them, so there's no end there. One side or another needs to not just claim the moral high ground, but actually have it by ending the stupid circle jerk.
Phillip's funeral, when it comes, will be quite the awkward affair.
And to be honest I've always thought the likelihood of Scottish independence would be best served by multiple strong indy voices in the parliament. Too much "SNP vs. the rest" is not the best way to make the argument for independence. 3 indy parties (say) versus 3 unionist parties, better balance to the debate.
Do you think there's any decent chance of a name going over to the ISP?
But Will does appear to be the aloof, controlled one in the image of his grandmother. For another royal comparison, the Kim Jong Un to Elizabeth's Kim Il Sung?
Harry has the problem of all second sons in an archaic system of primogenture. It seems to me that though all his life he has been searching for a meaningful role. He found it for a while in the army, providing him with the family support that he never had previously. Once that was over, like many ex soldiers he was lost.
It took him a while to find that family that he never had. He looks happier than ever in his life. Good luck to him, he has earned it.
It sometimes gets a bit detailed, but it is generally excellent, and sometimes brilliant. The first series in particular - Churchill, the Smog, Margaret - was amazingly well done
I'd put the latest series second. Superb TV
It has, by the by, further elevated the British Royal Family to being the most famous family in the world (if they weren't already), by an enormous distance. No one else comes close. Not necessarily where the Royals want to be be, but good for box office and British tourism. Everyone is invested in this narrative. The whole world has binge-watched
Harry was a few years younger than his brother when Diana passed away, which I understand can make a big difference. There's probably something in not being the heir, and not having that purpose in life like his brother too. Bad actors can take advantage of that, but he really should grow up and stop playing the victim.
Covid severely fucked up my attempt to finish off the official GB "National Rail" network in 2020! Especially when I just had two trains left to do (both from Inverness, incidentally!).
Anyway, my railway Bouquet-list includes:
Inverness to Kyle of Lochalsh
Inverness to Thurso/Wick
and also:
The Sunday-only "Dale Rail" from Clitheroe to Hellifield
The Manchester Metrolink branch to Trafford Centre (only open from Mother's Day last year - the day before lockdown!)
Maybe they needed to Bridgerton it up a bit.
Sadly that was 12 years ago and I think now with automated screening systems I wouldn't have made it through that in the first place for most companies. It's actually something I think needs serious reform.
However, am thinking that the Spanish Flu Pandemic may have played just as great a role. Especially in countries - the USA in particular - where the costs of WWI in sweat, blood, tears & treasure were NOT huge, but where the pandemic was widespread & deadly across America.
WWI trumped the Spanish Flu in modern memory, right from the start, and continues to do so a century later.
As for THIS pandemic, well, don't think there is an alternative, comparable trauma, at least not for most of the world.
Mental, quite mental. What's really going on Rishi?
Yes he's rich and privileged and got to marry a genuinely lovely woman thereby but who would really want his boring, repetitive life?
Yet he acquits himself well, day in, day out, And he is now charged with handling a wildcat younger brother who he obviously loves. but who is determined to take some incoherent "revenge" on their shared family
Tough gig. Well done.
Without William and Kate (also flawlessly behaved), the monarchy would definitely be in a tight spot
I sometimes reflect on one major change of life which is infant mortality. I cannot even contemplate what it must have felt like to face pregnancy and birth, often a great many times, when so many children would not survive to adulthood even if you both made it through the birth.
If we can get past the schools opening up without a disaster and reach step 2 on time on April 12th, then I think it's all but over. There'll be improving weather and, at last, more to leave the flat for at weekends other than going to the supermarket or out running round in circles. Come May 17th, things will be substantially back to normal. June 21st is an important symbolic end date, though in practice it's only really significant if you're organising a big wedding or you're desperate to go to a nightclub.
I was still very nervous up until a couple of weeks ago, but now I'm starting to feel like we really are getting there.
My personal view at the moment is that absolutely must not let the medical establishment pressure politicians into lockdown next winter for flu.
I'm prepared to keep a bit of an open mind on this, but it feels to me like we would get into a situation where we never really have a normal society again because we live in fear of flu which we have lived with for tens of thousands of years.
This was a one off pandemic. Once in a decades event. We cannot allow it to change our long held attitude to flu and other winter illnesses.
Still a straight line. Flat like a strap as the Rasta in Neuromancer said
Heard this lot advertise on TalkSPORT and always assumed it was a scam. Turns out it was.
The only better journey I have done, in the UK, is one I did on that same trip. Mallaig to Fort William, by steam. It is sublime. One of the greatest train journeys in the world, for sure, even if it only lasts an hour or two.
What I didn't know - until then - is just how filthy steam trains are. I always imagined they puffed out, well, STEAM. They don't. It is smoke and steam, mixed with soot, which gently rains on everything behind. By the end of the journey, when we arrived in Fort William - windows open to the wonderful Highlands sunset - everyone and everything was covered with a fine layer of dirt.
Three of the last 10 years house prices fluctuated down relative to earnings.
Again house price rises preceded interest rates falls. The price earnings ratio reached roughly its current level in 2007. In July 2007 base rate was 5.75%
As a libertarian I want to see the government get out of housing. Let anyone build whatever they want on any land. Abolish planning consent requirements. House prices would come down to market levels then.
We can cope with flu. We coped before. Fuck off
A winter campaign on washing hands and getting plenty of fresh air (and of course the flu vaccine) should be viewed as a proportionate response. More people encouraged not to go to work with bad colds or flu might help as was discussed on here a day or two ago.
Good evening, everybody.