Attlee was of the traditional Labour left, the idea of forging consensus around policies that were necessary and useful, he would not today be advocating nationalising large swathes of the economy.
He’s closer to Blair than Corbyn, I know that is hard for some to take
I don't think it at all likely Attlee would have agreed to invade Iraq.
Attlee agreed to invade Iran to secure Iran's oil.
Indeed - a strategic calculation, rather than a strategic blunder.
Nah, Attlee made Mohammad Reza Pahlavi the Shah which turned out be a disaster.
Wasn't the Shah doing a pretty good job all things considered - until he got cancer and hid it from the world and kind of lost his mind.
Certainly did a better job than the Ayatollah.
The Shah's Persia was definitely better than fundamentalist Iran, but it was no paradise. It had a particularly nasty internal security service, for example.
Oh absolutely.
Though any worse than the internal security service of fundamentalist Iran? Or Ba'athist Iraq? Or the rest of the Middle East?
Where will iSAGE be dragging their goal posts to next?
Fair point, but there's a fair bit of goalpost moving by many posters on here, isn't there? Namely:
When cases are going up: cases don't matter at all, let's stop counting them. When cases are going down: that's great news, let's celebrate.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm a bit concerned by rising hospitalisations, ICU/ventilator cases, and deaths. Still a long way to go, I think.
I don't think cases are as important as they used to be. Having said that, I think it is still beneficial to see them come down. These two statements are not incompatible.
In my view, we should just action to take on Covid now based on hospitalisations and deaths. I still want to see cases come down as this will reduce these two other metrics which can only be a good thing.
Surely the best combo is high positives but low illness?
Just been to one of the greatest small art museums in the world. The Rosengart Collection. Lucerne. Acquired by Swiss Jewish art dealers Siegfried and daughter angela Rosengart from the 1920s.
Now housed in a 1920s bank it has an outstanding collection of Picassos (he painted angela 5 times - personal friends), a phenomenal collection of Klees, plus masterpieces by Cezanne, Bonnard, Dufy, Miro, Monet, Modigliani, Calder, Matisse, Seurat, Signac, You name it. And some superb Chagall
Ten rooms of total genius. It would make a good national gallery of modern European art for an average midsized European country. Like, say, Portugal. Or Finland. I’ve no doubt it’s superior to the equivalent in lubljana or Dublin. Or Australia? Or anywhere in Africa?
I am now getting happily drunk by the fake wooden medieval bridge
Hello. That sounds fabulous. However unless it's in your contract I don't know why you have to always say you're getting drunk. There's no need. Much more efficient to just add a PS when you're not getting drunk.
Btw, this week I actually went out to the pub and had oysters. Yep.
But please note that I deconstructed it. I had the oysters (3 Maldens) ad hoc on a tray outside a fishmongers - ie in their proper setting - and then only after that did I go to the pub and do in there what such places are rightfully for, drink.
Fantastic! An 80-yr old joke. You're on fire.
I'm not 80. Nothing like.
Very nearly a good response. But a bit desperate to find a retort. And it showed, sadly.
I remain happy with it. But you keep on giving your take on things. I quite often notice.
This is the sort of rally I am hoping to see in the Raducanu match tomorrow.
Just been to one of the greatest small art museums in the world. The Rosengart Collection. Lucerne. Acquired by Swiss Jewish art dealers Siegfried and daughter angela Rosengart from the 1920s.
Now housed in a 1920s bank it has an outstanding collection of Picassos (he painted angela 5 times - personal friends), a phenomenal collection of Klees, plus masterpieces by Cezanne, Bonnard, Dufy, Miro, Monet, Modigliani, Calder, Matisse, Seurat, Signac, You name it. And some superb Chagall
Ten rooms of total genius. It would make a good national gallery of modern European art for an average midsized European country. Like, say, Portugal. Or Finland. I’ve no doubt it’s superior to the equivalent in lubljana or Dublin. Or Australia? Or anywhere in Africa?
I am now getting happily drunk by the fake wooden medieval bridge
Hello. That sounds fabulous. However unless it's in your contract I don't know why you have to always say you're getting drunk. There's no need. Much more efficient to just add a PS when you're not getting drunk.
Btw, this week I actually went out to the pub and had oysters. Yep.
But please note that I deconstructed it. I had the oysters (3 Maldens) ad hoc on a tray outside a fishmongers - ie in their proper setting - and then only after that did I go to the pub and do in there what such places are rightfully for, drink.
Maldons with an ‘o’ not an ‘e’
But you’re on your way. Within a few weeks you’ll be comparing the virtues of the helford natives in the Cow with the jersey rocks in the Drop
Sorry, yes, Maldons. The little town in Essex. Tbh I can't imagine any oyster being better than these that I had. Middle of the afternoon, so peckish rather than hungry, mouth dry in the hot weather, and here comes these 3 beauties, wow, if I was ranking them on the 4 key metrics of temp, taste, texture, size we're talking A stars across the board. They sat in a cool clear liquid (water?) and to this I added merely a squeeze of lemon and a few drops of tabasco. Down the hatch. And in case you're wondering I'm no virgin. I had some in Whitstable quite recently and there was no - repeat no - comparison.
There's an R in the month. Essex Natives have only been available since Wednesday last week. If you were Whitstable before then you were eating Rocks. And it goes without saying that Kentish oysters (or oysters of Kent) are just not as good as Essex ones.
Right, which fits since I had them 2 days ago. I don't know what the Whitstable ones were exactly, except they were presumably local, but they weren't top notch. Certainly not cf these Maldon wunderbars. However I wouldn't generalize on just the 2 data points, esp since the respective establishments were very different, high end fishmonger vs opportunistic looking kiosk.
On topic, unless Sadiq Khan wants to go back to Westminster (as part of a winning Labour Party presumably) he may as well stay Mayor until 2028 then find a Westminster seat in London (East Ham?) and then be part of the winning Labour Party.
Will he win in 2024?
Bailey did much better than many expected or anticipated including me. He won a Ward in Newham (Custom House) by 789 to 742 and the Conservative candidate in the East Ham Central by election polled a respectable 30%.
The question then becomes - who is the Conservative candidate that can reach the parts even Shaun Bailey couldn't reach? Unless Bailey finds a safe Westminster seat, I'm sure he'll be in the running for another go and there's the thing - he can either have the relatively certainty and obscurity of being a backbench MP or the uncertainty and profile of being London Mayor.
@TSE seems certain he knows the outcome of the next GE - as Richard Hoiles once said of Frankie Dettori after the Nunthorpe "he's sure I'm not".
Iff things generally remain the way they are then I'd expect the Conservatives to win the next election.
But oppositions don't win elections but governments lose them.
As I mentioned to JohnO I can easily see a situation where the blue wall crumbles and the Conservatives lose 50 seats in England & Wales and five seats in Scotland and kaboom, we have a Labour led government because no one will go into coalition/supply and confidence agreement.
I mean the DUP will never back Boris Johnson or the modern day Tories for putting a border down the Irish Sea, I think we can rule out the Lib Dems as well, cannot imagine Sinn Fein breaking their abstentionism to give the Tories a majority and I know climate change is an issue but cannot see hell freezing over and us having a Tory/SNP coalition at Westminster.
I can see the SNP offering to allow through a Queens Speech in return for a referendum.
Nope.
Surely there would be no time more proprietous for an independence vote than when there's a Tory government?
There is no way a Tory government would allow the SNP an indyref2 to stay in office and I would also be firmly opposed and prefer to go into opposition than deal with the SNP. I would even prefer a Grand Coalition between the Tories and Starmer Labour than having to touch the Nationalists.
If Sturgeon held power she would almost certainly back Starmer who would then have to offer her a devomax + indyref2 package in return however
I think devomax is a good idea. There will need to be constitutional realignment elsewhere though and that includes the ability of Scottish MPs to vote on England only laws. As I have said before, this could easily be fixed by either using Scots MPs as a revising chamber of laws made in Holyrood, which would have to be a good thing, or enable Scottish MPs to sit in both Holyrood and Westminster (be "double hatters") and only vote in Westminster of UK wide matters.
Where will iSAGE be dragging their goal posts to next?
Fair point, but there's a fair bit of goalpost moving by many posters on here, isn't there? Namely:
When cases are going up: cases don't matter at all, let's stop counting them. When cases are going down: that's great news, let's celebrate.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm a bit concerned by rising hospitalisations, ICU/ventilator cases, and deaths. Still a long way to go, I think.
The England trend on hospital occupancy and ICUs is really not that concerning - it took a whole month to rise from 5k to 6k.
Far more concerning is the government bringing in emergency restrictions on freedom when there is no emergency. Because there's no emergency, there's not going to be any end of the emergency, so there's never going to be an obvious time to remove these restrictions.
Now Houseparty is dead, I've got permission to share something insane that an insider told me last March. Remember that viral nonsense about the app 'hacking people's phones'. A classic piece of bs viral misinformation. Well it led to more than 1 MILLION people deleting the app.
Where will iSAGE be dragging their goal posts to next?
Fair point, but there's a fair bit of goalpost moving by many posters on here, isn't there? Namely:
When cases are going up: cases don't matter at all, let's stop counting them. When cases are going down: that's great news, let's celebrate.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm a bit concerned by rising hospitalisations, ICU/ventilator cases, and deaths. Still a long way to go, I think.
As we all switched our NHS apps off, cases seem to be a somewhat more arbitrary measure than they were. As you say hospital admissions, ventilation and deaths seem to be more objective metrics these days.
We then move onto the debate I had earlier with an anti-masker that how do I know these deaths aren't just cases of flu.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants.
Just been to one of the greatest small art museums in the world. The Rosengart Collection. Lucerne. Acquired by Swiss Jewish art dealers Siegfried and daughter angela Rosengart from the 1920s.
Now housed in a 1920s bank it has an outstanding collection of Picassos (he painted angela 5 times - personal friends), a phenomenal collection of Klees, plus masterpieces by Cezanne, Bonnard, Dufy, Miro, Monet, Modigliani, Calder, Matisse, Seurat, Signac, You name it. And some superb Chagall
Ten rooms of total genius. It would make a good national gallery of modern European art for an average midsized European country. Like, say, Portugal. Or Finland. I’ve no doubt it’s superior to the equivalent in lubljana or Dublin. Or Australia? Or anywhere in Africa?
I am now getting happily drunk by the fake wooden medieval bridge
Hello. That sounds fabulous. However unless it's in your contract I don't know why you have to always say you're getting drunk. There's no need. Much more efficient to just add a PS when you're not getting drunk.
Btw, this week I actually went out to the pub and had oysters. Yep.
But please note that I deconstructed it. I had the oysters (3 Maldens) ad hoc on a tray outside a fishmongers - ie in their proper setting - and then only after that did I go to the pub and do in there what such places are rightfully for, drink.
Fantastic! An 80-yr old joke. You're on fire.
I'm not 80. Nothing like.
Very nearly a good response. But a bit desperate to find a retort. And it showed, sadly.
I remain happy with it. But you keep on giving your take on things. I quite often notice.
This is the sort of rally I am hoping to see in the Raducanu match tomorrow.
2120 UK time, amazon prime, btw.
Ah - Amazon Prime - thanks for that - I can watch it then.
Where will iSAGE be dragging their goal posts to next?
Fair point, but there's a fair bit of goalpost moving by many posters on here, isn't there? Namely:
When cases are going up: cases don't matter at all, let's stop counting them. When cases are going down: that's great news, let's celebrate.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm a bit concerned by rising hospitalisations, ICU/ventilator cases, and deaths. Still a long way to go, I think.
There is a degree of logic to that though: - Cases going up used to mean similar proportional increases in hospitalisations and deaths, after a lag. Post-vaccines, the relationship is much smaller, so cases going up isless important than it was (while still not competely unimportant) - Cases going down still means that, after a lag, hospitalisations and deaths will go down or they at least certainly can't go up (you can't get hospitalised or die from Covid if you haven't got it)
(this does assume that a fairly consistent proportion of real cases are detected, so that the direciton of movement of cases stats reflect real cases, at least in the downwards direction)
Yes, I agree with all that. I was merely pointing out that there is a bit of inconsistency in the reaction to falling/rising numbers, especially from those who just wish Covid would disappear. (Of course we all wish this - but it hasn't happened yet and won't for a while). We do seem to get more comment on the trends in cases than the trends in deaths, the latter being my main concern. Whatever people say, c. 1,000 people a week dying of Covid at the moment in the UK is a bit depressing.
I'm loving the anti-maskers on here today. It's hilarious. Calling people who judge their own risks and choose to wear masks at certain times things like 'moronic' et al.
I am still wearing a mask at certain times. I judge when and where I will wear my mask; it is not always, but whenever I go into a shop, or pick or drop off the little 'un from school. To be frank, it's not much - perhaps twenty or thirty minutes a day, tops. I have judged the risks - as I see them - and made a choice.
It also does f'all harm. to myself or anyone around me - and may even help.
That's not moronic. It's personal choice in a civilised society.
I absolutely defend your right to choose, but I'd challenge your 'harmless' contention.
Mask wearing is not harmless, it is a trade-off of harm vs spreading the virus.
Humans are not meant to wander around with their faces covered. The face, and seeing each other's expressions, are the fundamental tenets of building trust, both with strangers and acquaintances.
The idea that mask-wearing is a zero-downside practice is deeply wrong, and flies in the face of decades of psychological research that shows that looking people – quite literally – in the mouth is a vital function of all human relationships.
I'll have to remember to 'look you in the mouth' if we ever meet, and give your teeth a good inspection
You should, that's how we communicate.
My youngest daughter is currently undergoing speech therapy because she doesn't enunciate all her sounds properly, and the wearing of masks at school through her reception year when school wasn't locked down etc has really been counterproductive. Her teacher's been cursing it whenever we speak on the subject, quite rightly saying you can't teach phonics properly with a mask on.
I don't really think about how you make certain sounds, you just do, but children learn from looking at your teeth etc while you speak. So we're currently working on the 'f' sound which requires putting your top teeth on your bottom lip "like a bunny" and blowing. Our advice is to try and practice this as much as possible with her, and to make a point of showing the teeth when doing so.
I'm sorry your daughter is going through that. If it helps, I underwent many years of speech therapy, and still do not speak perfectly. In fact, I didn't speak at all until I was five. It's not affected my life much at all (except for the fact I never shut up).
But I fail to see why wearing a mask in a shop would cause any difficulty.
Thank you for your kind remarks.
My reasons for not wearing a mask in a coffee shop.
1: Its pretty hard to drink coffee through a mask. 2: Cloth masks which are all most people are wearing, and disposable cheap clinical masks, not properly worn don't offer that much protection at all compared to getting vaccinated etc 3: If anyone is really bothered about the virus, they should be shielding or wearing a proper clinically safe mask like an FFP3 one which will protect far better than a cloth mask. 4: For anyone else who isn't vaccinated, or is OK with a vaccine breakthrough, better it occurs now over the summer than over the winter. 5: Even at the 'best' of times unless you ban sitting in, most people in a coffee shop would never be wearing a mask anyway. Because . . . see point 1. 6: Masks are stifling, uncomfortable and make communication harder.
I see absolutely no advantage to wearing a mask and only harms.
There is one massive advantage to wearing a mask: much lower levels of virus that reach others. And the size of the viral load people receive seems to be highly correlated with how sick they get. More masked people, means smaller viral load, which means more asymptomatic and mild cases, and fewer serious ones.
Maybe, in theory. Especially pre-vaccines, in theory.
Though where's the evidence for it now post-vaccinations? Not the theory, but the evidence. Is there any evidence at all that high cloth (not medical) mask wearing correlates with more mild cases when controlling for the same demographics and the same vaccinations?
Because England right now seems to be in a sweet spot of very high cases, but very low serious cases (ICUs) and deaths relative to almost all the rest of the western world. Without wearing masks.
Prof Alice Roberts💙 @theAliceRoberts · 2h The UK is carrying out a unique experiment in just ditching precautions and allowing such high numbers of cases - @chrischirp sharing this comparison at the @IndependentSage briefing. 1000 deaths a week has somehow become normalised.
==
Yet we see no widespread public alarm as to where we are with things and certainly no clamour for lockdown or making pubs social distance.
So maybe 1000 deaths a week is the acceptable level for this new disease at least for a while anyway?
It reflects well on our capacity to handle risk.
The only way you're ever going to get "through" delta is through a vigorous combination of both vaccination (To keep the body count down) and infection (For the strongest hybrid immunity). We're getting there.
Where will iSAGE be dragging their goal posts to next?
Fair point, but there's a fair bit of goalpost moving by many posters on here, isn't there? Namely:
When cases are going up: cases don't matter at all, let's stop counting them. When cases are going down: that's great news, let's celebrate.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm a bit concerned by rising hospitalisations, ICU/ventilator cases, and deaths. Still a long way to go, I think.
There is a degree of logic to that though: - Cases going up used to mean similar proportional increases in hospitalisations and deaths, after a lag. Post-vaccines, the relationship is much smaller, so cases going up isless important than it was (while still not competely unimportant) - Cases going down still means that, after a lag, hospitalisations and deaths will go down or they at least certainly can't go up (you can't get hospitalised or die from Covid if you haven't got it)
(this does assume that a fairly consistent proportion of real cases are detected, so that the direciton of movement of cases stats reflect real cases, at least in the downwards direction)
Yes, I agree with all that. I was merely pointing out that there is a bit of inconsistency in the reaction to falling/rising numbers, especially from those who just wish Covid would disappear. (Of course we all wish this - but it hasn't happened yet and won't for a while).
Covid is never disappearing....i fully expect it that on average 100 people a day die with covid for a long time to come.
But as we see from the data, under 60 and fully vaxxed, your chance of death is literally down with the hit by a bus territory. Unfortunately it is going to continue to kill some of the very old and vulernable.
Just been to one of the greatest small art museums in the world. The Rosengart Collection. Lucerne. Acquired by Swiss Jewish art dealers Siegfried and daughter angela Rosengart from the 1920s.
Now housed in a 1920s bank it has an outstanding collection of Picassos (he painted angela 5 times - personal friends), a phenomenal collection of Klees, plus masterpieces by Cezanne, Bonnard, Dufy, Miro, Monet, Modigliani, Calder, Matisse, Seurat, Signac, You name it. And some superb Chagall
Ten rooms of total genius. It would make a good national gallery of modern European art for an average midsized European country. Like, say, Portugal. Or Finland. I’ve no doubt it’s superior to the equivalent in lubljana or Dublin. Or Australia? Or anywhere in Africa?
I am now getting happily drunk by the fake wooden medieval bridge
Hello. That sounds fabulous. However unless it's in your contract I don't know why you have to always say you're getting drunk. There's no need. Much more efficient to just add a PS when you're not getting drunk.
Btw, this week I actually went out to the pub and had oysters. Yep.
But please note that I deconstructed it. I had the oysters (3 Maldens) ad hoc on a tray outside a fishmongers - ie in their proper setting - and then only after that did I go to the pub and do in there what such places are rightfully for, drink.
Maldons with an ‘o’ not an ‘e’
But you’re on your way. Within a few weeks you’ll be comparing the virtues of the helford natives in the Cow with the jersey rocks in the Drop
Sorry, yes, Maldons. The little town in Essex. Tbh I can't imagine any oyster being better than these that I had. Middle of the afternoon, so peckish rather than hungry, mouth dry in the hot weather, and here comes these 3 beauties, wow, if I was ranking them on the 4 key metrics of temp, taste, texture, size we're talking A stars across the board. They sat in a cool clear liquid (water?) and to this I added merely a squeeze of lemon and a few drops of tabasco. Down the hatch. And in case you're wondering I'm no virgin. I had some in Whitstable quite recently and there was no - repeat no - comparison.
There's an R in the month. Essex Natives have only been available since Wednesday last week. If you were Whitstable before then you were eating Rocks. And it goes without saying that Kentish oysters (or oysters of Kent) are just not as good as Essex ones.
Right, which fits since I had them 2 days ago. I don't know what the Whitstable ones were exactly, except they were presumably local, but they weren't top notch. Certainly not cf these Maldon wunderbars. However I wouldn't generalize on just the 2 data points, esp since the respective establishments were very different, high end fishmonger vs opportunistic looking kiosk.
We were (rightly) slagging off American food the other day, but if you like Oysters, Chesapeake Bay is the (probably a, given the lots of other coast the US has) place to go.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Just been to one of the greatest small art museums in the world. The Rosengart Collection. Lucerne. Acquired by Swiss Jewish art dealers Siegfried and daughter angela Rosengart from the 1920s.
Now housed in a 1920s bank it has an outstanding collection of Picassos (he painted angela 5 times - personal friends), a phenomenal collection of Klees, plus masterpieces by Cezanne, Bonnard, Dufy, Miro, Monet, Modigliani, Calder, Matisse, Seurat, Signac, You name it. And some superb Chagall
Ten rooms of total genius. It would make a good national gallery of modern European art for an average midsized European country. Like, say, Portugal. Or Finland. I’ve no doubt it’s superior to the equivalent in lubljana or Dublin. Or Australia? Or anywhere in Africa?
I am now getting happily drunk by the fake wooden medieval bridge
It's probably not quite in the same league but the Musée Marmottan in Paris is also a lovely little jewel devoted to Monet's works. We used to live round the corner in the early 70s.
The marmottan is lovely, tho yes this is better I think. And barely visited!
I love small private collections consisting almost entirely of masterpieces, personally chosen
Of course the louvre, national gallery, hermitage are fantastic but boy they are huge and exhausting. It takes you a week to really see them, and they are bloated with filler. One of my favorite national galleries is the Mauritshuis in The Hague, it’s tiny by the standards of the Prada but it just has the best of Dutch golden age art. That’s it
The Getty was so much better when it was that little villa. Now it is a sprawling mess full of dross alongside the great stuff
I strongly recommend the Rosengart. Mind blowingly good and you can properly see all of it in a lazy morning, then have a nice wine-soaked lunch
Hitler's Eagle's nest in the German Alps (not that he went there very much, being afraid of heights) can't really compete in the cultural stakes
Berchtesgaden? He was there quite a lot, I believe, in the pre war era. He loved it. During the war itself he retreated to the Wolf’s Lair in the east. Better bunkers. Nearer Russia.
I’ve been to Berchtesgaden. It’s deeply sinister even now. Spectacular but creepily subdued.
What amazed me is the presence of a 5 star hotel right underneath the lair whose only selling point really is: come and enjoy the view Hitler enjoyed! It’s never mentioned, but that is the USP. And many were there for that reason. A lot of young and old people were quietly reading books about the Nazis. Including me.
It occurred to me that one day even Auschwitz will be sold much more overtly as a tourist destination. They will reconstruct the gas chambers. Have 3D mock ups. Audio visual experiences. Augmented reality Holocaust. You too can imagine what it’s like to come through that railway arch…. Schnell! SCHNELL!
It sounds ghastly but that will happen. Guaranteed. The horror will fade and the capitalist greed will take over. A few will complain but then give up
There's all that London Dungeon shit about how torturing people to death gets deeply funny after a couple of centuries. It really doesn't.
But, a lot of people revel in it. There are whole websites devoted to boiling, hanging drawing and quartering, burning young women at the stake etc.
Just been to one of the greatest small art museums in the world. The Rosengart Collection. Lucerne. Acquired by Swiss Jewish art dealers Siegfried and daughter angela Rosengart from the 1920s.
Now housed in a 1920s bank it has an outstanding collection of Picassos (he painted angela 5 times - personal friends), a phenomenal collection of Klees, plus masterpieces by Cezanne, Bonnard, Dufy, Miro, Monet, Modigliani, Calder, Matisse, Seurat, Signac, You name it. And some superb Chagall
Ten rooms of total genius. It would make a good national gallery of modern European art for an average midsized European country. Like, say, Portugal. Or Finland. I’ve no doubt it’s superior to the equivalent in lubljana or Dublin. Or Australia? Or anywhere in Africa?
I am now getting happily drunk by the fake wooden medieval bridge
Hello. That sounds fabulous. However unless it's in your contract I don't know why you have to always say you're getting drunk. There's no need. Much more efficient to just add a PS when you're not getting drunk.
Btw, this week I actually went out to the pub and had oysters. Yep.
But please note that I deconstructed it. I had the oysters (3 Maldens) ad hoc on a tray outside a fishmongers - ie in their proper setting - and then only after that did I go to the pub and do in there what such places are rightfully for, drink.
Maldons with an ‘o’ not an ‘e’
But you’re on your way. Within a few weeks you’ll be comparing the virtues of the helford natives in the Cow with the jersey rocks in the Drop
Sorry, yes, Maldons. The little town in Essex. Tbh I can't imagine any oyster being better than these that I had. Middle of the afternoon, so peckish rather than hungry, mouth dry in the hot weather, and here comes these 3 beauties, wow, if I was ranking them on the 4 key metrics of temp, taste, texture, size we're talking A stars across the board. They sat in a cool clear liquid (water?) and to this I added merely a squeeze of lemon and a few drops of tabasco. Down the hatch. And in case you're wondering I'm no virgin. I had some in Whitstable quite recently and there was no - repeat no - comparison.
There's an R in the month. Essex Natives have only been available since Wednesday last week. If you were Whitstable before then you were eating Rocks. And it goes without saying that Kentish oysters (or oysters of Kent) are just not as good as Essex ones.
Right, which fits since I had them 2 days ago. I don't know what the Whitstable ones were exactly, except they were presumably local, but they weren't top notch. Certainly not cf these Maldon wunderbars. However I wouldn't generalize on just the 2 data points, esp since the respective establishments were very different, high end fishmonger vs opportunistic looking kiosk.
We were (rightly) slagging off American food the other day, but if you like Oysters, Chesapeake Bay is the (probably a, given the lots of other coast the US has) place to go.
The Americans haven't found a way to chlorinate oysters yet I suspect?
Just been to one of the greatest small art museums in the world. The Rosengart Collection. Lucerne. Acquired by Swiss Jewish art dealers Siegfried and daughter angela Rosengart from the 1920s.
Now housed in a 1920s bank it has an outstanding collection of Picassos (he painted angela 5 times - personal friends), a phenomenal collection of Klees, plus masterpieces by Cezanne, Bonnard, Dufy, Miro, Monet, Modigliani, Calder, Matisse, Seurat, Signac, You name it. And some superb Chagall
Ten rooms of total genius. It would make a good national gallery of modern European art for an average midsized European country. Like, say, Portugal. Or Finland. I’ve no doubt it’s superior to the equivalent in lubljana or Dublin. Or Australia? Or anywhere in Africa?
I am now getting happily drunk by the fake wooden medieval bridge
It's probably not quite in the same league but the Musée Marmottan in Paris is also a lovely little jewel devoted to Monet's works. We used to live round the corner in the early 70s.
The marmottan is lovely, tho yes this is better I think. And barely visited!
I love small private collections consisting almost entirely of masterpieces, personally chosen
Of course the louvre, national gallery, hermitage are fantastic but boy they are huge and exhausting. It takes you a week to really see them, and they are bloated with filler. One of my favorite national galleries is the Mauritshuis in The Hague, it’s tiny by the standards of the Prada but it just has the best of Dutch golden age art. That’s it
The Getty was so much better when it was that little villa. Now it is a sprawling mess full of dross alongside the great stuff
I strongly recommend the Rosengart. Mind blowingly good and you can properly see all of it in a lazy morning, then have a nice wine-soaked lunch
Hitler's Eagle's nest in the German Alps (not that he went there very much, being afraid of heights) can't really compete in the cultural stakes
Berchtesgaden? He was there quite a lot, I believe, in the pre war era. He loved it. During the war itself he retreated to the Wolf’s Lair in the east. Better bunkers. Nearer Russia.
I’ve been to Berchtesgaden. It’s deeply sinister even now. Spectacular but creepily subdued.
What amazed me is the presence of a 5 star hotel right underneath the lair whose only selling point really is: come and enjoy the view Hitler enjoyed! It’s never mentioned, but that is the USP. And many were there for that reason. A lot of young and old people were quietly reading books about the Nazis. Including me.
It occurred to me that one day even Auschwitz will be sold much more overtly as a tourist destination. They will reconstruct the gas chambers. Have 3D mock ups. Audio visual experiences. Augmented reality Holocaust. You too can imagine what it’s like to come through that railway arch…. Schnell! SCHNELL!
It sounds ghastly but that will happen. Guaranteed. The horror will fade and the capitalist greed will take over. A few will complain but then give up
There's all that London Dungeon shit about how torturing people to death gets deeply funny after a couple of centuries. It really doesn't.
But, a lot of people revel in it. There are whole websites devoted to boiling, hanging drawing and quartering, burning young women at the stake etc.
Yes. But I did give the Rothenburg (medieval) punishment and torture museum the miss. Very popular with the kids, though, it seemed.
They are lumping together two quite distinct forms of taxation. Stamp (and other) duties, compared to a recurring tax on the property.
It’s still a tax and a source of income for HMT.
Stamp duty is the worst form of property tax. It isn't a tax on holding property, it is a tax on mobility.
That's bad for encouraging people to 'right-size' their properties, which makes it bad for others who want to get a better house on the ladder, its bad for moving for jobs. It just encourages people to stay put which is not what we should be encouraging people to do.
Someone who has a mansion and lives in there for 50 years can avoid paying any stamp duty in that period. Someone who is mobile moving homes every five years due to work, or changing circumstances like kids, or going to a smaller house after the kids leave the nest etc can face stamp duty every time they move.
Mobility is the last part of property that should be taxed.
Prof Alice Roberts💙 @theAliceRoberts · 2h The UK is carrying out a unique experiment in just ditching precautions and allowing such high numbers of cases - @chrischirp sharing this comparison at the @IndependentSage briefing. 1000 deaths a week has somehow become normalised.
==
Yet we see no widespread public alarm as to where we are with things and certainly no clamour for lockdown or making pubs social distance.
So maybe 1000 deaths a week is the acceptable level for this new disease at least for a while anyway?
I think it is, and the lack of panic shows that. It's hard to define when people panic, as they didn't seem very panicky in January when deaths were very high indeed, but I think it is tied into whether people sense that the system is on the cusp of being overwhelmed.
When cases are pretty high but deaths nowhere near where they were in previous waves, 1000 a week doesn't worry the public.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
Prof Alice Roberts💙 @theAliceRoberts · 2h The UK is carrying out a unique experiment in just ditching precautions and allowing such high numbers of cases - @chrischirp sharing this comparison at the @IndependentSage briefing. 1000 deaths a week has somehow become normalised.
==
Yet we see no widespread public alarm as to where we are with things and certainly no clamour for lockdown or making pubs social distance.
So maybe 1000 deaths a week is the acceptable level for this new disease at least for a while anyway?
I think it is, and the lack of panic shows that. It's hard to define when people panic, as they didn't seem very panicky in January when deaths were very high indeed, but I think it is tied into whether people sense that the system is on the cusp of being overwhelmed.
When cases are pretty high but deaths nowhere near where they were in previous waves, 1000 a week doesn't worry the public.
In general the public have often lurched from one extreme to the other, with a lag in regards to the actual situation.
Talk of Rishi going for salary sacrifice next. What a further kick in the teeth that would be - if the Tories want to head sub 30 that'll be the way to do it.
Rishi as CofE looks increasingly like "too much too soon".
He's clearly a substantial talent, and the Conservative party needs those. But some time in a spending department (ideally W+P) on the way up would have filled out his experience in a way that he clearly needs. Sound money is a good thing, but this is not the time.
And having a multi-squillionaire as Chancellor masterminding massive austerity just isn't a good look.
From a betting perspective, I wonder if there is some value now in reviewing some of the candidates for next Tory leader.
Given the tax rises, and the suggested ones, It has reinforced my view Rishi won't be next leader.
As for the rest, it is a bit process by elimination. Raab's seat is at risk, Patel risks floundering over the migrants situation, Gove would be too toxic.
Javid and Truss are the two obvious ones from the rest of the Cabinet who would benefit from others' demise. However, I'm thinking Oliver Dowden at DCMS might be a good outside bet. He's ambitious, the DCMS brief gives him a platform to attack wokery, which goes down well with the faithful, and it is also a department that is unlikely to make too many unpopular decisions.
The problem is that everything rests on the date of Boris's departure. And that could be in 2027 or it could be next week if he discovers he needs a few quid in a hurry.
Dowden? Well if Isam's "charisma quotient" has any merit, Dowden beats Starmer for raw dullness.
It only gets worse if Jenrick is your man.
Sharma wants a word. Well he would, if he had any charisma, probably keeping quiet in the corner until he is needed for defending some shambles on breakfast tv.
A good call!
What is this salary sacrifice that Rishi is planning?
All sorts of minor tax avoidance schemes. Childcare vouchers being most common
Beware the impact on your pension if it is based on Salary though
Though childcare for working couples is another of those things that's intrinsically expensive, and since it depends on lots of relatively low-paid staff, may be about to become more so. If you take away the tax perk of salary sacrifice then working will be pointless for a fair few people and the long-term effect is a smaller workforce and fewer kids being born. That helps nobody in the medium term.
And politically, it is something that hurts parents, who by definition are young-to-middle aged. But the bottom line is there's no nice way forward.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
Just been to one of the greatest small art museums in the world. The Rosengart Collection. Lucerne. Acquired by Swiss Jewish art dealers Siegfried and daughter angela Rosengart from the 1920s.
Now housed in a 1920s bank it has an outstanding collection of Picassos (he painted angela 5 times - personal friends), a phenomenal collection of Klees, plus masterpieces by Cezanne, Bonnard, Dufy, Miro, Monet, Modigliani, Calder, Matisse, Seurat, Signac, You name it. And some superb Chagall
Ten rooms of total genius. It would make a good national gallery of modern European art for an average midsized European country. Like, say, Portugal. Or Finland. I’ve no doubt it’s superior to the equivalent in lubljana or Dublin. Or Australia? Or anywhere in Africa?
I am now getting happily drunk by the fake wooden medieval bridge
Hello. That sounds fabulous. However unless it's in your contract I don't know why you have to always say you're getting drunk. There's no need. Much more efficient to just add a PS when you're not getting drunk.
Btw, this week I actually went out to the pub and had oysters. Yep.
But please note that I deconstructed it. I had the oysters (3 Maldens) ad hoc on a tray outside a fishmongers - ie in their proper setting - and then only after that did I go to the pub and do in there what such places are rightfully for, drink.
Maldons with an ‘o’ not an ‘e’
But you’re on your way. Within a few weeks you’ll be comparing the virtues of the helford natives in the Cow with the jersey rocks in the Drop
Sorry, yes, Maldons. The little town in Essex. Tbh I can't imagine any oyster being better than these that I had. Middle of the afternoon, so peckish rather than hungry, mouth dry in the hot weather, and here comes these 3 beauties, wow, if I was ranking them on the 4 key metrics of temp, taste, texture, size we're talking A stars across the board. They sat in a cool clear liquid (water?) and to this I added merely a squeeze of lemon and a few drops of tabasco. Down the hatch. And in case you're wondering I'm no virgin. I had some in Whitstable quite recently and there was no - repeat no - comparison.
There's an R in the month. Essex Natives have only been available since Wednesday last week. If you were Whitstable before then you were eating Rocks. And it goes without saying that Kentish oysters (or oysters of Kent) are just not as good as Essex ones.
Right, which fits since I had them 2 days ago. I don't know what the Whitstable ones were exactly, except they were presumably local, but they weren't top notch. Certainly not cf these Maldon wunderbars. However I wouldn't generalize on just the 2 data points, esp since the respective establishments were very different, high end fishmonger vs opportunistic looking kiosk.
We were (rightly) slagging off American food the other day, but if you like Oysters, Chesapeake Bay is the (probably a, given the lots of other coast the US has) place to go.
Dear me, I will never forget driving across that bridge on a windy day. Not for the faint hearted.
Prof Alice Roberts💙 @theAliceRoberts · 2h The UK is carrying out a unique experiment in just ditching precautions and allowing such high numbers of cases - @chrischirp sharing this comparison at the @IndependentSage briefing. 1000 deaths a week has somehow become normalised.
==
Yet we see no widespread public alarm as to where we are with things and certainly no clamour for lockdown or making pubs social distance.
So maybe 1000 deaths a week is the acceptable level for this new disease at least for a while anyway?
I think it is, and the lack of panic shows that. It's hard to define when people panic, as they didn't seem very panicky in January when deaths were very high indeed, but I think it is tied into whether people sense that the system is on the cusp of being overwhelmed.
When cases are pretty high but deaths nowhere near where they were in previous waves, 1000 a week doesn't worry the public.
Why should it? About 8000 die every week in normal circumstances, and there's no evidence this <1000 per week are extra to the 8000, it seems to roughly be the same number. So either people who would have died anyway are dying due to this, or people are not dying who would have died normally. Either way, its a wash roughly.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
What, turning them around or sinking them?
Both.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
I can't work out on what basis you would decide it was a good idea. Patel even has cross party support from leading Labour and Lib Dem figures to have not renewed her contract. So it isn't even a concern that you would be doing something that would end up in a political row.
Some signs in the polling today Merkel's intervention might have steadied the Union ship a little.
CDU/CSU seem to be stabilising in the low 20s - SPD still with a 4-5 point advantage. YouGov was a poor poll for the FDP this morning at just 10%.
As for Norway. Norstat this morning had the centre-left bloc of parties leading the centre-right bloc 51-41 which closes the gap fractionally but still hard to see Solberg surviving.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
Mississippi will overtake New Jersey for deaths per million shortly, despite New Jersey being almost entirely urbanised and with 20 times the population density of Mississippi.
I can't work out on what basis you would decide it was a good idea. Patel even has cross party support from leading Labour and Lib Dem figures to have not renewed her contract. So it isn't even a concern that you would be doing something that would end up in a political row.
I think she is so partisan that the cross party opinion would lead her to take the opposite course of action
Prof Alice Roberts💙 @theAliceRoberts · 2h The UK is carrying out a unique experiment in just ditching precautions and allowing such high numbers of cases - @chrischirp sharing this comparison at the @IndependentSage briefing. 1000 deaths a week has somehow become normalised.
==
Yet we see no widespread public alarm as to where we are with things and certainly no clamour for lockdown or making pubs social distance.
So maybe 1000 deaths a week is the acceptable level for this new disease at least for a while anyway?
Another way of looking at it:
UK life expectancy in 2010 was 79.7, in 2020 it was 81.1
How much does the extra 1000 deaths per week move it down by? I doubt it is to 2010 levels. If the options are:
1) no lockdown and life expectancy between 2010 and 2020 levels 2) ongoing semi permanent restrictions on group socialisation and life expectancy at 2020 levels
Just been to one of the greatest small art museums in the world. The Rosengart Collection. Lucerne. Acquired by Swiss Jewish art dealers Siegfried and daughter angela Rosengart from the 1920s.
Now housed in a 1920s bank it has an outstanding collection of Picassos (he painted angela 5 times - personal friends), a phenomenal collection of Klees, plus masterpieces by Cezanne, Bonnard, Dufy, Miro, Monet, Modigliani, Calder, Matisse, Seurat, Signac, You name it. And some superb Chagall
Ten rooms of total genius. It would make a good national gallery of modern European art for an average midsized European country. Like, say, Portugal. Or Finland. I’ve no doubt it’s superior to the equivalent in lubljana or Dublin. Or Australia? Or anywhere in Africa?
I am now getting happily drunk by the fake wooden medieval bridge
Hello. That sounds fabulous. However unless it's in your contract I don't know why you have to always say you're getting drunk. There's no need. Much more efficient to just add a PS when you're not getting drunk.
Btw, this week I actually went out to the pub and had oysters. Yep.
But please note that I deconstructed it. I had the oysters (3 Maldens) ad hoc on a tray outside a fishmongers - ie in their proper setting - and then only after that did I go to the pub and do in there what such places are rightfully for, drink.
Maldons with an ‘o’ not an ‘e’
But you’re on your way. Within a few weeks you’ll be comparing the virtues of the helford natives in the Cow with the jersey rocks in the Drop
Sorry, yes, Maldons. The little town in Essex. Tbh I can't imagine any oyster being better than these that I had. Middle of the afternoon, so peckish rather than hungry, mouth dry in the hot weather, and here comes these 3 beauties, wow, if I was ranking them on the 4 key metrics of temp, taste, texture, size we're talking A stars across the board. They sat in a cool clear liquid (water?) and to this I added merely a squeeze of lemon and a few drops of tabasco. Down the hatch. And in case you're wondering I'm no virgin. I had some in Whitstable quite recently and there was no - repeat no - comparison.
There's an R in the month. Essex Natives have only been available since Wednesday last week. If you were Whitstable before then you were eating Rocks. And it goes without saying that Kentish oysters (or oysters of Kent) are just not as good as Essex ones.
Right, which fits since I had them 2 days ago. I don't know what the Whitstable ones were exactly, except they were presumably local, but they weren't top notch. Certainly not cf these Maldon wunderbars. However I wouldn't generalize on just the 2 data points, esp since the respective establishments were very different, high end fishmonger vs opportunistic looking kiosk.
We were (rightly) slagging off American food the other day, but if you like Oysters, Chesapeake Bay is the (probably a, given the lots of other coast the US has) place to go.
Dear me, I will never forget driving across that bridge on a windy day. Not for the faint hearted.
Longest bridge in the world when it was built, as I recall? Yes, a two lane motorway over water with no hard shoulder and quite narrow lanes.
I can't work out on what basis you would decide it was a good idea. Patel even has cross party support from leading Labour and Lib Dem figures to have not renewed her contract. So it isn't even a concern that you would be doing something that would end up in a political row.
I think she is so partisan that the cross party opinion would lead her to take the opposite course of action
But a load of her own MPs called for it.
Seemed like an absolute no brainer decision. Dick is useless and deeply unpopular, and as a minister you can then stamp your authority on the situation, with the knowledge you also have loads of political cover.
In purely political terms, easy decision. In actual policing terms, pretty easy decision as well.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
I think some of it at least will be like various Covid polling, with people picking an option to show how serious they are.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
What, turning them around or sinking them?
Both.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
I can't work out on what basis you would decide it was a good idea. Patel even has cross party support from leading Labour and Lib Dem figures to have not renewed her contract. So it isn't even a concern that you would be doing something that would end up in a political row.
I think she is so partisan that the cross party opinion would lead her to take the opposite course of action
But a load of her own MPs called for it.
Maybe Cressida has a camera in Priti's office? It does seem very strange.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
What, turning them around or sinking them?
Both.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
My old dad used to say that if the Nazis had invaded England there would have been those that would have turned a blind eye to the gas chambers. I think you just proved his point.
I can't work out on what basis you would decide it was a good idea. Patel even has cross party support from leading Labour and Lib Dem figures to have not renewed her contract. So it isn't even a concern that you would be doing something that would end up in a political row.
I think she is so partisan that the cross party opinion would lead her to take the opposite course of action
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
What, turning them around or sinking them?
Both.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
So Captain HYUFD is wrong...again?
Private HY feels more apposite?
I only mentioned turning round the boats as per the poll, it was NigelF and Omnium who mentioned sinking them
They are lumping together two quite distinct forms of taxation. Stamp (and other) duties, compared to a recurring tax on the property.
It’s still a tax and a source of income for HMT.
Stamp duty is the worst form of property tax. It isn't a tax on holding property, it is a tax on mobility.
That's bad for encouraging people to 'right-size' their properties, which makes it bad for others who want to get a better house on the ladder, its bad for moving for jobs. It just encourages people to stay put which is not what we should be encouraging people to do.
Someone who has a mansion and lives in there for 50 years can avoid paying any stamp duty in that period. Someone who is mobile moving homes every five years due to work, or changing circumstances like kids, or going to a smaller house after the kids leave the nest etc can face stamp duty every time they move.
Mobility is the last part of property that should be taxed.
I certainly agree with all that. This makes it a good example of our politics creating bad incentives for politicians.
Because most people only pay stamp duty very rarely, and at a time when they're being fleeced for all sorts of fees (e.g. estate agency, legal, mortgage application fees), and they can generally make it work by sticking the extra on the mortgage, it's a tax with much lower political cost than council tax, or even more so income tax, let alone a new reformed property or land value tax.
While most of Europe was still in bed at the weekend, Italian stunt pilot Dario Costa got up early, climbed into his aeroplane and, apropos of nothing, flew it through two Turkish motorway tunnels, becoming the first person on Earth to do so.
The flight, which took place through the Çatalca Tunnels on the Northern Marmara Highway east of Istanbul, broke the world record for the longest tunnel ever flown through in an aeroplane, an incongruous title which up until this point has not been hotly contested....
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
That's what my little old lady next door says. She's offered to go out and puncture their dinghys.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
What, turning them around or sinking them?
Both.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
So Captain HYUFD is wrong...again?
Private HY feels more apposite?
I only mentioned turning round the boats as per the poll, it was NigelF who mentioned sinking them
It was NigelF in fact, and just to be clear I was not proposing such a barbaric policy, though one poster has already proved that there are some people in this country who would.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
My old dad used to say that if the Nazis had invaded England there would have been those that would have turned a blind eye to the gas chambers. I think you just proved his point.
British exceptionalism rests upon our not having suffered occupation, yet in all probability we’d have had the same experience as those nations that did. That the German garrison in the Channel Islands received more denunciation letters than they could deal with is a clue.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
My old dad used to say that if the Nazis had invaded England there would have been those that would have turned a blind eye to the gas chambers. I think you just proved his point.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
Time to dust off that courtroom in Nuremburg I think.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
What, turning them around or sinking them?
Both.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
So Captain HYUFD is wrong...again?
Private HY feels more apposite?
I only mentioned turning round the boats as per the poll, it was NigelF who mentioned sinking them
It was NigelF in fact, and just to be clear I was not proposing such a barbaric policy, though one poster has already proved that there are some people in this country who would.
Take the point you were being sarcastic, Omnium was not
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
What, turning them around or sinking them?
Both.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
So Captain HYUFD is wrong...again?
Private HY feels more apposite?
I only mentioned turning round the boats as per the poll, it was NigelF and Omnium who mentioned sinking them
Did Mr Farage say who should be sinking the boats? Did Mr Farage explain how that can be squared with the law of the sea and international law concerning the ensuing deaths?
Have we heard, BTW, if the RNLI are still to be prosecuted at the first rescue?
They are lumping together two quite distinct forms of taxation. Stamp (and other) duties, compared to a recurring tax on the property.
It’s still a tax and a source of income for HMT.
Stamp duty is the worst form of property tax. It isn't a tax on holding property, it is a tax on mobility.
That's bad for encouraging people to 'right-size' their properties, which makes it bad for others who want to get a better house on the ladder, its bad for moving for jobs. It just encourages people to stay put which is not what we should be encouraging people to do.
Someone who has a mansion and lives in there for 50 years can avoid paying any stamp duty in that period. Someone who is mobile moving homes every five years due to work, or changing circumstances like kids, or going to a smaller house after the kids leave the nest etc can face stamp duty every time they move.
Mobility is the last part of property that should be taxed.
I certainly agree with all that. This makes it a good example of our politics creating bad incentives for politicians.
Because most people only pay stamp duty very rarely, and at a time when they're being fleeced for all sorts of fees (e.g. estate agency, legal, mortgage application fees), and they can generally make it work by sticking the extra on the mortgage, it's a tax with much lower political cost than council tax, or even more so income tax, let alone a new reformed property or land value tax.
Someone could inherit a valuable property portfolio from their family, spend their life living in it, renting it out, leaving it sitting empty, or selling some of it, whatever, and never pay a penny in Stamp Duty. Whereas someone whose job moved about and buys a succession of small flats to live in would pay a shedload. Calling it a property tax is a joke.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
Time to dust off that courtroom in Nuremburg I think.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
My old dad used to say that if the Nazis had invaded England there would have been those that would have turned a blind eye to the gas chambers. I think you just proved his point.
Choose to believe what you like.
I do choose to believe that anyone who could express the view that there were any circumstances when it would be correct to order servicemen to sink a boat full of civilians and children is a sick and twisted minded individual.
I think there are many others would would "choose to believe" the same.
This new border policy how far into UK waters will this be used for . It’s all very vague . How safe would this be , if you force the boat back , shouldn’t you be convinced that it’s safe with enough fuel . This looks like it could end up with tragic consequences .
Prof Alice Roberts💙 @theAliceRoberts · 2h The UK is carrying out a unique experiment in just ditching precautions and allowing such high numbers of cases - @chrischirp sharing this comparison at the @IndependentSage briefing. 1000 deaths a week has somehow become normalised.
==
Yet we see no widespread public alarm as to where we are with things and certainly no clamour for lockdown or making pubs social distance.
So maybe 1000 deaths a week is the acceptable level for this new disease at least for a while anyway?
I think it is, and the lack of panic shows that. It's hard to define when people panic, as they didn't seem very panicky in January when deaths were very high indeed, but I think it is tied into whether people sense that the system is on the cusp of being overwhelmed.
When cases are pretty high but deaths nowhere near where they were in previous waves, 1000 a week doesn't worry the public.
I'm facing both ways. OTOH, a theme of the pandemic is that due to wishful thinking, or just a lack of thinking, the virus is underestimated. OTOH, I do myself now feel like it's over. Not that there won't be many more serious cases and deaths, there's bound to be, but that it'll remain within NHS capacity and so there won't be any more lockdown. And although the word is that they are, I'm still not convinced that legally mandated domestic vaccine passports are coming for England.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
What, turning them around or sinking them?
Both.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
So Captain HYUFD is wrong...again?
Private HY feels more apposite?
I only mentioned turning round the boats as per the poll, it was NigelF and Omnium who mentioned sinking them
Did Mr Farage say who should be sinking the boats? Did Mr Farage explain how that can be squared with the law of the sea and international law concerning the ensuing deaths?
Have we heard, BTW, if the RNLI are still to be prosecuted at the first rescue?
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
What, turning them around or sinking them?
Both.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
So Captain HYUFD is wrong...again?
Private HY feels more apposite?
I only mentioned turning round the boats as per the poll, it was NigelF and Omnium who mentioned sinking them
Did Mr Farage say who should be sinking the boats? Did Mr Farage explain how that can be squared with the law of the sea and international law concerning the ensuing deaths?
Have we heard, BTW, if the RNLI are still to be prosecuted at the first rescue?
Border Force have always had that authority as the master of any vessel in territorial waters must obey any legal instruction from the military or law enforcement.
Quite how you get them to comply without killing everyone on board is the relevant question. What does BF do if the refugee boat just keeps coming?
Border Force have always had that authority as the master of any vessel in territorial waters must obey any legal instruction from the military or law enforcement.
Quite how you get them to comply without killing everyone on board is the relevant question. What does BF do if the refugee boat just keeps coming?
Is it actually legal for them to (a) be armed and (b) to fire their point fives to sink a boat?
The poll means that if there were a general election today the Tories would win 311 seats, down 54 seats from the 2019 general election, and below the 326 number for a Commons majority. A similar poll of 14,000 people in May gave the Tories a 122 majority if election held then.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
What, turning them around or sinking them?
Both.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
So Captain HYUFD is wrong...again?
Private HY feels more apposite?
I only mentioned turning round the boats as per the poll, it was NigelF and Omnium who mentioned sinking them
Did Mr Farage say who should be sinking the boats? Did Mr Farage explain how that can be squared with the law of the sea and international law concerning the ensuing deaths?
Have we heard, BTW, if the RNLI are still to be prosecuted at the first rescue?
I was thinking that I couldn't imagine any circumstances when a vessel with civilians onboard should be sunk, but then you mentioned Farage.... Was it wrong of me to imagine the smug twat clinging onto a half deflated lilo in the middle of a shipping lane and me passing on a jetski with a harpoon gun?
Just been to one of the greatest small art museums in the world. The Rosengart Collection. Lucerne. Acquired by Swiss Jewish art dealers Siegfried and daughter angela Rosengart from the 1920s.
Now housed in a 1920s bank it has an outstanding collection of Picassos (he painted angela 5 times - personal friends), a phenomenal collection of Klees, plus masterpieces by Cezanne, Bonnard, Dufy, Miro, Monet, Modigliani, Calder, Matisse, Seurat, Signac, You name it. And some superb Chagall
Ten rooms of total genius. It would make a good national gallery of modern European art for an average midsized European country. Like, say, Portugal. Or Finland. I’ve no doubt it’s superior to the equivalent in lubljana or Dublin. Or Australia? Or anywhere in Africa?
I am now getting happily drunk by the fake wooden medieval bridge
Hello. That sounds fabulous. However unless it's in your contract I don't know why you have to always say you're getting drunk. There's no need. Much more efficient to just add a PS when you're not getting drunk.
Btw, this week I actually went out to the pub and had oysters. Yep.
But please note that I deconstructed it. I had the oysters (3 Maldens) ad hoc on a tray outside a fishmongers - ie in their proper setting - and then only after that did I go to the pub and do in there what such places are rightfully for, drink.
Fantastic! An 80-yr old joke. You're on fire.
I'm not 80. Nothing like.
Very nearly a good response. But a bit desperate to find a retort. And it showed, sadly.
I remain happy with it. But you keep on giving your take on things. I quite often notice.
This is the sort of rally I am hoping to see in the Raducanu match tomorrow.
2120 UK time, amazon prime, btw.
Ah - Amazon Prime - thanks for that - I can watch it then.
Haven't got and well down about it too. Can I come round if I bring a big bag of Cheesy Wotsits?
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
My old dad used to say that if the Nazis had invaded England there would have been those that would have turned a blind eye to the gas chambers. I think you just proved his point.
Choose to believe what you like.
I do choose to believe that anyone who could express the view that there were any circumstances when it would be correct to order servicemen to sink a boat full of civilians and children is a sick and twisted minded individual.
I think there are many others would would "choose to believe" the same.
Your concerns will kill many more than my hard-heartedness.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
My old dad used to say that if the Nazis had invaded England there would have been those that would have turned a blind eye to the gas chambers. I think you just proved his point.
Choose to believe what you like.
I do choose to believe that anyone who could express the view that there were any circumstances when it would be correct to order servicemen to sink a boat full of civilians and children is a sick and twisted minded individual.
I think there are many others would would "choose to believe" the same.
Your concerns will kill many more than my hard-heartedness.
Perhaps you need to volunteer. I think it would be an order most military personnel would refuse.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
"Sink all boats without permission to be in UK waters". I think I'd go with that. Perhaps a hundred deaths now, and none in the future.
My old dad used to say that if the Nazis had invaded England there would have been those that would have turned a blind eye to the gas chambers. I think you just proved his point.
Whilst I don’t think we had the intense hatred for neighbours that existed in parts of Eastern Europe and the Balkans, I think there would have been plenty of willing collaborators.
I can’t see a British equivalent of the Ustase or Russian National Army coming into existence. I could see a large British Division of the Waffen SS being formed.
They are lumping together two quite distinct forms of taxation. Stamp (and other) duties, compared to a recurring tax on the property.
It’s still a tax and a source of income for HMT.
Stamp duty is the worst form of property tax. It isn't a tax on holding property, it is a tax on mobility.
That's bad for encouraging people to 'right-size' their properties, which makes it bad for others who want to get a better house on the ladder, its bad for moving for jobs. It just encourages people to stay put which is not what we should be encouraging people to do.
Someone who has a mansion and lives in there for 50 years can avoid paying any stamp duty in that period. Someone who is mobile moving homes every five years due to work, or changing circumstances like kids, or going to a smaller house after the kids leave the nest etc can face stamp duty every time they move.
Mobility is the last part of property that should be taxed.
I certainly agree with all that. This makes it a good example of our politics creating bad incentives for politicians.
Because most people only pay stamp duty very rarely, and at a time when they're being fleeced for all sorts of fees (e.g. estate agency, legal, mortgage application fees), and they can generally make it work by sticking the extra on the mortgage, it's a tax with much lower political cost than council tax, or even more so income tax, let alone a new reformed property or land value tax.
Someone could inherit a valuable property portfolio from their family, spend their life living in it, renting it out, leaving it sitting empty, or selling some of it, whatever, and never pay a penny in Stamp Duty. Whereas someone whose job moved about and buys a succession of small flats to live in would pay a shedload. Calling it a property tax is a joke.
I agree. I think that there should be an exemption for people that can prove they are relocating due to a change of location of their job. It is a major disincentive to labour mobility.
57% of voters and 88% of Tory voters and 85% of Leave voters back the government authorising the Border Force officials to, in certain circumstances, turn back small boats of migrants https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
It doesn't make it right or practical though. There would probably be a majority of Leave voters in favour of sinking them if they were given that option.
Its a completely impractical, insane and dangerous idea.
What, turning them around or sinking them?
Both.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
So Captain HYUFD is wrong...again?
Private HY feels more apposite?
I only mentioned turning round the boats as per the poll, it was NigelF and Omnium who mentioned sinking them
Did Mr Farage say who should be sinking the boats? Did Mr Farage explain how that can be squared with the law of the sea and international law concerning the ensuing deaths?
Have we heard, BTW, if the RNLI are still to be prosecuted at the first rescue?
I was thinking that I couldn't imagine any circumstances when a vessel with civilians onboard should be sunk, but then you mentioned Farage.... Was it wrong of me to imagine the smug twat clinging onto a half deflated lilo in the middle of a shipping lane and me passing on a jetski with a harpoon gun?
Ah - got it now: I'd misread HYUFD's "NigelF" to refer to Mr Farage rather than your ironic comment. Ignore my questions as to what Mr F said.
Though the point still stands, who is to do the killing if it is decided that boats are to be sunk? It's like the death sentence - it's not just the convict and his family you have to worry about, but the executioners.
Comments
Though any worse than the internal security service of fundamentalist Iran? Or Ba'athist Iraq? Or the rest of the Middle East?
The purchaser pays the Stamp Duty up front, then continues to pay council tax ongoing.
It is a tax on property paid by the owner - heavily front loaded.
2120 UK time, amazon prime, btw.
Far more concerning is the government bringing in emergency restrictions on freedom when there is no emergency. Because there's no emergency, there's not going to be any end of the emergency, so there's never going to be an obvious time to remove these restrictions.
We then move onto the debate I had earlier with an anti-masker that how do I know these deaths aren't just cases of flu.
58% of Labour voters and 55% of LDs and 55% of Remain voters opposed however
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1436344387185872898?s=20
Though where's the evidence for it now post-vaccinations? Not the theory, but the evidence. Is there any evidence at all that high cloth (not medical) mask wearing correlates with more mild cases when controlling for the same demographics and the same vaccinations?
Because England right now seems to be in a sweet spot of very high cases, but very low serious cases (ICUs) and deaths relative to almost all the rest of the western world. Without wearing masks.
We're getting there.
But as we see from the data, under 60 and fully vaxxed, your chance of death is literally down with the hit by a bus territory. Unfortunately it is going to continue to kill some of the very old and vulernable.
Just about sums up both of them
Utterly hopeless and incompetent
Yes. But I did give the Rothenburg (medieval) punishment and torture museum the miss. Very popular with the kids, though, it seemed.
That's bad for encouraging people to 'right-size' their properties, which makes it bad for others who want to get a better house on the ladder, its bad for moving for jobs. It just encourages people to stay put which is not what we should be encouraging people to do.
Someone who has a mansion and lives in there for 50 years can avoid paying any stamp duty in that period.
Someone who is mobile moving homes every five years due to work, or changing circumstances like kids, or going to a smaller house after the kids leave the nest etc can face stamp duty every time they move.
Mobility is the last part of property that should be taxed.
When cases are pretty high but deaths nowhere near where they were in previous waves, 1000 a week doesn't worry the public.
And politically, it is something that hurts parents, who by definition are young-to-middle aged. But the bottom line is there's no nice way forward.
This wasn't BoJo's plan at all.
(I assumed the latter was sarcastic so I did mean the former)
CDU/CSU seem to be stabilising in the low 20s - SPD still with a 4-5 point advantage. YouGov was a poor poll for the FDP this morning at just 10%.
As for Norway. Norstat this morning had the centre-left bloc of parties leading the centre-right bloc 51-41 which closes the gap fractionally but still hard to see Solberg surviving.
UK life expectancy in 2010 was 79.7, in 2020 it was 81.1
How much does the extra 1000 deaths per week move it down by? I doubt it is to 2010 levels. If the options are:
1) no lockdown and life expectancy between 2010 and 2020 levels
2) ongoing semi permanent restrictions on group socialisation and life expectancy at 2020 levels
it is a no brainer for society to choose 1.
Seemed like an absolute no brainer decision. Dick is useless and deeply unpopular, and as a minister you can then stamp your authority on the situation, with the knowledge you also have loads of political cover.
In purely political terms, easy decision. In actual policing terms, pretty easy decision as well.
...which will be nice.
Because most people only pay stamp duty very rarely, and at a time when they're being fleeced for all sorts of fees (e.g. estate agency, legal, mortgage application fees), and they can generally make it work by sticking the extra on the mortgage, it's a tax with much lower political cost than council tax, or even more so income tax, let alone a new reformed property or land value tax.
https://twitter.com/JonErlichman/status/1436109277907890178
Have we heard, BTW, if the RNLI are still to be prosecuted at the first rescue?
I think there are many others would would "choose to believe" the same.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2021/09/10/187e0/1?utm_source=twitter &utm_medium=daily_questions &utm_campaign=question_1
Who is supposed to be firing the 0.5" M2HB? From what ships? Under what legality?
Quite how you get them to comply without killing everyone on board is the relevant question. What does BF do if the refugee boat just keeps coming?
Another poll
Tories 37
Labour 33
A similar poll of 14,000 people in May gave the Tories a 122 majority if election held then.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1436315553170403357
Taliban EXECUTE brother of one of the Afghan resistance fighters' leaders and refuse to let relatives bury him so that 'his body can rot
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9977941/Second-charter-flight-carrying-foreigners-Afghanistan-leaves-Kabul-airport.html
I can’t see a British equivalent of the Ustase or Russian National Army coming into existence. I could see a large British Division of the Waffen SS being formed.
Nobody likes what it requires.
Still, good to see Labor aren't getting any lift for sucking air through teeth and going "Oh, I wouldn't...no...I...I mean....no....."
Though the point still stands, who is to do the killing if it is decided that boats are to be sunk? It's like the death sentence - it's not just the convict and his family you have to worry about, but the executioners.