from the last thread, I think the worse personal thing I said about Plato was it was nice to have period without her around, and then I apologised, and said it was badly done. Apart from calling seanT a narcissist, stating the bleeding obvious, I don't think I've made a personal attack on another poster. And you call me out for that attack which was really quite mild compared to some of the stuff you read here.
Admittedly, I do make personal attacks on political figures- but usually more on my side of the fence. Nick Palmer has called me out for some of the things I've said about Corbyn. I had a go at Gove yesterday which actually I felt was too low on reflection.
But mostly, I make loaded polemical arguments- I make them forcibly, and for that I get countless personal attacks, all of which I take without responding back in kind. I know that I am winding people up, so I accept the responses. But I think there is is space on this site for a lefty, open minded, verbally robust, polemicist who is genuinely interested in ideas.
I often compliment people on the site, if they make witty posts, or write well, or are proved right, irrespective of their political views. And I often reach out to other posters who engage with me.
I don't think there is anyone who has met me, worked with me or who knows me would describe me as "not a nice person." Maybe behind my back, but invariably I have encountered the opposite.
US whistleblower Edward Snowden has criticised new anti-terrorism legislation approved by Russia's parliament. He wrote on Twitter that the "Big Brother law" was an "unworkable, unjustifiable violation of rights that should never be signed".
Among the new rules are tough punishments for failing to report crime, or inciting terrorism online. It must still be signed into law by Russian president Vladimir Putin.
Mr Snowden, a former contractor for the CIA, fled to Russia in 2013 after leaking details of extensive internet and phone surveillance by the US National Security Agency. Commenting on the law, he wrote: "Mass surveillance doesn't work. This bill will take money and liberty from every Russian without improving safety."
It made me wonder, well, if you really hate government intrusion and surveillance as a threat to freedom and democracy, why the hell did you move to Russia, of all places?
That's not a place to move to if you've got the slightest intention of being dissident or outspoken.
Well he was encouraged to do so by some of his Wikileaks mates and he had met Russian officials in Hong Kong before his flight to Moscow.
In my pre-referendum reading of European think-pieces, it came across clearly that several commentators thought we were bonkers.
We refused transitional controls, neglected to reform our H&W systems and were now throwing our toys out of the pram as poor Eastern Europeans took advantage of the most generous welfare and in-work benefit system in Europe.
Quite. We've made our own bed.....
Blame New Labour not the voters.
And who elected New Labour?
Probably another example of voters actually having no idea what policies are in manifestos. I doubt 1 person in 200 could have told you about transitional controls when it was put before the people (if it even was, I haven't got time to check the early New Lab manifestos).
No, it was a home office decision based on the Dustmann report (2003). He estimated 13k A8 migrants p.a. ergo transitional controls not needed. In fairness, the politicians didn't read his caveats about the effect of other countries transitional controls. Germany introduced them, so the Poles came here instead.
*edit* Just checked - all countries bar UK, Ireland and Sweden had transitional controls of one form or another.
Agree with much of that but would have a basic minimum for benefits with higher benefits dependent on NI contribution like Germany
Why? People should be encouraged to save and to workinto work.
Food vouchers are benefits by another name and what about heating bills, electricity, rental costs etc? In a civilised country I believe everyone should have enough to survive on but to live in any form of comfort requires effort
I resent the idea of "reforming" our benefits system because the EU is wedded to an ideal that was dreamt up in the 1950s.
Actually much of the EU does have a more contributory benefits system than we do, so that is one thing we can learn from them
Quite. Not to mention the fact that our benefits system is 'wedded to an ideal' dreamt up in the 1940s.
Don't forget though that Beveridge's original plans were contributory. It is subsequent governments who have watered this down.
Also don't forget the whole NHS and welfare state thing comes from the Liberal/Tory end of the political spectrum not Labour.
That would be the NHS establshed by a Labour government?
Yes.
It was in the Beverage report and promised by both the Conservatives and Liberals. The Labour manifesto only promised improving public health.
Right - so we agree Labour created the NHS. The Tories may have done, but voters clearly didn't trust them to.
No. Oddly Churchill went with something like "vote for me to finish the job".
The electorate concluded that as far as they were concerned the job was as finished (war, that is) as far as they were going to finish it, so they'd rather vote for someone who thought the job was finished.
Those trade deals are going to take a minimum of fou
It needs to be more than a fig leaf. People care mo with FoM I think.
snip
Agre have a basic minimum for benefits with higher benefits dependent on NI contribution like Germany
Why? People should be encouraged to save and to workinto work.
Food vouchers are benefits by another name and what about heating bills, electricity, rental costs etc? In a civilised country I believe everyone should have enough to survive on but to live in any form of comfort requires effort
I resent the idea of "reforming" our benefits system because the EU is wedded to an ideal that was dreamt up in the 1950s.
Actually much of the EU does have a more contributory benefits system than we do, so that is one thing we can learn from them
Quite. Not to mention the fact that our benefits system is 'wedded to an ideal' dreamt up in the 1940s.
Don't forget though that Beveridge's original plans were contributory. It is subsequent governments who have watered this down.
Also don't forget the whole NHS and welfare state thing comes from the Liberal/Tory end of the political spectrum not Labour.
That would be the NHS establshed by a Labour government?
Yes.
It was in the Beverage report and p
Right - so we agree Labour created the NHS. The Tories may have done, but voters clearly didn't trust them to.
Don't start dancing on the heads of pins again. It would have been born under either labour or cons, all the ground work had been laid.
Imagine what we'd have thought if a country from behind the Iron Curtain had a referendum to decide if it wanted to change the status quo and, when they voted for change, the leader quit, installed a colleague who voted for the status quo, and ignored the outcome of the vote
Well luckily that is not going to happen is it. May has said BREXIT means BREXIT and was the most popular choice amongst the public for next PM in a yougov poll last week. The referendum was about leaving the EU not then refusing to join EFTA as well!
"May has said BREXIT means BREXIT" is not a lot to rely on. She has to say that or she can write off her chances. Whether she means it is another matter.
Of course she means it, most Tory voters voted Leave, she cannot ignore that
Right - so we agree Labour created the NHS. The Tories may have done, but voters clearly didn't trust them to.
Observers in the 1940s wouldn't necessarily agree. For example, in 1948 the Times said:
Conceived by a Liberal, nurtured by a wartime National coalition under a Conservative Prime Minister and brought to full fruition by a Labour government, the National Health Service can justly claim to be a national institution.
I think personally that's going a bit far, but certainly there were massive extensions to the public health system in the war that Labour built on, including many new free hospitals and much greater provision of medical facilities for the poor necessitated by the health problems arising from rationing.
Those trade deals are going to take a minimum of fou
It needs to be more than a fig leaf. People care mo with FoM I think.
snip
Agre have a basic minimum for benefits with higher benefits dependent on NI contribution like Germany
Why? People should be encouraged to save and to workinto work.
Food vouchers are benefits by another name and what about heating bills, electricity, rental costs etc? In a civilised country I believe everyone should have enough to survive on but to live in any form of comfort requires effort
I resent the idea of "reforming" our benefits system because the EU is wedded to an ideal that was dreamt up in the 1950s.
Actually much of the EU does have a more contributory benefits system than we do, so that is one thing we can learn from them
Quite. Not to mention the fact that our benefits system is 'wedded to an ideal' dreamt up in the 1940s.
Don't forget though that Beveridge's original plans were contributory. It is subsequent governments who have watered this down.
Also don't forget the whole NHS and welfare state thing comes from the Liberal/Tory end of the political spectrum not Labour.
That would be the NHS establshed by a Labour government?
Yes.
It was in the Beverage report and p
Right - so we agree Labour created the NHS. The Tories may have done, but voters clearly didn't trust them to.
Don't start dancing on the heads of pins again. It would have been born under either labour or cons, all the ground work had been laid.
Ha, ha. It surely can't be that hard to accept a Labour government created the NHS. Google it :-)
from the last thread, I think the worse personal thing I said about Plato was it was nice to have period without her around, and then I apologised, and said it was badly done. Apart from calling seanT a narcissist, stating the bleeding obvious, I don't think I've made a personal attack on another poster. And you call me out for that attack which was really quite mild compared to some of the stuff you read here.
Admittedly, I do make personal attacks on political figures- but usually more on my side of the fence. Nick Palmer has called me out for some of the things I've said about Corbyn. I had a go at Gove yesterday which actually I felt was too low on reflection.
But mostly, I make loaded polemical arguments- I make them forcibly, and for that I get countless personal attacks, all of which I take without responding back in kind. I know that I am winding people up, so I accept the responses. But I think there is is space on this site for a lefty, open minded, verbally robust, polemicist who is genuinely interested in ideas.
I often compliment people on the site, if they make witty posts, or write well, or are proved right, irrespective of their political views. And I often reach out to other posters who engage with me.
I don't think there is anyone who has met me, worked with me or who knows me would describe me as "not a nice person." Maybe behind my back, but invariably I have encountered the opposite.
I'd quite happily call you not a nice person to your face. Your posting history would support me.
Brent had 40% voting Leave and is 100% in London. It was meant to be one of the most Remain councils, but the bourgeois Islington and Wandsworth were easily more Remain friendly.
52% voted Leave across the UK, so even 40% is 12% less
I assume you are studying for a degree in stating the obvious
Its still hardly a ringing endorsement of Remain.
The election obviously was not a ringing endorsement of Remain because they lost!! The point is Remain comfortably won inner London and every council area in the inner city
NZ offering us their senior trade deal negotiators made my day. We've already 11 countries eyeing our newly independent status. 65 million buyers have said Hiya to the rest of the world.
What's not to like?
Those trade deals are going to take a minimum of four years to get off the ground and as @rcs1000 has pointed out on a number of occasions, we need to negotiate from a position of strength. A year long recession followed by rising unemployment isn't the position we want to be looking for trade deals from because other nations will know how desperate we are to sign. Like it or not, 35-38% of our exports go to the EU. We can't face barriers to that trade and lose the income on the hopes of signing non-EU deals in the meantime. It is a fantastical policy position.
The real
It needs to be more than a fig leaf. People care more about outcomes than abstracts. Reduce unskilled immigration and people will be fine with FoM I think.
I think we could do a few things ourselves. We need to axe in working benefits, add English language requirements for certain industries, make benefits contributory. On the EU side we could ask for an EU wide increase in waiting days to a year and have them start only once working status is achieved, or for self employed the first invoice date. I think those two moves alone would drastically reduce unskilled and low paid migration.
Agree with much of that but would have a basic minimum for benefits with higher benefits dependent on NI contribution like Germany
Why? People should be encouraged to save and to work. If they have nothing assistance should be provided in the form of food vouchers until they get back into work.
LOL, not everybody can get their Dad's chum to get them a job , you sound like a real right wing Tory nasty. Next you will be wanting them to wear badges and spend their vouchers in your chums shops..
Those trade deals are going to take a minimum of fou
It needs to be more than a fig leaf. People care mo with FoM I think.
snip
Agre have a basic minimum for benefits with higher benefits dependent on NI contribution like Germany
Why? People should be encouraged to save and to workinto work.
Food vouchers are benefits by another name and what about heating bills, electricity, rental costs etc? In a civilised country I believe everyone should have enough to survive on but to live in any form of comfort requires effort
I resent the idea of "reforming" our benefits system because the EU is wedded to an ideal that was dreamt up in the 1950s.
Actually much of the EU does have a more contributory benefits system than we do, so that is one thing we can learn from them
Quite. Not to mention the fact that our benefits system is 'wedded to an ideal' dreamt up in the 1940s.
Don't forget though that Beveridge's original plans were contributory. It is subsequent governments who have watered this down.
Also don't forget the whole NHS and welfare state thing comes from the Liberal/Tory end of the political spectrum not Labour.
That would be the NHS establshed by a Labour government?
Yes.
It was in the Beverage report and p
Right - so we agree Labour created the NHS. The Tories may have done, but voters clearly didn't trust them to.
Don't start dancing on the heads of pins again. It would have been born under either labour or cons, all the ground work had been laid.
Ha, ha. It surely can't be that hard to accept a Labour government created the NHS. Google it :-)
It's not difficult to accept it would have been introduced under either party Google it.
No, it is. When did you last drive on an English motorway? You have to go many miles up the M1 before you get the first chance to hit the speed limit. There is heavy traffic, always, everywhere.
England has the highest population density in Europe, for a large country. The only other EU country which is higher is Malta.
Have you been to Malta? It's horrible on the main island. Too many towns, too many people. That's where we're headed.
I drove on an English motorway last Autumn. It wasn't particularly busy. You may not be able to do 70 in many places but you spend a lot of time over 50.
But the other striking thing about it is that you're driving for miles through virtually nothing. You could add more lanes without a lot of serious logistical difficulties. There's very little of the kind of infrastructure you see in genuinely heavily populated areas like extended sections in tunnels or multiple decks stacked on top of each other. The limiting factor for doing this is cost, and that scales great when spread over more users.
The other thing you notice about England if you only drive there once a year, that might get lost to gradualism if you do it all the time, is that the roads are gradually getting better: Bypasses built, single-lane roads getting upgraded to two, etc. So I don't think the process of turning new people into taxes, and taxes into infrastructure, is particularly broken.
I drive up and down to Portugal and Italy and other parts of Europe several times a year and without doubt the driving in the UK is without fail the most miserable, slow and stressful section of every journey by a country mile.
Norway is horrific. The speed limit is something like 50 mph and quite a few people stick to it, which makes the queues very long and stressful.
In the UK the M5 is always dreadful.
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
On 17 Mar 2009: Theresa May voted against requiring public communications providers retain certain categories of communications data, which they generate or process, for a minimum period of 12 months.
On 15 Jul 2014: Theresa May voted in favour of requiring the mass retention of information about communications, (but not the content of those communications); in favour of arrangements to limit access to such information;
Snoopers charters are okay as long as they are not Labour snoopers charters.
Exactly. May is far from the perfect candidate everyone makes her out to be, she needs to be put under scrutiny.
Andrea Leadsom for PM? That's all we need to unite the country and to restore faith in politics - a former banker and hedge fund manager who used dubious methods to avoid inheritance tax for her kids and stuffed money in off-shore tax havens. I can see that going down well in the marginals!
Yes, or we could have Theresa May a former banker.
The Establishment has been blown out of the water. A hedge fund manager takes on a banker in the fight to be our next PM. The little people are on the march
It's much duller than that. It's an apparatchik versus a compliance officer. Can't wait for the film of the book.
The phrase invented here was "Champagne populism" , it hits the nail on the head.
Oh! So they are changing the basis of their legal system, massively slashing their top rates of tax, making it considerably easier to sack people, who knew!
France's income tax is nowhere near as bad as we think as every family member adds to your tax threshold. So, someone earning £100,000 with three kids is paying well under 30%.
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....
Is this a priority? For the last 6 months Leavers have been telling us that Britain is becoming unsustainably overpopulated. Or is that just the wrong sort of population growth?
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.
Alastair, stop being so...you. I live in one of the least densely populated areas in the UK. You can stack people like cordwood in the SE if that's what pleases y'all.
My view on mass immigration has been based on logistics rather than considering all people unlike me to be untermenschen.
I shall now return to the interesting phenomenon of low fertility in Western countries.
Do feel free to return to it. And I shall continue to feel free to keep pointing out that Leave was dishonest and pandered to xenophobia.
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.
As it wasn't utterly mendacious and nakedly racist it has the edge.
Of course it was mendacious. Indeed it was outright dishonest.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.
No, it is. When did you last drive on an English motorway? You have to go many miles up the M1 before you get the first chance to hit the speed limit. There is heavy traffic, always, everywhere.
England has the highest population density in Europe, for a large country. The only other EU country which is higher is Malta.
Have you been to Malta? It's horrible on the main island. Too many towns, too many people. That's where we're headed.
I drove on an English motorway last Autumn. It wasn't particularly busy. You may not be able to do 70 in many places but you spend a lot of time over 50.
But the other striking thing about it is that you're driving for miles through virtually nothing. You could add more lanes without a lot of serious logistical difficulties. There's very little of the kind of infrastructure you see in genuinely heavily populated areas like extended sections in tunnels or multiple decks stacked on top of each other. The limiting factor for doing this is cost, and that scales great when spread over more users.
The other thing you notice about England if you only drive there once a year, that might get lost to gradualism if you do it all the time, is that the roads are gradually getting better: Bypasses built, single-lane roads getting upgraded to two, etc. So I don't think the process of turning new people into taxes, and taxes into infrastructure, is particularly broken.
I drive up and down to Portugal and Italy and other parts of Europe several times a year and without doubt the driving in the UK is without fail the most miserable, slow and stressful section of every journey by a country mile.
Norway is horrific. The speed limit is something like 50 mph and quite a few people stick to it, which makes the queues very long and stressful.
In the UK the M5 is always dreadful.
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
Cars all at the same speed tend to get to close to each other and then over brake causing traffic waves.
Those trade deals are going to take a minimum of fou
It needs to be more than a fig leaf. People care mo with FoM I think.
snip
Agre have a basic minimum for benefits with higher benefits dependent on NI contribution like Germany
Why? People should be encouraged to save and to workinto work.
Food vouchers are benefits by another name and what about heating bills, electricity, rental costs etc? In a civilised country I believe everyone should have enough to survive on but to live in any form of comfort requires effort
I resent the idea of "reforming" our benefits system because the EU is wedded to an ideal that was dreamt up in the 1950s.
Actually much of the EU does have a more contributory benefits system than we do, so that is one thing we can learn from them
Quite. Not to mention the fact that our benefits system is 'wedded to an ideal' dreamt up in the 1940s.
Don't forget though that Beveridge's original plans were contributory. It is subsequent governments who have watered this down.
Also don't forget the whole NHS and welfare state thing comes from the Liberal/Tory end of the political spectrum not Labour.
That would be the NHS establshed by a Labour government?
Yes.
It was in the Beverage report and p
Right - so we agree Labour created the NHS. The Tories may have done, but voters clearly didn't trust them to.
Don't start dancing on the heads of pins again. It would have been born under either labour or cons, all the ground work had been laid.
Ha, ha. It surely can't be that hard to accept a Labour government created the NHS. Google it :-)
It's not difficult to accept it would have been introduced under either party Google it.
The NHS introduced by Labour was very different to the reformed health system proposed by the Conservatives and Liberals. Look up National Health Service Act 1946 and its progress through Parliament.
No, it is. When did you last drive on an English motorway? You have to go many miles up the M1 before you get the first chance to hit the speed limit. There is heavy traffic, always, everywhere.
England has the highest population density in Europe, for a large country. The only other EU country which is higher is Malta.
Have you been to Malta? It's horrible on the main island. Too many towns, too many people. That's where we're headed.
I drove on an English motorway last Autumn. It wasn't particularly busy. You may not be able to do 70 in many places but you spend a lot of time over 50.
But the other striking thing about it is that you're driving for miles through virtually nothing. You could add more lanes without a lot of serious logistical difficulties. There's very little of the kind of infrastructure you see in genuinely heavily populated areas like extended sections in tunnels or multiple decks stacked on top of each other. The limiting factor for doing this is cost, and that scales great when spread over more users.
The other thing you notice about England if you only drive there once a year, that might get lost to gradualism if you do it all the time, is that the roads are gradually getting better: Bypasses built, single-lane roads getting upgraded to two, etc. So I don't think the process of turning new people into taxes, and taxes into infrastructure, is particularly broken.
I drive up and down to Portugal and Italy and other parts of Europe several times a year and without doubt the driving in the UK is without fail the most miserable, slow and stressful section of every journey by a country mile.
Norway is horrific. The speed limit is something like 50 mph and quite a few people stick to it, which makes the queues very long and stressful.
In the UK the M5 is always dreadful.
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
In theory. In practice it is bollocks. It only works in computer simulations where drivers don't continually brake unnecessarily.
No, it is. When did you last drive on an English motorway? You have to go many miles up the M1 before you get the first chance to hit the speed limit. There is heavy traffic, always, everywhere.
England has the highest population density in Europe, for a large country. The only other EU country which is higher is Malta.
Have you been to Malta? It's horrible on the main island. Too many towns, too many people. That's where we're headed.
I drove on an English motorway last Autumn. It wasn't particularly busy. You may not be able to do 70 in many places but you spend a lot of time over 50.
But the other striking thing about it is that you're driving for miles through virtually nothing. You could add more lanes without a lot of serious logistical difficulties. There's very little of the kind of infrastructure you see in genuinely heavily populated areas like extended sections in tunnels or multiple decks stacked on top of each other. The limiting factor for doing this is cost, and that scales great when spread over more users.
The other thing you notice about England if you only drive there once a year, that might get lost to gradualism if you do it all the time, is that the roads are gradually getting better: Bypasses built, single-lane roads getting upgraded to two, etc. So I don't think the process of turning new people into taxes, and taxes into infrastructure, is particularly broken.
I drive up and down to Portugal and Italy and other parts of Europe several times a year and without doubt the driving in the UK is without fail the most miserable, slow and stressful section of every journey by a country mile.
Norway is horrific. The speed limit is something like 50 mph and quite a few people stick to it, which makes the queues very long and stressful.
In the UK the M5 is always dreadful.
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
It's like escalators on the tube. The can carry more people faster if nobody walks up and everybody stands right and left.
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
I could swear I've seen research that indicates it's more complex than that in reality (in free-flowing traffic rather than in queues). It was that anything that causes cars to brake can cause a ripple down the chain of cars, with later cars often braking harder due to poor reaction times. If the gap is smaller, the driver behind brakes harder. This is lessened when cars are going faster as they *should* have bigger gaps.
I think! It sounded slightly counter-intuitive. But since reading it I've thought once or twice whether the momentary traffic jam where the road slows to a stop or crawl for no apparent reason might be down to such a phenomena.
Those trade deals are going to take a minimum of fou
It needs to be more than a fig leaf. People care mo with FoM I think.
snip
Agre have a basic minimum for benefits with higher benefits dependent on NI contribution like Germany
Why? People should be encouraged to save and to workinto work.
Foort
I resent the idea of "reforming" our benefits system because the EU is wedded to an ideal that was dreamt up in the 1950s.
Actually Quite. Not to mention the fact that our benefits system is 'wedded to an ideal' dreamt up in the 1940s.
Don't forget though that Beveridge's original plans were contributory. It is subsequent governments who have watered this down.
Also don't forget the whole NHS and welfare state thing comes from the Liberal/Tory end of the political spectrum not Labour.
That would be the NHS establshed by a Labour government?
Yes.
It was in the Beverage report and p
Right - so we agree Labour created the NHS. The Tories may have done, but voters clearly didn't trust them to.
Don't start dancing on the heads of pins again. It would have been born under either labour or cons, all the ground work had been laid.
Ha, ha. It surely can't be that hard to accept a Labour government created the NHS. Google it :-)
It's not difficult to accept it would have been introduced under either party Google it.
The NHS introduced by Labour was very different to the reformed health system proposed by the Conservatives and Liberals. Look up National Health Service Act 1946 and its progress through Parliament.
Well I could, but as I don't hold it as an article of faith, I'll probably not bother. You've convinced yourself there would be no NHS, if labour had lost in 45. I can't get myself worked up enough to care
France's income tax is nowhere near as bad as we think as every family member adds to your tax threshold. So, someone earning £100,000 with three kids is paying well under 30%.
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....
Is this a priority? For the last 6 months Leavers have been telling us that Britain is becoming unsustainably overpopulated. Or is that just the wrong sort of population growth?
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.
Alastair, stop being so...you. I live in one of the least densely populated areas in the UK. You can stack people like cordwood in the SE if that's what pleases y'all.
My view on mass immigration has been based on logistics rather than considering all people unlike me to be untermenschen.
I shall now return to the interesting phenomenon of low fertility in Western countries.
Do feel free to return to it. And I shall continue to feel free to keep pointing out that Leave was dishonest and pandered to xenophobia.
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.
As it wasn't utterly mendacious and nakedly racist it has the edge.
Of course it was mendacious. Indeed it was outright dishonest.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.
It's hard to think of anything quite as blatantly mendacious as Leave's headline "£350m a week for the NHS claim". My old dad simply refused to believe me when I pointed out that we don't actually send £350m a week to the EU; he reckoned that I must be wrong because the politicians wouldn't be allowed to lie about such a thing. He's very glad that he voted Leave and is now looking forward to the vast improvements in the NHS that he now believes are imminent.
from the last thread, I think the worse personal thing I said about Plato was it was nice to have period without her around, and then I apologised, and said it was badly done. Apart from calling seanT a narcissist, stating the bleeding obvious, I don't think I've made a personal attack on another poster. And you call me out for that attack which was really quite mild compared to some of the stuff you read here.
Admittedly, I do make personal attacks on political figures- but usually more on my side of the fence. Nick Palmer has called me out for some of the things I've said about Corbyn. I had a go at Gove yesterday which actually I felt was too low on reflection.
But mostly, I make loaded polemical arguments- I make them forcibly, and for that I get countless personal attacks, all of which I take without responding back in kind. I know that I am winding people up, so I accept the responses. But I think there is is space on this site for a lefty, open minded, verbally robust, polemicist who is genuinely interested in ideas.
I often compliment people on the site, if they make witty posts, or write well, or are proved right, irrespective of their political views. And I often reach out to other posters who engage with me.
I don't think there is anyone who has met me, worked with me or who knows me would describe me as "not a nice person." Maybe behind my back, but invariably I have encountered the opposite.
I'd quite happily call you not a nice person to your face. Your posting history would support me.
I wouldn't call you, or anyone else on this site not a nice person. For all I know you could be Pope Francis using a sock puppet. I've met Nick Palmer who is an exceptionally pleasant man, Roger who has become a friend, Tissue Price, Pulpstar, TSE and Fox- who are all very agreeable.
I think if I met you and you called me not a nice person to my face I'd be really quite shocked to be honest.
No, it is. When did you last drive on an English motorway? You have to go many miles up the M1 before you get the first chance to hit the speed limit. There is heavy traffic, always, everywhere.
England has the highest population density in Europe, for a large country. The only other EU country which is higher is Malta.
Have you been to Malta? It's horrible on the main island. Too many towns, too many people. That's where we're headed.
I drove on an English motorway last Autumn. It wasn't particularly busy. You may not be able to do 70 in many places but you spend a lot of time over 50.
But the other striking thing about it is that you're driving for miles through virtually nothing. You could add more lanes without a lot of serious logistical difficulties. There's very little of the kind of infrastructure you see in genuinely heavily populated areas like extended sections in tunnels or multiple decks stacked on top of each other. The limiting factor for doing this is cost, and that scales great when spread over more users.
The other thing you notice about England if you only drive there once a year, that might get lost to gradualism if you do it all the time, is that the roads are gradually getting better: Bypasses built, single-lane roads getting upgraded to two, etc. So I don't think the process of turning new people into taxes, and taxes into infrastructure, is particularly broken.
I drive up and down to Portugal and Italy and other parts of Europe several times a year and without doubt the driving in the UK is without fail the most miserable, slow and stressful section of every journey by a country mile.
Norway is horrific. The speed limit is something like 50 mph and quite a few people stick to it, which makes the queues very long and stressful.
In the UK the M5 is always dreadful.
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
It's like escalators on the tube. The can carry more people faster if nobody walks up and everybody stands right and left.
The problem is that when people drive, they do not drive in a perfect manner. Imagine the escalator where people are queuing perfectly and one person takes a step back onto a free step, causing the person behind to step back, and the person behind him to takes two steps back out of surprise, falling into the next person behind, and so on.
France's income tax is nowhere near as bad as we think as every family member adds to your tax threshold. So, someone earning £100,000 with three kids is paying well under 30%.
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....
Is this a priority? For the last 6 months Leavers have been telling us that Britain is becoming unsustainably overpopulated. Or is that just the wrong sort of population growth?
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.
Alastair, stop being so...you. I live in one of the least densely populated areas in the UK. You can stack people like cordwood in the SE if that's what pleases y'all.
My view on mass immigration has been based on logistics rather than considering all people unlike me to be untermenschen.
I shall now return to the interesting phenomenon of low fertility in Western countries.
Do feel free to return to it. And I shall continue to feel free to keep pointing out that Leave was dishonest and pandered to xenophobia.
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.
As it wasn't utterly mendacious and nakedly racist it has the edge.
Of course it was mendacious. Indeed it was outright dishonest.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.
It's hard to think of anything quite as blatantly mendacious as Leave's headline "£350m a week for the NHS claim". My old dad simply refused to believe me when I pointed out that we don't actually send £350m a week to the EU; he reckoned that I must be wrong because the politicians wouldn't be allowed to lie about such a thing. He's very glad that he voted Leave and is now looking forward to the vast improvements in the NHS that he now believes are imminent.
Quite. It was the sort of thing a SPAD would come up with - pure sophistry. The two lines on the bus were:
- We send the EU £350 million a week. - Let's fund our NHS instead
They clearly thought they were being clever, as the spending transfer is implicit, not explicit.
France's income tax is nowhere near as bad as we think as every family member adds to your tax threshold. So, someone earning £100,000 with three kids is paying well under 30%.
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....
Is this a priority? For the last 6 months Leavers have been telling us that Britain is becoming unsustainably overpopulated. Or is that just the wrong sort of population growth?
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.
Alastair, stop being so...you. I live in one of the least densely populated areas in the UK. You can stack people like cordwood in the SE if that's what pleases y'all.
My view on mass immigration has been based on logistics rather than considering all people unlike me to be untermenschen.
I shall now return to the interesting phenomenon of low fertility in Western countries.
Do feel free to return to it. And I shall continue to feel free to keep pointing out that Leave was dishonest and pandered to xenophobia.
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.
As it wasn't utterly mendacious and nakedly racist it has the edge.
Of course it was mendacious. Indeed it was outright dishonest.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.
It's hard to think of anything quite as blatantly mendacious as Leave's headline "£350m a week for the NHS claim". My old dad simply refused to believe me when I pointed out that we don't actually send £350m a week to the EU; he reckoned that I must be wrong because the politicians wouldn't be allowed to lie about such a thing. He's very glad that he voted Leave and is now looking forward to the vast improvements in the NHS that he now believes are imminent.
In a knockout tournament of mendacity, 350 million a week to the NHS would be the England football team. Brexit causing WWIII would be Italy. Brexit heralding the 'end of Western Civilisation' would be Germany.
It has been suggested that Angela Eagle is delaying declaring her leadership bid is because of the Chilcott Report, as she voted for the war. I can't remember if she was a cabinet minister at the time, but if she was, surely this was "collective responsibility?"
Anyway it will make no difference because she will be dire as Labour leader. That ITV Referendum Debate showed that.
The Welsh MP, Owen Smith, who is rumoured to run, is a real sarky character. There is clearly some "history" between him and Stephen Crabb, as displayed at the Despatch Box. I just don't think there is any real talent on the Labour benches at the moment, particularly amongst the women. I always thought they would pay the price for their all-women shortlists and it shows.
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
I could swear I've seen research that indicates it's more complex than that in reality (in free-flowing traffic rather than in queues). It was that anything that causes cars to brake can cause a ripple down the chain of cars, with later cars often braking harder due to poor reaction times. If the gap is smaller, the driver behind brakes harder. This is lessened when cars are going faster as they *should* have bigger gaps.
I think! It sounded slightly counter-intuitive. But since reading it I've thought once or twice whether the momentary traffic jam where the road slows to a stop or crawl for no apparent reason might be down to such a phenomena.
If drivers were perfect you'd probably be right.
I think you're taking about a different phenomenon. I'm pretty sure that, in general, lower speeds improve throughput. However, there is a limit to the improvement that can be achieved. Once the traffic density passes a certain threshold, then you do start to get the random freezes that you mention, where small changes in the speed of one vehicle cause ripple effects.
We have managed motorways now where the speeds are restricted. Are you saying they are not working? More and more are being converted
The idea of reducing speed limits was to improve air quality to meet EU standards. Since it seems to be causing a lot more congestion on motorways like the M1 I am not sure that it is proving a great success.
Having worked on motorway maintenance in my youth I am a big fan of speed limits through roadworks. But even when there is no reduction in lanes it still causes severe congestion. A plan to reduce the speed limits on the M1 in South Yorkshire in the late 80s and 90s was abandoned for that reason.
Oh! So they are changing the basis of their legal system, massively slashing their top rates of tax, making it considerably easier to sack people, who knew!
France's income tax is nowhere near as bad as we think as every family member adds to your tax threshold. So, someone earning £100,000 with three kids is paying well under 30%.
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....
Is this a priority? For the last 6 months Leavers have been telling us that Britain is becoming unsustainably overpopulated. Or is that just the wrong sort of population growth?
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.
Alastair, stop being so...you. I live in one of the least densely populated areas in the UK. You can stack people like cordwood in the SE if that's what pleases y'all.
My view on mass immigration has been based on logistics rather than considering all people unlike me to be untermenschen.
I shall now return to the interesting phenomenon of low fertility in Western countries.
Do feel free to return to it. And I shall continue to feel free to keep pointing out that Leave was dishonest and pandered to xenophobia.
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.
I thought Remain ran a terrible campaign. I thought Leave's was considerably worse and will poison British politics for years to come as stoking up racial tensions has proven to be a vote winner.
As opposed to stoking up loathing for the elderly and the working classes?
I think it'd be better if May was chosen by the MPs, without a members' vote. That's because the MPs are at least part of the GB democracy. Tory members aren't. Do ordinary people want a PM who's been chosen by 100,000 Tory party members?
Generally speaking, decision-making throughout British democracy is best left to MPs. That's their job.
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....
Is this a priority? For the last 6 months Leavers have been telling us that Britain is becoming unsustainably overpopulated. Or is that just the wrong sort of population growth?
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.
Alastair, stop being so...you. I live in one of the least densely populated areas in the UK. You can stack people like cordwood in the SE if that's what pleases y'all.
My view on mass immigration has been based on logistics rather than considering all people unlike me to be untermenschen.
I shall now return to the interesting phenomenon of low fertility in Western countries.
Do feel free to return to it. And I shall continue to feel free to keep pointing out that Leave was dishonest and pandered to xenophobia.
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.
As it wasn't utterly mendacious and nakedly racist it has the edge.
Of course it was mendacious. Indeed it was outright dishonest.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.
It's hard to think of anything quite as blatantly mendacious as Leave's headline "£350m a week for the NHS claim". My old dad simply refused to believe me when I pointed out that we don't actually send £350m a week to the EU; he reckoned that I must be wrong because the politicians wouldn't be allowed to lie about such a thing. He's very glad that he voted Leave and is now looking forward to the vast improvements in the NHS that he now believes are imminent.
In a knockout tournament of mendacity, 350 million a week to the NHS would be the England football team. Brexit causing WWIII would be Italy. Brexit heralding the 'end of Western Civilisation' would be Germany.
I don't remember seeing anything about WW III or the end of Western civilisation plastered on the side of a bus.
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
I could swear I've seen research that indicates it's more complex than that in reality (in free-flowing traffic rather than in queues). It was that anything that causes cars to brake can cause a ripple down the chain of cars, with later cars often braking harder due to poor reaction times. If the gap is smaller, the driver behind brakes harder. This is lessened when cars are going faster as they *should* have bigger gaps.
I think! It sounded slightly counter-intuitive. But since reading it I've thought once or twice whether the momentary traffic jam where the road slows to a stop or crawl for no apparent reason might be down to such a phenomena.
If drivers were perfect you'd probably be right.
I think you're taking about a different phenomenon. I'm pretty sure that, in general, lower speeds improve throughput. However, there is a limit to the improvement that can be achieved. Once the traffic density passes a certain threshold, then you do start to get the random freezes that you mention, where small changes in the speed of one vehicle cause ripple effects.
Quite possibly. I've done a quick google and cannot find it - it might have been in an IEEE or another printed magazine.
I wouldn't call you, or anyone else on this site not a nice person. For all I know you could be Pope Francis using a sock puppet. I've met Nick Palmer who is an exceptionally pleasant man, Roger who has become a friend, Tissue Price, Pulpstar, TSE and Fox- who are all very agreeable.
I think if I met you and you called me not a nice person to my face I'd be really quite shocked to be honest.
Some of the nicest people I've known I've met at Auchentennach Castle ....
In theory. In practice it is bollocks. It only works in computer simulations where drivers don't continually brake unnecessarily.
We have managed motorways now where the speeds are restricted. Are you saying they are not working? More and more are being converted
If it's done properly then it does work. The problem is when the limits are left on long after the traffic has died down. I regularly get back to the M25 late on a Saturday or Sunday night to find the limits on unnecessarily.
I wouldn't call you, or anyone else on this site not a nice person. For all I know you could be Pope Francis using a sock puppet. I've met Nick Palmer who is an exceptionally pleasant man, Roger who has become a friend, Tissue Price, Pulpstar, TSE and Fox- who are all very agreeable.
I think if I met you and you called me not a nice person to my face I'd be really quite shocked to be honest.
Some of the nicest people I've known I've met at Auchentennach Castle ....
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
I could swear I've seen research that indicates it's more complex than that in reality (in free-flowing traffic rather than in queues). It was that anything that causes cars to brake can cause a ripple down the chain of cars, with later cars often braking harder due to poor reaction times. If the gap is smaller, the driver behind brakes harder. This is lessened when cars are going faster as they *should* have bigger gaps.
I think! It sounded slightly counter-intuitive. But since reading it I've thought once or twice whether the momentary traffic jam where the road slows to a stop or crawl for no apparent reason might be down to such a phenomena.
If drivers were perfect you'd probably be right.
My boy has done some work on this as part of his electronic engineering course. The base idea is that when one joins a motorway one joins a convoy. From there on it is hands off and the convoy lead (itself computer controlled) takes over control of the acceleration and velocity.
It sounds to me like it should work. The best bit is that it would piss off young Darth Eagles whi has previously confessed on here that he ignores motorway regulations and will undertake, overtake and treat the speed limits as advisory as long as it suits him to do so. People driving like complete canutes probably kill more than any automated convoy system will ever do.
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....
Is this a priority? For the last 6 months Leavers have been telling us that Britain is becoming unsustainably overpopulated. Or is that just the wrong sort of population growth?
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.
Alastair, stop being so...you. I live in one of the least densely populated areas in the UK. You can stack people like cordwood in the SE if that's what pleases y'all.
My view on mass immigration has been based on logistics rather than considering all people unlike me to be untermenschen.
I shall now return to the interesting phenomenon of low fertility in Western countries.
Do feel free to return to it. And I shall continue to feel free to keep pointing out that Leave was dishonest and pandered to xenophobia.
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.
As it wasn't utterly mendacious and nakedly racist it has the edge.
Of course it was mendacious. Indeed it was outright dishonest.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.
It's hard to think of anything quite as blatantly mendacious as Leave's headline "£350m a week for the NHS claim". My old dad simply refused to believe me when I pointed out that we don't actually send £350m a week to the EU; he reckoned that I must be wrong because the politicians wouldn't be allowed to lie about such a thing. He's very glad that he voted Leave and is now looking forward to the vast improvements in the NHS that he now believes are imminent.
In a knockout tournament of mendacity, 350 million a week to the NHS would be the England football team. Brexit causing WWIII would be Italy. Brexit heralding the 'end of Western Civilisation' would be Germany.
I don't remember seeing anything about WW III or the end of Western civilisation plastered on the side of a bus.
Oh, so it's only lying if it's plastered on a bus? You live and learn.
No, it is. When did you last drive on an English motorway? You have to go many miles up the M1 before you get the first chance to hit the speed limit. There is heavy traffic, always, everywhere.
England has the highest population density in Europe, for a large country. The only other EU country which is higher is Malta.
Have you been to Malta? It's horrible on the main island. Too many towns, too many people. That's where we're headed.
I drove on an English motorway last Autumn. It wasn't particularly busy. You may not be able to do 70 in many places but you spend a lot of time over 50.
But the other striking thing about it is that you're driving for miles through virtually nothing. You could add more lanes without a lot of serious logistical difficulties. There's very little of the kind of infrastructure you see in genuinely heavily populated areas like extended sections in tunnels or multiple decks stacked on top of each other. The limiting factor for doing this is cost, and that scales great when spread over more users.
The other thing you notice about England if you only drive there once a year, that might get lost to gradualism if you do it all the time, is that the roads are gradually getting better: Bypasses built, single-lane roads getting upgraded to two, etc. So I don't think the process of turning new people into taxes, and taxes into infrastructure, is particularly broken.
I drive up and down to Portugal and Italy and other parts of Europe several times a year and without doubt the driving in the UK is without fail the most miserable, slow and stressful section of every journey by a country mile.
Norway is horrific. The speed limit is something like 50 mph and quite a few people stick to it, which makes the queues very long and stressful.
In the UK the M5 is always dreadful.
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
It's like escalators on the tube. The can carry more people faster if nobody walks up and everybody stands right and left.
The operative word being "if".
In practice they generally do all sorts of weird stuff.
New Tramlink platforms 10a and 10b opened in November. I managed to catch a tram from platform 10a, but have yet to use 10b.
Connected to the dual-ling of the Tram track right through from Therapia Lane to Wimbledon meaning more trams on Route 4 and much more capacity out of Wimbledon.
It has been suggested that Angela Eagle is delaying declaring her leadership bid is because of the Chilcott Report, as she voted for the war. I can't remember if she was a cabinet minister at the time, but if she was, surely this was "collective responsibility?"
Anyway it will make no difference because she will be dire as Labour leader. That ITV Referendum Debate showed that.
The Welsh MP, Owen Smith, who is rumoured to run, is a real sarky character. There is clearly some "history" between him and Stephen Crabb, as displayed at the Despatch Box. I just don't think there is any real talent on the Labour benches at the moment, particularly amongst the women. I always thought they would pay the price for their all-women shortlists and it shows.
This is what happens when you sell common sense for identity politics. We all suffer in the end, because ability becomes something to be ashamed of. Better to adhere to a Losers' Charter than to aspire to government.
I wouldn't call you, or anyone else on this site not a nice person. For all I know you could be Pope Francis using a sock puppet. I've met Nick Palmer who is an exceptionally pleasant man, Roger who has become a friend, Tissue Price, Pulpstar, TSE and Fox- who are all very agreeable.
I think if I met you and you called me not a nice person to my face I'd be really quite shocked to be honest.
Some of the nicest people I've known I've met at Auchentennach Castle ....
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
I could swear I've seen research that indicates it's more complex than that in reality (in free-flowing traffic rather than in queues). It was that anything that causes cars to brake can cause a ripple down the chain of cars, with later cars often braking harder due to poor reaction times. If the gap is smaller, the driver behind brakes harder. This is lessened when cars are going faster as they *should* have bigger gaps.
I think! It sounded slightly counter-intuitive. But since reading it I've thought once or twice whether the momentary traffic jam where the road slows to a stop or crawl for no apparent reason might be down to such a phenomena.
If drivers were perfect you'd probably be right.
My boy has done some work on this as part of his electronic engineering course. The base idea is that when one joins a motorway one joins a convoy. From there on it is hands off and the convoy lead (itself computer controlled) takes over control of the acceleration and velocity.
It sounds to me like it should work. The best bit is that it would piss off young Darth Eagles whi has previously confessed on here that he ignores motorway regulations and will undertake, overtake and treat the speed limits as advisory as long as it suits him to do so. People driving like complete canutes probably kill more than any automated convoy system will ever do.
I believe you have just described a railway. Quick! Patent the idea before someone else thinks of it.
On 17 Mar 2009: Theresa May voted against requiring public communications providers retain certain categories of communications data, which they generate or process, for a minimum period of 12 months.
On 15 Jul 2014: Theresa May voted in favour of requiring the mass retention of information about communications, (but not the content of those communications); in favour of arrangements to limit access to such information;
Snoopers charters are okay as long as they are not Labour snoopers charters.
Exactly. May is far from the perfect candidate everyone makes her out to be, she needs to be put under scrutiny.
Theresa May - tough on criminals, tough on terrorists.
In theory. In practice it is bollocks. It only works in computer simulations where drivers don't continually brake unnecessarily.
We have managed motorways now where the speeds are restricted. Are you saying they are not working? More and more are being converted
If it's done properly then it does work. The problem is when the limits are left on long after the traffic has died down. I regularly get back to the M25 late on a Saturday or Sunday night to find the limits on unnecessarily.
On the M6 past Birmingham they put the speed limits on when it's quiet and take them off when it's busy.
If I were a cynic I would wonder whether the M6 Toll had some kind of hookup with the management centre.
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
I could swear I've seen research that indicates it's more complex than that in reality (in free-flowing traffic rather than in queues). It was that anything that causes cars to brake can cause a ripple down the chain of cars, with later cars often braking harder due to poor reaction times. If the gap is smaller, the driver behind brakes harder. This is lessened when cars are going faster as they *should* have bigger gaps.
I think! It sounded slightly counter-intuitive. But since reading it I've thought once or twice whether the momentary traffic jam where the road slows to a stop or crawl for no apparent reason might be down to such a phenomena.
If drivers were perfect you'd probably be right.
My boy has done some work on this as part of his electronic engineering course. The base idea is that when one joins a motorway one joins a convoy. From there on it is hands off and the convoy lead (itself computer controlled) takes over control of the acceleration and velocity.
It sounds to me like it should work. The best bit is that it would piss off young Darth Eagles whi has previously confessed on here that he ignores motorway regulations and will undertake, overtake and treat the speed limits as advisory as long as it suits him to do so. People driving like complete canutes probably kill more than any automated convoy system will ever do.
Isn't there going to be a trial of this with lorries on the M6 Shap-way? It'll improve fuel efficiency no end by allowing drafting.
But: the lorries still need drivers when off the motorway, so I can't see there being many gains by losing staff.
Also cars wanting to join from a sliproad when one of these convoys (for convenience let's call it a 'train') passes might have difficulty.
I wouldn't call you, or anyone else on this site not a nice person. For all I know you could be Pope Francis using a sock puppet. I've met Nick Palmer who is an exceptionally pleasant man, Roger who has become a friend, Tissue Price, Pulpstar, TSE and Fox- who are all very agreeable.
I think if I met you and you called me not a nice person to my face I'd be really quite shocked to be honest.
Some of the nicest people I've known I've met at Auchentennach Castle ....
It's just like they never seem to leave ....
Except in some very fine pies?
Hampers dear chap .... hampers ....
Jack- I know you have a penchant for tennis. I put a ton on Roger at 20's pre Wimbledon. Do I stick or twist?
Is this a priority? For the last 6 months Leavers have been telling us that Britain is becoming unsustainably overpopulated. Or is that just the wrong sort of population growth?
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.
Alastair, stop being so...you. I live in one of the least densely populated areas in the UK. You can stack people like cordwood in the SE if that's what pleases y'all.
My view on mass immigration has been based on logistics rather than considering all people unlike me to be untermenschen.
I shall now return to the interesting phenomenon of low fertility in Western countries.
Do feel free to return to it. And I shall continue to feel free to keep pointing out that Leave was dishonest and pandered to xenophobia.
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.
As it wasn't utterly mendacious and nakedly racist it has the edge.
Of course it was mendacious. Indeed it was outright dishonest.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.
It's hard to think of anything quite as blatantly mendacious as Leave's headline "£350m a week for the NHS claim". My old dad simply refused to believe me when I pointed out that we don't actually send £350m a week to the EU; he reckoned that I must be wrong because the politicians wouldn't be allowed to lie about such a thing. He's very glad that he voted Leave and is now looking forward to the vast improvements in the NHS that he now believes are imminent.
In a knockout tournament of mendacity, 350 million a week to the NHS would be the England football team. Brexit causing WWIII would be Italy. Brexit heralding the 'end of Western Civilisation' would be Germany.
I don't remember seeing anything about WW III or the end of Western civilisation plastered on the side of a bus.
Oh, so it's only lying if it's plastered on a bus? You live and learn.
I think you're probably smart enough to appreciate the point I'm making.
Oh! So they are changing the basis of their legal system, massively slashing their top rates of tax, making it considerably easier to sack people, who knew!
France's income tax is nowhere near as bad as we think as every family member adds to your tax threshold. So, someone earning £100,000 with three kids is paying well under 30%.
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....
Is this a priority? For the last 6 months Leavers have been telling us that Britain is becoming unsustainably overpopulated. Or is that just the wrong sort of population growth?
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.
Alastair, stop being so...you. I live in one of the least densely populated areas in the UK. You can stack people like cordwood in the SE if that's what pleases y'all.
My view on mass immigration has been based on logistics rather than considering all people unlike me to be untermenschen.
I shall now return to the interesting phenomenon of low fertility in Western countries.
Do feel free to return to it. And I shall continue to feel free to keep pointing out that Leave was dishonest and pandered to xenophobia.
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.
I thought Remain ran a terrible campaign. I thought Leave's was considerably worse and will poison British politics for years to come as stoking up racial tensions has proven to be a vote winner.
As opposed to stoking up loathing for the elderly and the working classes?
I shall add that had Leave been utterly high-minded, focusing on nothing other than theoretical arguments about sovereignty, you TSE et al would have jeered about what a bunch of amateurs we were, bringing knives to a gunfight.
I wouldn't call you, or anyone else on this site not a nice person. For all I know you could be Pope Francis using a sock puppet. I've met Nick Palmer who is an exceptionally pleasant man, Roger who has become a friend, Tissue Price, Pulpstar, TSE and Fox- who are all very agreeable.
I think if I met you and you called me not a nice person to my face I'd be really quite shocked to be honest.
Some of the nicest people I've known I've met at Auchentennach Castle ....
It's just like they never seem to leave ....
Except in some very fine pies?
I really do not have clue what the two of you are talking about.
New Tramlink platforms 10a and 10b opened in November. I managed to catch a tram from platform 10a, but have yet to use 10b.
Connected to the dual-ling of the Tram track right through from Therapia Lane to Wimbledon meaning more trams on Route 4 and much more capacity out of Wimbledon.
I know dualled near Mitcham in 2012, and near Beddington Lane in 2014. I think there still single sections at Mitcham Junction flyover, and near Morden Road.
France's income tax is nowhere near as bad as we think as every family member adds to your tax threshold. So, someone earning £100,000 with three kids is paying well under 30%.
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....
Is this a priority? For the last 6 months Leavers have been telling us that Britain is becoming unsustainably overpopulated. Or is that just the wrong sort of population growth?
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.
Alastair, stop being so...you. I live in one of the least densely populated areas in the UK. You can stack people like cordwood in the SE if that's what pleases y'all.
My view on mass immigration has been based on logistics rather than considering all people unlike me to be untermenschen.
I shall now return to the interesting phenomenon of low fertility in Western countries.
Do feel free to return to it. And I shall continue to feel free to keep pointing out that Leave was dishonest and pandered to xenophobia.
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.
As it wasn't utterly mendacious and nakedly racist it has the edge.
Of course it was mendacious. Indeed it was outright dishonest.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.
It's hard to think of anything quite as blatantly mendacious as Leave's headline "£350m a week for the NHS claim". My old dad simply refused to believe me when I pointed out that we don't actually send £350m a week to the EU; he reckoned that I must be wrong because the politicians wouldn't be allowed to lie about such a thing. He's very glad that he voted Leave and is now looking forward to the vast improvements in the NHS that he now believes are imminent.
TBH your old dad must be peculiarly naive if he thought politicians wouldn't indulge in a barefaced lie.
I'm probably of his vintage and experience has taught me to take most of what is asserted by such people with a truckload, not a pinch, of salt. And I was involved in politics for some years!
I shall add that had Leave been utterly high-minded, focusing on nothing other than theoretical arguments about sovereignty, you TSE et al would have jeered about what a bunch of amateurs we were, bringing knives to a gunfight.
Yes, anytime we complained about Project Fear we were asked "what did you expect?" I asked my dad what he thinks about the Leave campaign's NHS stuff and he wasn't impressed. But he pointed out that the Yes campaign told blatant lies to the people in 1975 so he doesn't care.
Mr. Lowlander, don't have a PP account, but those odds are way more generous than Ladbrokes (126 against 67, and with an extra two places).
Even though its now dropped to 80, based on the profile óf the stage finish, it's hard to see how he can finish outside the top 5. And like I said earlier he won a very similar stage last year.
In theory. In practice it is bollocks. It only works in computer simulations where drivers don't continually brake unnecessarily.
We have managed motorways now where the speeds are restricted. Are you saying they are not working? More and more are being converted
If it's done properly then it does work. The problem is when the limits are left on long after the traffic has died down. I regularly get back to the M25 late on a Saturday or Sunday night to find the limits on unnecessarily.
On the M6 past Birmingham they put the speed limits on when it's quiet and take them off when it's busy.
If I were a cynic I would wonder whether the M6 Toll had some kind of hookup with the management centre.
I always chuckle when heading south on the M6 I see the matrix sign saying "M6 Toll clear".
Jack- I know you have a penchant for tennis. I put a ton on Roger at 20's pre Wimbledon. Do I stick or twist?
A number of factors would concern me about Federer.
1. Fitness - Recent problems may recur given 7 matches to win. 2. Federer has Steve Johnson next and then either Cilic or Nishikori in his quarter of the draw. Raonic the Queens finalist is probable semi- final opponent. All good grass court players 3. Likely in form Murray in final.
Much would depend on your cash out value and whether you're a safety first gambler or like the thrill of the chase. Or a little of both.
Comments
I first visited Wimbledon station way back during season 1994/5, though didn't take pics until 2008.
from the last thread, I think the worse personal thing I said about Plato was it was nice to have period without her around, and then I apologised, and said it was badly done. Apart from calling seanT a narcissist, stating the bleeding obvious, I don't think I've made a personal attack on another poster. And you call me out for that attack which was really quite mild compared to some of the stuff you read here.
Admittedly, I do make personal attacks on political figures- but usually more on my side of the fence. Nick Palmer has called me out for some of the things I've said about Corbyn. I had a go at Gove yesterday which actually I felt was too low on reflection.
But mostly, I make loaded polemical arguments- I make them forcibly, and for that I get countless personal attacks, all of which I take without responding back in kind. I know that I am winding people up, so I accept the responses. But I think there is is space on this site for a lefty, open minded, verbally robust, polemicist who is genuinely interested in ideas.
I often compliment people on the site, if they make witty posts, or write well, or are proved right, irrespective of their political views. And I often reach out to other posters who engage with me.
I don't think there is anyone who has met me, worked with me or who knows me would describe me as "not a nice person." Maybe behind my back, but invariably I have encountered the opposite.
He was a self-righteous fool.
Tricky to bet on the race, but the grid's looking intriguing.
*edit* Just checked - all countries bar UK, Ireland and Sweden had transitional controls of one form or another.
Boris could win elections. But his faith wasn't pure enough for the Brexiteers, so he was executed.
Purity of belief is more important to the cultists than electability.
The electorate concluded that as far as they were concerned the job was as finished (war, that is) as far as they were going to finish it, so they'd rather vote for someone who thought the job was finished.
Oh, and Murray through easily in the end.
The pre-Brexit answer to that question is without electability, purity of belief is worthless.
Now, you don't need to win an election for belief to triumph.
Exactly. May is far from the perfect candidate everyone makes her out to be, she needs to be put under scrutiny.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_wave
How good is your German?
http://www.bild.de/politik/ausland/edward-snowden/von-russen-als-spion-angeworben-46601344.bild.html
The guy who made the statement has enough connections to know his onions.
I think! It sounded slightly counter-intuitive. But since reading it I've thought once or twice whether the momentary traffic jam where the road slows to a stop or crawl for no apparent reason might be down to such a phenomena.
If drivers were perfect you'd probably be right.
Thanks for the link
I think if I met you and you called me not a nice person to my face I'd be really quite shocked to be honest.
The problem is that when people drive, they do not drive in a perfect manner. Imagine the escalator where people are queuing perfectly and one person takes a step back onto a free step, causing the person behind to step back, and the person behind him to takes two steps back out of surprise, falling into the next person behind, and so on.
- We send the EU £350 million a week.
- Let's fund our NHS instead
They clearly thought they were being clever, as the spending transfer is implicit, not explicit.
Anyway it will make no difference because she will be dire as Labour leader. That ITV Referendum Debate showed that.
The Welsh MP, Owen Smith, who is rumoured to run, is a real sarky character. There is clearly some "history" between him and Stephen Crabb, as displayed at the Despatch Box. I just don't think there is any real talent on the Labour benches at the moment, particularly amongst the women. I always thought they would pay the price for their all-women shortlists and it shows.
Having worked on motorway maintenance in my youth I am a big fan of speed limits through roadworks. But even when there is no reduction in lanes it still causes severe congestion. A plan to reduce the speed limits on the M1 in South Yorkshire in the late 80s and 90s was abandoned for that reason.
Generally speaking, decision-making throughout British democracy is best left to MPs. That's their job.
Should be a fun thing to model.
It's just like they never seem to leave ....
It sounds to me like it should work. The best bit is that it would piss off young Darth Eagles whi has previously confessed on here that he ignores motorway regulations and will undertake, overtake and treat the speed limits as advisory as long as it suits him to do so. People driving like complete canutes probably kill more than any automated convoy system will ever do.
In practice they generally do all sorts of weird stuff.
Paddy Power are offering 1/4 odds E/W on the first five places for tomorrows stage.
They have Chris Froome at 125/1.
Caveat emptor but fill your boots.
Exactly. May is far from the perfect candidate everyone makes her out to be, she needs to be put under scrutiny.
Theresa May - tough on criminals, tough on terrorists.
If I were a cynic I would wonder whether the M6 Toll had some kind of hookup with the management centre.
But: the lorries still need drivers when off the motorway, so I can't see there being many gains by losing staff.
Also cars wanting to join from a sliproad when one of these convoys (for convenience let's call it a 'train') passes might have difficulty.
P'haps.
I'm probably of his vintage and experience has taught me to take most of what is asserted by such people with a truckload, not a pinch, of salt.
And I was involved in politics for some years!
1. Fitness - Recent problems may recur given 7 matches to win.
2. Federer has Steve Johnson next and then either Cilic or Nishikori in his quarter of the draw. Raonic the Queens finalist is probable semi- final opponent. All good grass court players
3. Likely in form Murray in final.
Much would depend on your cash out value and whether you're a safety first gambler or like the thrill of the chase. Or a little of both.