politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It would be a mistake for May to become leader & PM without
Options
Comments
-
BBC breaking
Clinton questioned by FBI over Emails
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-36695722
Sorry if already posted0 -
Absurdist piffle. So party members, who after all help to get MPs and Councillors elected, don't get to have a say in the choice of leader but have to put up with whomsoever is anointed by the cabal of MPs.Dadge said: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.
May is already being eulogised by the Mail as the incarnation of the Blessed Margaret and for all the guff about Labour and "identity politics", the Conservatives are just as bad. Every woman is compared to Thatcher and every man gets the s-word thrown at him sooner or later.
May is a nasty authoritarian piece of work who some will love but others will come to loathe as she attacks personal freedoms in the dubious name of "security". The so-called Snoopers Charter is her handywork and it's interesting that while some LDs worked harmoniously with their Conservative counterparts (Webb with IDS and Alexander with Osborne being notable examples), May excluded LDs like Norman Baker from the decision making process.
0 -
Given that it turns out that most of leave didn't want to win, I think they both did lose...Richard_Tyndall said:
Of course it was mendacious. Indeed it was outright dishonest.Jobabob said:
As it wasn't utterly mendacious and nakedly racist it has the edge.Sean_F said:
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.AlastairMeeks said:
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.John_M said:
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.AlastairMeeks said:
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.John_M said:
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?AlastairMeeks said:
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?Mortimer said:
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....rcs1000 said:
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%.Indigo said:
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!Scott_P said:@TelePolitics: Paris opens doors to City of London businesses looking to relocate after Brexit vote https://t.co/0grScvJbnl
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.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.0 -
That's a leap of logic, even for this site.eek said:
Given that it turns out that most of leave didn't want to win, I think they both did lose...Richard_Tyndall said:
Of course it was mendacious. Indeed it was outright dishonest.Jobabob said:
As it wasn't utterly mendacious and nakedly racist it has the edge.Sean_F said:
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.AlastairMeeks said:
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.John_M said:
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.AlastairMeeks said:
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.John_M said:
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?AlastairMeeks said:
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?Mortimer said:
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....rcs1000 said:
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%.Indigo said:
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!Scott_P said:@TelePolitics: Paris opens doors to City of London businesses looking to relocate after Brexit vote https://t.co/0grScvJbnl
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.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.0 -
Well, he getting on a bit, has had a couple of strokes and has never been involved in politics, so I think a little naivety is understandable.OldKingCole said:
TBH your old dad must be peculiarly naive if he thought politicians wouldn't indulge in a barefaced lie.FeersumEnjineeya said:
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.Richard_Tyndall said:
Of course it was mendacious. Indeed it was outright dishonest.Jobabob said:
As it wasn't utterly mendacious and nakedly racist it has the edge.Sean_F said:
Do you seriously believe your team ran a decent and honest campaign? Your side don't hold the moral high ground here.AlastairMeeks said:
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.John_M said:
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.AlastairMeeks said:
Intriguing non-response to a simple question. Obviously worrying about overpopulation is so last week.John_M said:
I think it was more of an off-the-cuff observation. Not every comment has to pertain to Brexit, surely?AlastairMeeks said:
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?Mortimer said:
That is, incidentally, an eminently sensible way of incentivising middle class reproduction....
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.
Both campaigns were awful and I wanted both to lose. To try and pretend the Remain campaign was any less dishonest is ridiculous.
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!0 -
Nothing in the allegations, obviously...williamglenn said:Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI for three and a half hours today.
0 -
They'd carry even more again if everybody walks up.MikeSmithson said:
It's like escalators on the tube. The can carry more people faster if nobody walks up and everybody stands right and left.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.SouthamObserver said:
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.OllyT said:
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.edmundintokyo said:
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.SeanT said:fpt for Edmund
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.
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.
In the UK the M5 is always dreadful.0 -
I can't say I'm happy with the Leave campaign. But, their opponent sought to bury them in shit, and they buried Remain in shit in turn, more effectively.tlg86 said:
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.Sean_F said: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.
0 -
Mr FeersumEnjineeya, strokes are nasty and can be disabling. My sympathies.0
-
That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
The whole point of standing on the right is that it gives people the option to stand or walk.0 -
Once upon a time, I was in a convoy that took aid to the front in the Yugoslav "civil" war, and one of the vehicles was a diesel land rover driven by a peer of the realm no less. (No idea how he got involved, nice chap though....)JosiasJessop said:
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.HurstLlama said:
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.JosiasJessop said:
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.FeersumEnjineeya said:Strange. Well-enforced speed limits generally increase throughput of traffic due to the reduction in the braking distance needed between each vehicle.
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.
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.
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.
His piston rings were blowing and he was making appalling time. On the way home I persuaded him to sit in my slipstream on the motorway through Austria. It got another 10 miles an hour out of his motor!
0 -
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster0 -
My book is getting close to strike on the lay offs.. I hope there is a negative (to Hillary) statement coming soon...RodCrosby said:
Nothing in the allegations, obviously...williamglenn said:Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI for three and a half hours today.
0 -
-
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster0 -
I wouldn't worry, sir. Mrs May and Ms Sturgeon will need Auchtennach Castle for their first summit where they divide the UK between them.JackW said:
Another tick in the box then ....stodge said:May excluded LDs like Norman Baker from the decision making process.
Sturgeon will get Scotland, May England and both Wales and Ulster will be sold to Bill Gates.
0 -
They don't because people stand on the right....Scott_P said:
But they don't, do they.Mortimer said:Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..
EDIT: And even if they did, there would still be empty steps between them
If that didn't exist as a rule, then yes, they would.
It is also quicker than twice (for me, at least) as fast to walk up an escalator as to stand on it, negating the 2 step capacity principle.0 -
Incidentally, I used to use Holborn at peak times twice a day. There was not a significant capacity problem that I ever saw0
-
Walking on the left 81.25 people per minute per escalatorMortimer said:
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster
Standing on the left 112.25 per minute per escalator
From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/16/the-tube-at-a-standstill-why-tfl-stopped-people-walking-up-the-escalators
The quickest way to settle the argument is to get the facts. its a 38% improvement just by changing people's habits..0 -
"kindly" right.........tyson said:
Corbyn is an old man.........and he looks it. I can't see how he manages to hold it together. I felt sorry for kindly old Uncle Roy HodgsonY0kel said:I think the emotional pressure on Corbyn is the crack in the wall, not some cack about whether he has the members support.
0 -
But slowing down a significant number of those who walk...eek said:
Walking on the left 81.25 people per minute per escalatorMortimer said:
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster
Standing on the left 112.25 per minute per escalator
From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/16/the-tube-at-a-standstill-why-tfl-stopped-people-walking-up-the-escalators
The quickest way to settle the argument is to get the facts. its a 38% improvement just by changing people's habits..
Those who choose to wait and stand are willing to cope with a slower journey. Those who walk are not.
We need to stop pandering to the LCD in all things.0 -
I used to commute via Holborn to Imperial (South Kensington). I always loved walking down the Piccadilly line escalator as fast as possibleMortimer said:Incidentally, I used to use Holborn at peak times twice a day. There was not a significant capacity problem that I ever saw
0 -
Bond St and Baker St always seemed the most congested escalator stations to me.0
-
Another tick in the box then ....stodge said:
I wouldn't worry, sir. Mrs May and Ms Sturgeon will need Auchtennach Castle for their first summit where they divide the UK between them.JackW said:
Another tick in the box then ....stodge said:May excluded LDs like Norman Baker from the decision making process.
Sturgeon will get Scotland, May England and both Wales and Ulster will be sold to Bill Gates. 0 -
No! May will get England and Wales! Both 53% LEAVE!stodge said:
I wouldn't worry, sir. Mrs May and Ms Sturgeon will need Auchtennach Castle for their first summit where they divide the UK between them.JackW said:
Another tick in the box then ....stodge said:May excluded LDs like Norman Baker from the decision making process.
Sturgeon will get Scotland, May England and both Wales and Ulster will be sold to Bill Gates.0 -
Standing increases your interchange time.eek said:
Walking on the left 81.25 people per minute per escalatorMortimer said:
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster
Standing on the left 112.25 per minute per escalator
From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/16/the-tube-at-a-standstill-why-tfl-stopped-people-walking-up-the-escalators
The quickest way to settle the argument is to get the facts. its a 38% improvement just by changing people's habits..0 -
Absolutely not who cares about flow rate?eek said:
Walking on the left 81.25 people per minute per escalatorMortimer said:
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster
Standing on the left 112.25 per minute per escalator
From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/16/the-tube-at-a-standstill-why-tfl-stopped-people-walking-up-the-escalators
The quickest way to settle the argument is to get the facts. its a 38% improvement just by changing people's habits..
It is about the sovereign right of the people either:
a) to stand on the right; or
b) to walk on the left if you are in a hurry.
Not everyone is in a hurry and hence the sense of the current rule.
Plus for as long as I can remember people have blatantly ignored the "dogs must be carried" rule. Plenty of people on the escalators with no dogs.0 -
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:0 -
Your perception and actual reality may not tell you the same things....Mortimer said:
But slowing down a significant number of those who walk...eek said:
Walking on the left 81.25 people per minute per escalatorMortimer said:
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster
Standing on the left 112.25 per minute per escalator
From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/16/the-tube-at-a-standstill-why-tfl-stopped-people-walking-up-the-escalators
The quickest way to settle the argument is to get the facts. its a 38% improvement just by changing people's habits..
Those who choose to wait and stand are willing to cope with a slower journey. Those who walk are not.
We need to stop pandering to the LCD in all things.0 -
And pushchairs!!! No one folds them these days!TOPPING said:
Absolutely not who cares about flow rate?eek said:
Walking on the left 81.25 people per minute per escalatorMortimer said:
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster
Standing on the left 112.25 per minute per escalator
From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/16/the-tube-at-a-standstill-why-tfl-stopped-people-walking-up-the-escalators
The quickest way to settle the argument is to get the facts. its a 38% improvement just by changing people's habits..
It is about the sovereign right of the people either:
a) to stand on the right; or
b) to walk on the left if you are in a hurry.
Not everyone is in a hurry and hence the sense of the current rule.
Plus for as long as I can remember people have blatantly ignored the "dogs must be carried" rule. Plenty of people on the escalators with no dogs.
0 -
The 'Prince over the Water' is 3rd favourite on BF (D. Miliband - 9.6)
Tells you all you need to know about the febrile atmosphere of politics this week. He doesn't even live in the UK, never mind being an MP.
0 -
My grandfather & his friends on the Tory benches were actively agitating for a national health service.saddened said:
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 careSouthamObserver said:
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.saddened said:
It's not difficult to accept it would have been introduced under either party Google it.0 -
Rubio and remain backers IMO. More money than sense.rottenborough said:The 'Prince over the Water' is 3rd favourite on BF (D. Miliband - 9.6)
Tells you all you need to know about the febrile atmosphere of politics this week. He doesn't even live in the UK, never mind being an MP.0 -
I doubt Remain backers have any betting money left!!MaxPB said:
Rubio and remain backers IMO. More money than sense.rottenborough said:The 'Prince over the Water' is 3rd favourite on BF (D. Miliband - 9.6)
Tells you all you need to know about the febrile atmosphere of politics this week. He doesn't even live in the UK, never mind being an MP.0 -
Maybe, but not terribly effective.PClipp said:
http://order-order.com/2016/07/02/read-full-article-pulled-telegraph-pressure-may-campaign/0 -
Bond Street is a nightmare at the moment because they keep swapping things around because of the Crossrail works.Mortimer said:Bond St and Baker St always seemed the most congested escalator stations to me.
The thing about Holborn is that there are always at least two up escalators from the mezzanine to the ticket hall - and given the length very few people walk up. Therefore making one up escalator standing only increases capacity whilst still allowing the few who want to walk to do so.0 -
If the notices ask them to fold pushchairs, no surprise if all the people who push babybuggies don't respond - they probably don't realise pushchair = buggy.Sunil_Prasannan said:
And pushchairs!!! No one folds them these days!TOPPING said:
Absolutely not who cares about flow rate?eek said:
Walking on the left 81.25 people per minute per escalatorMortimer said:
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster
Standing on the left 112.25 per minute per escalator
From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/16/the-tube-at-a-standstill-why-tfl-stopped-people-walking-up-the-escalators
The quickest way to settle the argument is to get the facts. its a 38% improvement just by changing people's habits..
It is about the sovereign right of the people either:
a) to stand on the right; or
b) to walk on the left if you are in a hurry.
Not everyone is in a hurry and hence the sense of the current rule.
Plus for as long as I can remember people have blatantly ignored the "dogs must be carried" rule. Plenty of people on the escalators with no dogs.
(Good evening everyone - and goodnight, for I am off now)0 -
As Terry Pratchett noted.TOPPING said:
Absolutely not who cares about flow rate?eek said:
Walking on the left 81.25 people per minute per escalatorMortimer said:
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster
Standing on the left 112.25 per minute per escalator
From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/16/the-tube-at-a-standstill-why-tfl-stopped-people-walking-up-the-escalators
The quickest way to settle the argument is to get the facts. its a 38% improvement just by changing people's habits..
It is about the sovereign right of the people either:
a) to stand on the right; or
b) to walk on the left if you are in a hurry.
Not everyone is in a hurry and hence the sense of the current rule.
Plus for as long as I can remember people have blatantly ignored the "dogs must be carried" rule. Plenty of people on the escalators with no dogs.0 -
The solution is clear - make the escalators so fast that walking up them seems pointless.0
-
Go on, admit it: it wasn't your "grandfather", it was you...Charles said:
My grandfather & his friends on the Tory benches were actively agitating for a national health service.saddened said:
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 careSouthamObserver said:
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.saddened said:
It's not difficult to accept it would have been introduced under either party Google it. 0 -
Is PB full of the London Elite, we only have escalators in the M&S shops.RobD said:The solution is clear - make the escalators so fast that walking up them seems pointless.
0 -
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:0 -
It's an act of faith NHS = Labour, it seems a shame to take it from them.Charles said:
My grandfather & his friends on the Tory benches were actively agitating for a national health service.saddened said:
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 careSouthamObserver said:
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.saddened said:
It's not difficult to accept it would have been introduced under either party Google it.0 -
Road works ahead.ThreeQuidder said:
As Terry Pratchett noted.TOPPING said:
Absolutely not who cares about flow rate?eek said:
Walking on the left 81.25 people per minute per escalatorMortimer said:
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster
Standing on the left 112.25 per minute per escalator
From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/16/the-tube-at-a-standstill-why-tfl-stopped-people-walking-up-the-escalators
The quickest way to settle the argument is to get the facts. its a 38% improvement just by changing people's habits..
It is about the sovereign right of the people either:
a) to stand on the right; or
b) to walk on the left if you are in a hurry.
Not everyone is in a hurry and hence the sense of the current rule.
Plus for as long as I can remember people have blatantly ignored the "dogs must be carried" rule. Plenty of people on the escalators with no dogs.
Oh thank you, good to know.
WTF? Who put that hole in the road, it was supposed to be working ahead!
(I can't remember the exact quotes but comes from his digger series of children's books)0 -
You're not still on that vampire things are you?viewcode said:
Go on, admit it: it wasn't your "grandfather", it was you...Charles said:
My grandfather & his friends on the Tory benches were actively agitating for a national health service.saddened said:
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 careSouthamObserver said:
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.saddened said:
It's not difficult to accept it would have been introduced under either party Google it.
Vampires don't have forked tongues.0 -
I loved those books as a kid. This is the bit you're referring to...BenedictWhite said:
Road works ahead.ThreeQuidder said:
As Terry Pratchett noted.TOPPING said:
Absolutely not who cares about flow rate?eek said:
Walking on the left 81.25 people per minute per escalatorMortimer said:
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster
Standing on the left 112.25 per minute per escalator
From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/16/the-tube-at-a-standstill-why-tfl-stopped-people-walking-up-the-escalators
The quickest way to settle the argument is to get the facts. its a 38% improvement just by changing people's habits..
It is about the sovereign right of the people either:
a) to stand on the right; or
b) to walk on the left if you are in a hurry.
Not everyone is in a hurry and hence the sense of the current rule.
Plus for as long as I can remember people have blatantly ignored the "dogs must be carried" rule. Plenty of people on the escalators with no dogs.
Oh thank you, good to know.
WTF? Who put that hole in the road, it was supposed to be working ahead!
(I can't remember the exact quotes but comes from his digger series of children's books)
I was thinking of this one...0 -
Anyhoo, here's a hypothesis. John Carpenter is regarded as a synth legend because of the soundtracks to his 70's/80's films. But the credit may be better attributed to his frequent collaborator Alan Howarth and (in a minor way) to Ennio Morricone (who did "The Thing"). This is borne out by the fact that Carpenter's post-Howarth films (Mouth of Madness onwards) have a poor soundtracks.
Discuss.0 -
Who on Earth is backing him? He's not said anything on the subject of the Labour Party in months! All that's stopping me laying him for hundreds is the spineless Labour MPs who, like their new young voters, think a challenge is done on Twitter rather than by following the formal process.rottenborough said:The 'Prince over the Water' is 3rd favourite on BF (D. Miliband - 9.6)
Tells you all you need to know about the febrile atmosphere of politics this week. He doesn't even live in the UK, never mind being an MP.0 -
There are 330 Tory MPs. You can't come third with 110 or more because, in that case, the top two can't each have more than 110.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:0 -
There can't be automatic places, this is a series of individual votes on different days, with the electorate free to change their mind between votes. It's not AV!RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
It's also a secret ballot, so public declarations mean precisely nothing!0 -
Yeah, so it's more like a guaranteed place, rather than an automatic one.Barnesian said:
There are 330 Tory MPs. You can't come third with 110 or more because the top two can't each have more than 110.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:0 -
Rob D. Your right. It's the same thing. If you get more than 1/3 of the votes and hold on to them, logically you must make the final two.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
By the way, I find your new avatar rather disconcerting!0 -
It was either this, or her shoesstjohn said:
Rob D. Your right. It's the same thing. If you get more than 1/3 of the votes and hold on to them, logically you must make the final two.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
By the way, I find your new avatar rather disconcerting!
0 -
I don't understand this post.rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
The rules mean the bottom place candidate drops out and the contest continues into another round without him or her0 -
Lowly humans tend to interpret paranormal phenomena in terms of existing templates: vampires, aliens, witches, and so on. If I use the wrong word, I apologise.Charles said:
You're not still on that vampire things are you?viewcode said:
Go on, admit it: it wasn't your "grandfather", it was you...Charles said:
My grandfather & his friends on the Tory benches were actively agitating for a national health service.saddened said:
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 careSouthamObserver said:
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.saddened said:
It's not difficult to accept it would have been introduced under either party Google it.
Vampires don't have forked tongues.0 -
Correct. There's no automatic places, pledged votes or AV involved.JennyFreeman said:
I don't understand this post.rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
The rules mean the bottom place candidate drops out and the contest continues into another round without him or her0 -
There's no guarantee of holding on to votes especially if another candidate has momentum. It's a fresh vote every time and I believe it's also a secret one is it not?stjohn said:
Rob D. Your right. It's the same thing. If you get more than 1/3 of the votes and hold on to them, logically you must make the final two.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
By the way, I find your new avatar rather disconcerting!0 -
Sandpit said:
It's also a secret ballot, so public declarations mean precisely nothing!RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
Shy Leave will strike again
Joking apart, we could well have a situation where MPs declare for the establishment figure but vote something else.0 -
Fair point.JennyFreeman said:
There's no guarantee of holding on to votes especially if another candidate has momentum. It's a fresh vote every time and I believe it's also a secret one is it not?stjohn said:
Rob D. Your right. It's the same thing. If you get more than 1/3 of the votes and hold on to them, logically you must make the final two.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
By the way, I find your new avatar rather disconcerting!0 -
I was not a child when I read those but did so whilst I was waiting for more disc world novels.ThreeQuidder said:
I loved those books as a kid. This is the bit you're referring to...BenedictWhite said:
Road works ahead.ThreeQuidder said:
As Terry Pratchett noted.TOPPING said:
Absolutely not who cares about flow rate?eek said:
Walking on the left 81.25 people per minute per escalatorMortimer said:
Urm, people can walk up 2 abreast..Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster
Standing on the left 112.25 per minute per escalator
From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/16/the-tube-at-a-standstill-why-tfl-stopped-people-walking-up-the-escalators
The quickest way to settle the argument is to get the facts. its a 38% improvement just by changing people's habits..
It is about the sovereign right of the people either:
a) to stand on the right; or
b) to walk on the left if you are in a hurry.
Not everyone is in a hurry and hence the sense of the current rule.
Plus for as long as I can remember people have blatantly ignored the "dogs must be carried" rule. Plenty of people on the escalators with no dogs.
Oh thank you, good to know.
WTF? Who put that hole in the road, it was supposed to be working ahead!
(I can't remember the exact quotes but comes from his digger series of children's books)
I was thinking of this one...
Very very funny observations on the use of language in those though.0 -
You mean like....RobD said:
It was either this, or her shoesstjohn said:
Rob D. Your right. It's the same thing. If you get more than 1/3 of the votes and hold on to them, logically you must make the final two.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
By the way, I find your new avatar rather disconcerting!0 -
You can get 200 on the first ballot and still not make the final cut. No one has to say which way they voted and they can change their minds between rounds.RobD said:
Yeah, so it's more like a guaranteed place, rather than an automatic one.Barnesian said:
There are 330 Tory MPs. You can't come third with 110 or more because the top two can't each have more than 110.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:0 -
MarqueeMark said:
You mean like....RobD said:
It was either this, or her shoesstjohn said:
Rob D. Your right. It's the same thing. If you get more than 1/3 of the votes and hold on to them, logically you must make the final two.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
By the way, I find your new avatar rather disconcerting! 0 -
A very good point!BenedictWhite said:
You can get 200 on the first ballot and still not make the final cut. No one has to say which way they voted and they can change their minds between rounds.RobD said:
Yeah, so it's more like a guaranteed place, rather than an automatic one.Barnesian said:
There are 330 Tory MPs. You can't come third with 110 or more because the top two can't each have more than 110.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:0 -
Yes but if you have 110 votes at any stage you can't be eliminated at that stage because there are only 220 other votes between the rest. So as long as you continue with at least 110 votes you are guaranteed to be in the final two. If at any stage you have less than 110 votes, then the guarantee doesn't work.JennyFreeman said:
There's no guarantee of holding on to votes especially if another candidate has momentum. It's a fresh vote every time and I believe it's also a secret one is it not?stjohn said:
Rob D. Your right. It's the same thing. If you get more than 1/3 of the votes and hold on to them, logically you must make the final two.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
By the way, I find your new avatar rather disconcerting!0 -
Not content with pissing off Hispanics, Muslims and women, Trump is seeking to lose the Jewish vote:
https://twitter.com/Max_Fisher/status/749244090584272896/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw0 -
The first round is just to get rid of Fox.BenedictWhite said:
You can get 200 on the first ballot and still not make the final cut. No one has to say which way they voted and they can change their minds between rounds.RobD said:
Yeah, so it's more like a guaranteed place, rather than an automatic one.Barnesian said:
There are 330 Tory MPs. You can't come third with 110 or more because the top two can't each have more than 110.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
After that, it gets serious.0 -
It's just like Strictly.MarqueeMark said:
The first round is just to get rid of Fox.BenedictWhite said:
You can get 200 on the first ballot and still not make the final cut. No one has to say which way they voted and they can change their minds between rounds.RobD said:
Yeah, so it's more like a guaranteed place, rather than an automatic one.Barnesian said:
There are 330 Tory MPs. You can't come third with 110 or more because the top two can't each have more than 110.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
After that, it gets serious.0 -
What has happened to Louise Mensch's accent? I'm listening to her appearance on Bill Maher and it's the most bizarre faux Manhattan socialite voice I've ever heard.0
-
Corbyn vs Channel 4 journalist
https://youtu.be/GmGymFt308M0 -
0
-
Article in the Indy suggests it will be a whitewash on Blair taking us to war but with criticism of no plan for after the victory.murali_s said:
Not planning for what happens after a win seems to be a common failing.0 -
It doesn't matter he is learning from Nigel's playbook and going after the big non religious wwc vote. You know the same block that just won an election for a side the establishment said couldn't win.rcs1000 said:Not content with pissing off Hispanics, Muslims and women, Trump is seeking to lose the Jewish vote:
https://twitter.com/Max_Fisher/status/749244090584272896/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
Can't help thinking in there are as many pissed off voters in the former industrial towns of the south and the Midwest as the north of England, Midlands and Welsh Valleys.0 -
No AV!?Sandpit said:
Correct. There's no automatic places, pledged votes or AV involved.JennyFreeman said:
I don't understand this post.rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
The rules mean the bottom place candidate drops out and the contest continues into another round without him or her
*sobs*
0 -
Italy vs Germany zzzzzzz0
-
I agree. Said exactly the same y day... questions to be asked re photo choice!!!stjohn said:
Rob D. Your right. It's the same thing. If you get more than 1/3 of the votes and hold on to them, logically you must make the final two.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
By the way, I find your new avatar rather disconcerting!0 -
Tempted to watch the Wales game again... it was superb.John_M said:Italy vs Germany zzzzzzz
0 -
'A senior Labour source, close to the embattled leader, said they had blocked Watson from talking privately to Corbyn because they have a “duty of care. They [Watson’s aides] want Watson to be on his own with Corbyn so that he can jab his finger at him,” the source said.
“We are not letting that happen. He’s a 70-year-old [sic] man. We have a duty of care … This is not a one-off. There is a culture of bullying. Maybe it’s a Blairite/Brownite thing.”'
[Also]
On Saturday night, Corbyn allies accused the parliamentary party of sabotaging Labour’s ability to hold the government to account.
One Labour source said those at the top of the party were livid when it emerged that files on a shared Labour party hard drive relating to the finance bill going through parliament had been deleted as the shadow finance secretary Rob Marris resigned.
An internal email seen by this newspaper said: “Unfortunately, it looks like someone from Rob Marris’s office has deleted the vast majority of the finance bill records and notes on each clause from the shared drive.”
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/02/corbyn-keeps-watson-arms-length?CMP=twt_a-politics_b-gdnukpolitics0 -
I wonder if the Clinton's are over relying on black voters like Remain were relying on south Asian Brits who yes voted for remain but not in the numbers needed and Leave won Birmingham, Bradford, luton, Slough came close in Leicester, Leeds, Hounslow and fucking Newham!
Also had huge margins in greater Manchester tho not sure how polarised the white vs. Muslim vote was in those areas.0 -
I remember your Osborne one.. that was truly something elseScrapheap_as_was said:
I agree. Said exactly the same y day... questions to be asked re photo choice!!!stjohn said:
Rob D. Your right. It's the same thing. If you get more than 1/3 of the votes and hold on to them, logically you must make the final two.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
By the way, I find your new avatar rather disconcerting!
0 -
On thread - apart from Theresa May reinforcing her anticipated position of leader of the Conservative party by allowing a ballot of all its members, I trust she will then call a General Election so that the country as a whole can endorse her right to be Prime Minister.0
-
Won't Crabb go first?MarqueeMark said:
The first round is just to get rid of Fox.BenedictWhite said:
You can get 200 on the first ballot and still not make the final cut. No one has to say which way they voted and they can change their minds between rounds.RobD said:
Yeah, so it's more like a guaranteed place, rather than an automatic one.Barnesian said:
There are 330 Tory MPs. You can't come third with 110 or more because the top two can't each have more than 110.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
After that, it gets serious.0 -
It has to be Gove. He can talk properly. Moreover, he has vision and personifies the kind of society we should be. Theresa May, on the other hand, is just the kind of grey-suit, yes-man, we don't need. It would be tragic if someone so anonymous, so poor at communicating, was given the tiller simply because likes sitting in the middle of the boat.0
-
Most people just call us lizards. Not our real name, but it will suffice.viewcode said:
Lowly humans tend to interpret paranormal phenomena in terms of existing templates: vampires, aliens, witches, and so on. If I use the wrong word, I apologise.Charles said:
You're not still on that vampire things are you?viewcode said:
Go on, admit it: it wasn't your "grandfather", it was you...Charles said:
My grandfather & his friends on the Tory benches were actively agitating for a national health service.saddened said:
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 careSouthamObserver said:
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.saddened said:
It's not difficult to accept it would have been introduced under either party Google it.
Vampires don't have forked tongues.0 -
Quality. You are quite correct. Must dust it off perhaps when ozzy is reconfirmed as Chancellor just to piss off the PB crowd ...and Tim...RobD said:
I remember your Osborne one.. that was truly something elseScrapheap_as_was said:
I agree. Said exactly the same y day... questions to be asked re photo choice!!!stjohn said:
Rob D. Your right. It's the same thing. If you get more than 1/3 of the votes and hold on to them, logically you must make the final two.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
By the way, I find your new avatar rather disconcerting!0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/02/tory-leadership-battle-five-questions-for-five-contenders---here/Goupillon said:On thread - apart from Theresa May reinforcing her anticipated position of leader of the Conservative party by allowing a ballot of all its members, I trust she will then call a General Election so that the country as a whole can endorse her right to be Prime Minister.
None of the candidates are proposing a general election. Sorry to disappoint.0 -
Oh Scott, how could you! I thought that if we had learned one thing in the last few weeks, it is that factual evidence has no value at all, and you should hang your head in shame at trying to convince someone to change their mind with reasoned arguments.Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster0 -
The chances if Trump picking a black VP but with same outlook as him must be pretty high.0
-
Hopefully it will be Fox, he needs a dose of humility combined with reality.AlastairMeeks said:
Won't Crabb go first?MarqueeMark said:
The first round is just to get rid of Fox.BenedictWhite said:
You can get 200 on the first ballot and still not make the final cut. No one has to say which way they voted and they can change their minds between rounds.RobD said:
Yeah, so it's more like a guaranteed place, rather than an automatic one.Barnesian said:
There are 330 Tory MPs. You can't come third with 110 or more because the top two can't each have more than 110.RobD said:
Is there such a thing as an automatic place? I thought it simply the figure at which coming third was virtually impossible?rottenborough said:
May is just short I believe of automatic place - 110 IIRC.John_M said:
After that, it gets serious.0 -
Do Labour not keep backups of the shared drive? Schoolboy error if they don't.RodCrosby said:'A senior Labour source, close to the embattled leader, said they had blocked Watson from talking privately to Corbyn because they have a “duty of care. They [Watson’s aides] want Watson to be on his own with Corbyn so that he can jab his finger at him,” the source said.
“We are not letting that happen. He’s a 70-year-old [sic] man. We have a duty of care … This is not a one-off. There is a culture of bullying. Maybe it’s a Blairite/Brownite thing.”'
[Also]
On Saturday night, Corbyn allies accused the parliamentary party of sabotaging Labour’s ability to hold the government to account.
One Labour source said those at the top of the party were livid when it emerged that files on a shared Labour party hard drive relating to the finance bill going through parliament had been deleted as the shadow finance secretary Rob Marris resigned.
An internal email seen by this newspaper said: “Unfortunately, it looks like someone from Rob Marris’s office has deleted the vast majority of the finance bill records and notes on each clause from the shared drive.”
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/02/corbyn-keeps-watson-arms-length?CMP=twt_a-politics_b-gdnukpolitics0 -
-
Regardless of his skills, in the 24 hour rolling news era, he is too reminiscent of Harry Enfield's Tory boy, he will be eviscerated by the press. Every TV appearance will see a loss in support.Blueberry said:It has to be Gove. He can talk properly. Moreover, he has vision and personifies the kind of society we should be. Theresa May, on the other hand, is just the kind of grey-suit, yes-man, we don't need. It would be tragic if someone so anonymous, so poor at communicating, was given the tiller simply because likes sitting in the middle of the boat.
0 -
Standing may increase capacity, but it slows down people wot want to reach their exit or interchange quickly.MrsB said:
Oh Scott, how could you! I thought that if we had learned one thing in the last few weeks, it is that factual evidence has no value at all, and you should hang your head in shame at trying to convince someone to change their mind with reasoned arguments.Scott_P said:
Except that is not necessarily true, is it? I though the whole point of the experiment was to prove standing increases capacity.Mortimer said:That standing only escalator rule would annoy me rotten. Stupid to say it would be quicker for all if everyone stood still; it would be even quicker if everyone walked.
If everyone stands, every step can accommodate 2 people. If everyone is walking, each person takes up at least 2 steps, so you may have quarter of the capacity, even if each person moves faster0 -
So Germany take the lead against Italy 1-0!0
This discussion has been closed.