politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Javid goes on the offensive at cabinet over cannabis for medic
Options
Comments
-
It appears to be yes. Its a bonus if you once went on holiday there.DecrepitJohnL said:
Anyone in France with a pair of boots and a Tunisian grandmother?FrancisUrquhart said:It seems Tunisia have taken the Republic of Ireland under Jack Charlton's approach to international football.
0 -
Ah, fair enough. Then I should say believe in it at all. From what I remember, it is a pretty high proportion who think it'll help national finances in the long term, but I'm not convinced it'll outweigh the amount it'll piss off remainersBig_G_NorthWales said:
To be fair she never said it would cover the whole funding increase and that is why she has said taxes will riseStereotomy said:
I think increasing funding almost certainly is a winner. The question is, given that they were going to increase funding, should May have tried to link it to the Brexit dividend? There's two apsects to that- internal party politics and national politics. And I don't think it's unambiguous, I can see arguments both ways.kle4 said:
What about that suggests it might not still be a winner? If people want more money for the NHS we will have to pay for it, whoever is offering it. We all know politicians promise more for less, but there has to be an element of public skepticism in such claims, and yet we still accept some policies as worth it.Scott_P said:
But on the national politics front, it does seem that she's needlessly alienating Remainers, and that the prospect this will significantly help her with Leavers is a bit dubious. What's the latest polling we have on how many Leavers actually believe in a Brexit dividend big enough to cover this funding increase?0 -
The trouble is you can't reverse thirty or more years of conditioning with a single gesture. The Labour line, throughout my lifetime, has been one of Tories bad, want to dismantle the NHS. A single gesture looks tokenistic and will be unlikely to to break the widely held perception, particularly if it becomes a bidding war - what's to stop Labour pledging to spend even more?Stereotomy said:
I think increasing funding almost certainly is a winner. The question is, given that they were going to increase funding, should May have tried to link it to the Brexit dividend? There's two apsects to that- internal party politics and national politics. And I don't think it's unambiguous, I can see arguments both ways.kle4 said:
What about that suggests it might not still be a winner? If people want more money for the NHS we will have to pay for it, whoever is offering it. We all know politicians promise more for less, but there has to be an element of public skepticism in such claims, and yet we still accept some policies as worth it.Scott_P said:
But on the national politics front, it does seem that she's needlessly alienating Remainers, and that the prospect this will significantly help her with Leavers is a bit dubious. What's the latest polling we have on how many Leavers actually believe in a Brexit dividend big enough to cover this funding increase?
The Tories' USP is that of a low tax party, by stealing Labour's clothes on the NHS they also open themselves to their own attack line that public services have to be paid for somehow. Most people recognise there's no such thing as a free lunch, even if it's written on the side of a bus.0 -
There. Is. No. Brexit. Dividend.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be fair she never said it would cover the whole funding increase and that is why she has said taxes will riseStereotomy said:
I think increasing funding almost certainly is a winner. The question is, given that they were going to increase funding, should May have tried to link it to the Brexit dividend? There's two apsects to that- internal party politics and national politics. And I don't think it's unambiguous, I can see arguments both ways.kle4 said:
What about that suggests it might not still be a winner? If people want more money for the NHS we will have to pay for it, whoever is offering it. We all know politicians promise more for less, but there has to be an element of public skepticism in such claims, and yet we still accept some policies as worth it.Scott_P said:
But on the national politics front, it does seem that she's needlessly alienating Remainers, and that the prospect this will significantly help her with Leavers is a bit dubious. What's the latest polling we have on how many Leavers actually believe in a Brexit dividend big enough to cover this funding increase?0 -
How likely is the Lords to agree to that? As for flooding the Lords with Tory Peers, George V only agreed to Asquith's request for such peers - should they have proved necessary - after the holding of a second General Election in December 1910.HYUFD said:
As I have already pointed out the Commons could even amend the Parliament Act to reduce that time if it really wanted as in 1911 it forced the Lords to become a delaying not a blocking body.justin124 said:
Delay for 12 months!HYUFD said:
So what, the elected Commons has already backed the government and ultimately the unelected Lords can only delay not blockwilliamglenn said:Government defeated in the Lords on a meaningful vote by a bigger majority than last time.
May could even appoint 200 Leaver peers if she wanted as well even if the Lords then became standing room only I doubt she would care0 -
Of course there will be. Explain how between 2025 and 2030 we will still be paying into the EU as nowBromptonaut said:
There. Is. No. Brexit. Dividend.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be fair she never said it would cover the whole funding increase and that is why she has said taxes will riseStereotomy said:
I think increasing funding almost certainly is a winner. The question is, given that they were going to increase funding, should May have tried to link it to the Brexit dividend? There's two apsects to that- internal party politics and national politics. And I don't think it's unambiguous, I can see arguments both ways.kle4 said:
What about that suggests it might not still be a winner? If people want more money for the NHS we will have to pay for it, whoever is offering it. We all know politicians promise more for less, but there has to be an element of public skepticism in such claims, and yet we still accept some policies as worth it.Scott_P said:
But on the national politics front, it does seem that she's needlessly alienating Remainers, and that the prospect this will significantly help her with Leavers is a bit dubious. What's the latest polling we have on how many Leavers actually believe in a Brexit dividend big enough to cover this funding increase?0 -
Remainers are in full attack at present as they cannot allow even the slightest idea that some of the money we stop sending the EU in time may just justify the bus.Stereotomy said:
Ah, fair enough. Then I should say believe in it at all. From what I remember, it is a pretty high proportion who think it'll help national finances in the long term, but I'm not convinced it'll outweigh the amount it'll piss off remainersBig_G_NorthWales said:
To be fair she never said it would cover the whole funding increase and that is why she has said taxes will riseStereotomy said:
I think increasing funding almost certainly is a winner. The question is, given that they were going to increase funding, should May have tried to link it to the Brexit dividend? There's two apsects to that- internal party politics and national politics. And I don't think it's unambiguous, I can see arguments both ways.kle4 said:
What about that suggests it might not still be a winner? If people want more money for the NHS we will have to pay for it, whoever is offering it. We all know politicians promise more for less, but there has to be an element of public skepticism in such claims, and yet we still accept some policies as worth it.Scott_P said:
But on the national politics front, it does seem that she's needlessly alienating Remainers, and that the prospect this will significantly help her with Leavers is a bit dubious. What's the latest polling we have on how many Leavers actually believe in a Brexit dividend big enough to cover this funding increase?0 -
Hopefully all these misses aren't going to cost England.0
-
Smart chap is Sajid Javid (its being from Rochdale...). He can see that the ZombieMay head might get lopped off any week now. He has an issue that has mass appeal inside the party and out. And knew that May would be unable to do human and respond at a suitable pace - the Hunt car crash interview with Humphreys this morning didn't do him any good either.
So he sets out his stall so that should the boss fall over he has momentum to launch straight into a leadership bid. And if she doesn't he still scores points ready for when it does happen. As it will.
And the best news of all. A Sajid Javid premiership would force the MoFuckingMentum to respond. The Tories have had two female leaders and now a BAME leader. Which means there is only one obvious candidate to allow the party to catch up with the 21st Century. Step forward Diane Abbot. At which point Mr Eagles can donate 5% of his mahoosive winnings off my Abbot tip to a charity of my choosing...0 -
We'll be still paying in substantial sums for access to the CU and SM and our economy, and therefore the government's tax take, will be substantially lower than if we had stayed in the EU.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Of course there will be. Explain how between 2025 and 2030 we will still be paying into the EU as nowBromptonaut said:
There. Is. No. Brexit. Dividend.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be fair she never said it would cover the whole funding increase and that is why she has said taxes will riseStereotomy said:
I think increasing funding almost certainly is a winner. The question is, given that they were going to increase funding, should May have tried to link it to the Brexit dividend? There's two apsects to that- internal party politics and national politics. And I don't think it's unambiguous, I can see arguments both ways.kle4 said:
What about that suggests it might not still be a winner? If people want more money for the NHS we will have to pay for it, whoever is offering it. We all know politicians promise more for less, but there has to be an element of public skepticism in such claims, and yet we still accept some policies as worth it.Scott_P said:
But on the national politics front, it does seem that she's needlessly alienating Remainers, and that the prospect this will significantly help her with Leavers is a bit dubious. What's the latest polling we have on how many Leavers actually believe in a Brexit dividend big enough to cover this funding increase?
There is no Brexit dividend. It is negative.0 -
Tunisia misses even !!!FrancisUrquhart said:Hopefully all these misses aren't going to cost England.
0 -
Don`t Mrs May`s false promises come into play somewhere there?HYUFD said:
So what, the elected Commons has already backed the government and ultimately the unelected Lords can only delay not blockwilliamglenn said:Government defeated in the Lords on a meaningful vote by a bigger majority than last time.
0 -
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea. And, yes, I know we do it with alcohol. But just because we do does not mean that we should double up. After all, heroin and cocaine were (may well still be) used for pain relief (the Brompton cocktail) but that doesn’t mean we should decriminalise those.0 -
You are following the dodgy forecasts on economic activity post Brexit which are guesswork and to date have been very, very wrongBarnesian said:
We'll be still paying in substantial sums for access to the CU and SM and our economy, and therefore the government's tax take, will be substantially lower than if we had stayed in the EU.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Of course there will be. Explain how between 2025 and 2030 we will still be paying into the EU as nowBromptonaut said:
There. Is. No. Brexit. Dividend.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be fair she never said it would cover the whole funding increase and that is why she has said taxes will riseStereotomy said:
I think increasing funding almost certainly is a winner. The question is, given that they were going to increase funding, should May have tried to link it to the Brexit dividend? There's two apsects to that- internal party politics and national politics. And I don't think it's unambiguous, I can see arguments both ways.kle4 said:
What about that suggests it might not still be a winner? If people want more money for the NHS we will have to pay for it, whoever is offering it. We all know politicians promise more for less, but there has to be an element of public skepticism in such claims, and yet we still accept some policies as worth it.Scott_P said:
But on the national politics front, it does seem that she's needlessly alienating Remainers, and that the prospect this will significantly help her with Leavers is a bit dubious. What's the latest polling we have on how many Leavers actually believe in a Brexit dividend big enough to cover this funding increase?
There is no Brexit dividend. It is negative.0 -
Sajid has my vote ( and I have one)RochdalePioneers said:Smart chap is Sajid Javid (its being from Rochdale...). He can see that the ZombieMay head might get lopped off any week now. He has an issue that has mass appeal inside the party and out. And knew that May would be unable to do human and respond at a suitable pace - the Hunt car crash interview with Humphreys this morning didn't do him any good either.
So he sets out his stall so that should the boss fall over he has momentum to launch straight into a leadership bid. And if she doesn't he still scores points ready for when it does happen. As it will.
And the best news of all. A Sajid Javid premiership would force the MoFuckingMentum to respond. The Tories have had two female leaders and now a BAME leader. Which means there is only one obvious candidate to allow the party to catch up with the 21st Century. Step forward Diane Abbot. At which point Mr Eagles can donate 5% of his mahoosive winnings off my Abbot tip to a charity of my choosing...0 -
Penalty to Tunisia0
-
You can tell Kyle Walker is a former Spurs player.
Bloody tosser.0 -
It was going so well...Big_G_NorthWales said:Penalty to Tunisia
0 -
That is so funnyBig_G_NorthWales said:Penalty to Tunisia
0 -
I'm sure they won't...oh!FrancisUrquhart said:Hopefully all these misses aren't going to cost England.
0 -
I have completely lost interest in Association Football. Have no idea who most of our players areBig_G_NorthWales said:Penalty to Tunisia
0 -
AlastairMeeks said:
I realise you struggle with dates more recent than 1690 but that poll was taken before the events of last Wednesday, so quite how you tie it into my thread header is beyond me.TGOHF said:LOLZA - another chance to laugh at yesterday's thread header.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1008751906842464256
A staunch No voter of my acquaintance just had a conversion moment post Wednesday and now believes, with regret, that Independence may be the only answer.AlastairMeeks said:
I realise you struggle with dates more recent than 1690 but that poll was taken before the events of last Wednesday, so quite how you tie it into my thread header is beyond me.TGOHF said:LOLZA - another chance to laugh at yesterday's thread header.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/10087519068424642560 -
Not to defend the Man City player, but he's being played out of position by Southgate. Would have preferred Cahill to start.TheScreamingEagles said:You can tell Kyle Walker is a former Spurs player.
Bloody tosser.0 -
Why does legalisation imply selling cannabis to the young ?Cyclefree said:
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea....
A similar regulatory regime to tobacco (perhaps more stringent) ought to deal with that objection.
0 -
Cahill's legs have gone.MaxPB said:
Not to defend the Man City player, but he's being played out of position by Southgate. Would have preferred Cahill to start.TheScreamingEagles said:You can tell Kyle Walker is a former Spurs player.
Bloody tosser.0 -
Not that we should just do what other countries are doing, but an increasing number are moving that way, it clearly isn't regarded as as horrendous as it once was, and the problem for those who are against legalisation is they still overdo the shock claims like we're living in the world of Reefer Madness.Cyclefree said:
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea. And, yes, I know we do it with alcohol. But just because we do does not mean that we should double up. After all, heroin and cocaine were (may well still be) used for pain relief (the Brompton cocktail) but that doesn’t mean we should decriminalise those.
And if it is a question of it being dangerous for the young, prohibit them from buying it until they are 21 or something. Sure they'll get hold of it anyway to some extent, but if anyone thinks a 21 year cannot get hold of weed right now they are kidding themselves.0 -
John Stones with a fresh air shot with the goal wide open0
-
How has VAR missed that?0
-
VAR really is a total joke.0
-
Was that in the warm up !!!TheScreamingEagles said:
Cahill's legs have gone.MaxPB said:
Not to defend the Man City player, but he's being played out of position by Southgate. Would have preferred Cahill to start.TheScreamingEagles said:You can tell Kyle Walker is a former Spurs player.
Bloody tosser.0 -
That is a pen - no ifs no butstlg86 said:VAR really is a total joke.
0 -
Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/10087599996889989170 -
I'm certainly no fan of this government but it seems to me that cabinet ministers leading on the policies and issues of their respective departments is a pretty good thing - regardless of whether or not I agree with the actual policies. And cabinet level is hardly "bottom up".Casino_Royale said:
This Government is being led from the bottom up.
Gove on the environment, Hunt on Health, and Javid now on migration and law & order.
Theresa May is providing no leadership whatsoever.
0 -
We try to rationalise it with arguments about reducing harm or reducing crime, the medicinal benefits or the old "prohibition doesn't work" line when what it all comes down to is one simple thing: my body, my choice.Cyclefree said:
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea. And, yes, I know we do it with alcohol. But just because we do does not mean that we should double up. After all, heroin and cocaine were (may well still be) used for pain relief (the Brompton cocktail) but that doesn’t mean we should decriminalise those.
If tomorrow I decided to commit suicide, take heroin, etc, so be it. It's when I decide to off myself by driving my car in front of a train, or snatch an old lady's purse to buy heroin that it becomes society's problem. It should never be the government's role to police what we can and can't do with our own bodies.0 -
True Unionism there TSE. Shameful exclusionary thinking from you.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
Deffo not a cock up by Corbyn.0 -
Corbyn is hopelessTheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/10087599996889989170 -
Told you - gonna be the new penalty shoot-out in England's misery!!TheScreamingEagles said:How has VAR missed that?
0 -
I wonder how much Jezza actually controls his tw@tter and how much it is others.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/10087599996889989170 -
I would be delighted if TM let her cabinet members lead on issues generallyTorby_Fennel said:
I'm certainly no fan of this government but it seems to me that cabinet ministers leading on the policies and issues of their respective departments is a pretty good thing - regardless of whether or not I agree with the actual policies. And cabinet level is hardly "bottom up".Casino_Royale said:
This Government is being led from the bottom up.
Gove on the environment, Hunt on Health, and Javid now on migration and law & order.
Theresa May is providing no leadership whatsoever.0 -
I can't believe that if Alli had to go off Southgate was going to send on Delph.0
-
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.0 -
"They say Rome wasn't built in a day, but I wasn't on that particular job."Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.0 -
Nah, this is up there with Gordon Brown saying his favourite ever goal was Gazza's goal against Scotland at Euro 96.Alistair said:
True Unionism there TSE. Shameful exclusionary thinking from you.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
Deffo not a cock up by Corbyn.0 -
Surprised he didn't quote FergieTheuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.0 -
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.0 -
I would personally have thought anyone quoting Brian Clough would almost inevitably make a fool of themselves.Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.0 -
Ha, I didn't until I Googled it.tlg86 said:
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.
Aposite!0 -
What's the point of VAR if you miss the rugby tackle on Harry Kane?0
-
Jesus Christ, 34,000 tweets from Tim and he only has 1500 followers.0
-
So, annoyingly, the Americans are right to say soccer. The word football belongs to none of the sports that claim to be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Ha, I didn't until I Googled it.tlg86 said:
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.
Aposite!0 -
Decent tackle by the Tunisian lad, more worries for Eddie Jones ?0
-
There are quite a few things that Americans say / spell that we mock, but aren't as wrong as most people think. Often it comes back to the what were the norms when many left the British Isles to emigrate there.tlg86 said:
So, annoyingly, the Americans are right to say soccer. The word football belongs to none of the sports that claim to be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Ha, I didn't until I Googled it.tlg86 said:
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.
Aposite!0 -
Jermaine Jenas looks like he is wearing his Dad's suit jacket and his mum told him he would grow into it.0
-
Midges!0
-
Many of them aren’t wrong at all - particularly as US English is more widely taught and spoken in the world than English English...FrancisUrquhart said:
There are quite a few things that Americans say / spell that we mock, but aren't as wrong as most people think. Often it comes back to the what were the norms when many left the British Isles to emigrate there.tlg86 said:
So, annoyingly, the Americans are right to say soccer. The word football belongs to none of the sports that claim to be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Ha, I didn't until I Googled it.tlg86 said:
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.
Aposite!0 -
Fixed it for you.Nigelb said:
Many of them aren’t wrong at all - particularly as US English is more widely taught and spoken in the world than real English...FrancisUrquhart said:
There are quite a few things that Americans say / spell that we mock, but aren't as wrong as most people think. Often it comes back to the what were the norms when many left the British Isles to emigrate there.tlg86 said:
So, annoyingly, the Americans are right to say soccer. The word football belongs to none of the sports that claim to be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Ha, I didn't until I Googled it.tlg86 said:
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.
Aposite!0 -
LOL.ydoethur said:
Fixed it for you.Nigelb said:
Many of them aren’t wrong at all - particularly as US English is more widely taught and spoken in the world than real English...FrancisUrquhart said:
There are quite a few things that Americans say / spell that we mock, but aren't as wrong as most people think. Often it comes back to the what were the norms when many left the British Isles to emigrate there.tlg86 said:
So, annoyingly, the Americans are right to say soccer. The word football belongs to none of the sports that claim to be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Ha, I didn't until I Googled it.tlg86 said:
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.
Aposite!
0 -
I was thinking more of this.tlg86 said:
So, annoyingly, the Americans are right to say soccer. The word football belongs to none of the sports that claim to be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Ha, I didn't until I Googled it.tlg86 said:
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.
Aposite!
'THE WORD "soccer" is simply a diminutive of association, as in As-soc-iation Football, with "er" added. It was, apparently, all the rage among public schoolboys in the mid to late nineteenth century to bung "er" on the end of a butchered word. '0 -
Tunisia are 13.5 to win with Betfair Exchange. Does anyone think that's value?
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/football/market/1.1375973590 -
Indeed, I think that would be healthier for the whole country and should be the norm whoever is Prime Minister. Prime Ministers need to choose the right people to think and lead their respective departments not try to be across everything themselves.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I would be delighted if TM let her cabinet members lead on issues generally
At the last GE the only two Conservatives who had any reasonable level of public profile were Theresa May and Amber Rudd - and we only saw Rudd because of May's refusal to debate.
0 -
VAR is as useful as tits on a fish0
-
That was the worst back-pass I've ever seen.0
-
Lee Dixon says hello...AndyJS said:That was the worst back-pass I've ever seen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpSo1aciPqU0 -
How many times does Harry Kane have to be wrestled to the ground before a penalty is awarded?0
-
Are you suggesting that the system sucks?TheScreamingEagles said:VAR is as useful as tits on a fish
0 -
Some choice wrestling moves being performed on Kane0
-
I didn't realise that it was posh boys who came up with this and, presumably, rugger.Theuniondivvie said:
I was thinking more of this.tlg86 said:
So, annoyingly, the Americans are right to say soccer. The word football belongs to none of the sports that claim to be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Ha, I didn't until I Googled it.tlg86 said:
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.
Aposite!
'THE WORD "soccer" is simply a diminutive of association, as in As-soc-iation Football, with "er" added. It was, apparently, all the rage among public schoolboys in the mid to late nineteenth century to bung "er" on the end of a butchered word. '0 -
So you'd support making alcohol illegal?Cyclefree said:
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea. And, yes, I know we do it with alcohol. But just because we do does not mean that we should double up. After all, heroin and cocaine were (may well still be) used for pain relief (the Brompton cocktail) but that doesn’t mean we should decriminalise those.0 -
Each team should have one appeal available to the TV replays, like cricket. You lose it if it turns out to have been unjustified.ydoethur said:
Are you suggesting that the system sucks?TheScreamingEagles said:VAR is as useful as tits on a fish
0 -
Get Rashford on.0
-
I misread that at first. I thought you said, 'You lose if it turns out to have been unjustified,' which seemed excessive.AndyJS said:
Each team should have one appeal available to the TV replays, like cricket. You lose it if it turns out to have been unjustified.ydoethur said:
Are you suggesting that the system sucks?TheScreamingEagles said:VAR is as useful as tits on a fish
0 -
C.f. “rugger” (for rugby), “Twickers” (Twickenham), “Singers” (Singapore), the naval game of “uckers“. In fact quite a lot of naval slang does the -er or -ers thing: icers [cold, superlative "harry icers"], redders [hot], roughers, shippers, four [or nine] O’clockers, sippers, gulpers, homeward bounders, limers, snorkers.tlg86 said:
I didn't realise that it was posh boys who came up with this and, presumably, rugger.Theuniondivvie said:
I was thinking more of this.tlg86 said:
So, annoyingly, the Americans are right to say soccer. The word football belongs to none of the sports that claim to be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Ha, I didn't until I Googled it.tlg86 said:
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.
Aposite!
'THE WORD "soccer" is simply a diminutive of association, as in As-soc-iation Football, with "er" added. It was, apparently, all the rage among public schoolboys in the mid to late nineteenth century to bung "er" on the end of a butchered word. '0 -
Or cheeseburgers or fizzy drinks, for that matter. Once you accept it's OK to police what people do or don't do with their bodies, it's just a matter of where you draw the arbitrary line.Stereotomy said:
So you'd support making alcohol illegal?Cyclefree said:
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea. And, yes, I know we do it with alcohol. But just because we do does not mean that we should double up. After all, heroin and cocaine were (may well still be) used for pain relief (the Brompton cocktail) but that doesn’t mean we should decriminalise those.0 -
It'd create a big majority for a hardish Brexit too which is clearly what most of England wants.Alistair said:AlastairMeeks said:
I realise you struggle with dates more recent than 1690 but that poll was taken before the events of last Wednesday, so quite how you tie it into my thread header is beyond me.TGOHF said:LOLZA - another chance to laugh at yesterday's thread header.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1008751906842464256
A staunch No voter of my acquaintance just had a conversion moment post Wednesday and now believes, with regret, that Independence may be the only answer.AlastairMeeks said:
I realise you struggle with dates more recent than 1690 but that poll was taken before the events of last Wednesday, so quite how you tie it into my thread header is beyond me.TGOHF said:LOLZA - another chance to laugh at yesterday's thread header.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1008751906842464256
Keep Corbyn out too.0 -
We could definitely ban pineapple on pizza to advantage.kyf_100 said:
Or cheeseburgers or fizzy drinks, for that matter. Once you accept it's OK to police what people do or don't do with their bodies, it's just a matter of where you draw the arbitrary line.Stereotomy said:
So you'd support making alcohol illegal?Cyclefree said:
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea. And, yes, I know we do it with alcohol. But just because we do does not mean that we should double up. After all, heroin and cocaine were (may well still be) used for pain relief (the Brompton cocktail) but that doesn’t mean we should decriminalise those.0 -
This ref is as dodgy as they come.0
-
Footer for the real poshos, eg JRM and Seumas Milne.tlg86 said:
I didn't realise that it was posh boys who came up with this and, presumably, rugger.Theuniondivvie said:
I was thinking more of this.tlg86 said:
So, annoyingly, the Americans are right to say soccer. The word football belongs to none of the sports that claim to be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Ha, I didn't until I Googled it.tlg86 said:
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.
Aposite!
'THE WORD "soccer" is simply a diminutive of association, as in As-soc-iation Football, with "er" added. It was, apparently, all the rage among public schoolboys in the mid to late nineteenth century to bung "er" on the end of a butchered word. '0 -
Well I am in favour of drawing that line somewhere. But I'd at least try to make it a straight line rather than one that has to go through the contortions required to make alcohol and tobacco legal and cannabis, ecstacy and LSD illegalkyf_100 said:
Or cheeseburgers or fizzy drinks, for that matter. Once you accept it's OK to police what people do or don't do with their bodies, it's just a matter of where you draw the arbitrary line.Stereotomy said:
So you'd support making alcohol illegal?Cyclefree said:
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea. And, yes, I know we do it with alcohol. But just because we do does not mean that we should double up. After all, heroin and cocaine were (may well still be) used for pain relief (the Brompton cocktail) but that doesn’t mean we should decriminalise those.0 -
Also: Honkers (Hong Kong), neaters, planters, up homers (some quite fun ones on that page, I like "Yodel in a bucket"/"Pavement pizza"/"dockyard omelette"/"technicolor yawn")MyBurningEars said:
C.f. “rugger” (for rugby), “Twickers” (Twickenham), “Singers” (Singapore), the naval game of “uckers“. In fact quite a lot of naval slang does the -er or -ers thing: icers [cold, superlative "harry icers"], redders [hot], roughers, shippers, four [or nine] O’clockers, sippers, gulpers, homeward bounders, limers, snorkers.tlg86 said:
I didn't realise that it was posh boys who came up with this and, presumably, rugger.Theuniondivvie said:
I was thinking more of this.tlg86 said:
So, annoyingly, the Americans are right to say soccer. The word football belongs to none of the sports that claim to be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Ha, I didn't until I Googled it.tlg86 said:
Without Googling it, I assume you know the origin of the word soccer?Theuniondivvie said:
Catnip for Tim.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh dear, Bill Shankly was born in Scotland
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1008759999688998917
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/1008770019705094144
At least Jez/the posh boys didn't call it soccer.
Aposite!
'THE WORD "soccer" is simply a diminutive of association, as in As-soc-iation Football, with "er" added. It was, apparently, all the rage among public schoolboys in the mid to late nineteenth century to bung "er" on the end of a butchered word. '0 -
May will fall if she loses a parliamentary vote. But the new leader is likely to be a Brexiteer. Good. Grieve is "unprintable" words.williamglenn said:
One of Tory rebels is my MP. Lot of phone calls to Chairman about de-selecting him. Remainer MPs will be sacrificed on Tory and Labour side.0 -
I have no problem with cabinet ministers taking the initiative and implementing/developing policy in their own departments, that’s what happened under Cameron too, but I do expect it to be done within an overarching framework with strong leadership on the Government’s political priorities.Torby_Fennel said:
I'm certainly no fan of this government but it seems to me that cabinet ministers leading on the policies and issues of their respective departments is a pretty good thing - regardless of whether or not I agree with the actual policies. And cabinet level is hardly "bottom up".Casino_Royale said:
This Government is being led from the bottom up.
Gove on the environment, Hunt on Health, and Javid now on migration and law & order.
Theresa May is providing no leadership whatsoever.
Theresa May may as well be a fly on the wall.0 -
Did I get it the wrong way round? You know what I mean anyway.ydoethur said:
I misread that at first. I thought you said, 'You lose if it turns out to have been unjustified,' which seemed excessive.AndyJS said:
Each team should have one appeal available to the TV replays, like cricket. You lose it if it turns out to have been unjustified.ydoethur said:
Are you suggesting that the system sucks?TheScreamingEagles said:VAR is as useful as tits on a fish
0 -
You Gareth?FrancisUrquhart said:Get Rashford on.
0 -
I’m not happy about it, but I note the document is full of grammar and spelling mistakes.AlastairMeeks said:I doubt this is going to go down well with the scorched earth school of Brexit:
https://twitter.com/nick_gutteridge/status/1008688962486132737?s=21
I suspect it’s being pushed out publicly for some anchoring and to shape the negotiating agenda.0 -
Given the concern there rightly is about mental health problems in the young I am not as sanguine as you about legalising a substance where there is credible evidence linking it to very serious - and lifelong - mental illnesses when it is consumed by the young.kyf_100 said:
We try to rationalise it with arguments about reducing harm or reducing crime, the medicinal benefits or the old "prohibition doesn't work" line when what it all comes down to is one simple thing: my body, my choice.Cyclefree said:
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea. And, yes, I know we do it with alcohol. But just because we do does not mean that we should double up. After all, heroin and cocaine were (may well still be) used for pain relief (the Brompton cocktail) but that doesn’t mean we should decriminalise those.
If tomorrow I decided to commit suicide, take heroin, etc, so be it. It's when I decide to off myself by driving my car in front of a train, or snatch an old lady's purse to buy heroin that it becomes society's problem. It should never be the government's role to police what we can and can't do with our own bodies.
Saying that the government should not police what we do with our own bodies is a slogan. Not an argument. We strongly discourage smoking because of its long term harm. Why then introduce another substance which causes just as much harm?
The drug laws are a mess and inconsistent. A proper study is needed. But the effect of drugs on the young brain are pretty harmful - not just some youth being a bit spaced out at a party. And that harm needs to be taken pretty seriously, not dismissed or minimised just because decriminalisation is now the coming fashionable option.0 -
May will only fall if the letters go in and she loses the confidence vote. If there's one thing she's been most consistent on, it's her willingness to sacrifice anything and everything to stay in number 10 for one more dayDeano said:
May will fall if she loses a parliamentary vote. But the new leader is likely to be a Brexiteer. Good. Grieve is "unprintable" words.williamglenn said:
One of Tory rebels is my MP. Lot of phone calls to Chairman about de-selecting him. Remainer MPs will be sacrificed on Tory and Labour side.0 -
No. As my post made clear.Stereotomy said:
So you'd support making alcohol illegal?Cyclefree said:
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea. And, yes, I know we do it with alcohol. But just because we do does not mean that we should double up. After all, heroin and cocaine were (may well still be) used for pain relief (the Brompton cocktail) but that doesn’t mean we should decriminalise those.0 -
Can't see England beating Belgium with this sort of performance.0
-
Did it? I thought you were saying we shouldn't double up on the mistake of making alcohol legal? So why -do- you think one should be legal and not the other?Cyclefree said:
No. As my post made clear.Stereotomy said:
So you'd support making alcohol illegal?Cyclefree said:
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea. And, yes, I know we do it with alcohol. But just because we do does not mean that we should double up. After all, heroin and cocaine were (may well still be) used for pain relief (the Brompton cocktail) but that doesn’t mean we should decriminalise those.0 -
Answer to what?Alistair said:AlastairMeeks said:
I realise you struggle with dates more recent than 1690 but that poll was taken before the events of last Wednesday, so quite how you tie it into my thread header is beyond me.TGOHF said:LOLZA - another chance to laugh at yesterday's thread header.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1008751906842464256
A staunch No voter of my acquaintance just had a conversion moment post Wednesday and now believes, with regret, that Independence may be the only answer.AlastairMeeks said:
I realise you struggle with dates more recent than 1690 but that poll was taken before the events of last Wednesday, so quite how you tie it into my thread header is beyond me.TGOHF said:LOLZA - another chance to laugh at yesterday's thread header.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/10087519068424642560 -
I see my England as Carthage analogy from this morning is proving to be be true.0
-
"Research over the last 10 years has suggested that it can have serious consequences for people, such as the development of an enduring psychotic illness, particularly in those who are genetically vulnerable."Cyclefree said:
Given the concern there rightly is about mental health problems in the young I am not as sanguine as you about legalising a substance where there is credible evidence linking it to very serious - and lifelong - mental illnesses when it is consumed by the young.kyf_100 said:
If tomorrow I decided to commit suicide, take heroin, etc, so be it. It's when I decide to off myself by driving my car in front of a train, or snatch an old lady's purse to buy heroin that it becomes society's problem. It should never be the government's role to police what we can and can't do with our own bodies.Cyclefree said:
Really David: that is just too trite. There is evidence that cannabis seriously harms the brains of developing adolescents and can be linked to mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.DavidL said:
There's a lot of truth in that maxim. But in this case the correct answer is that the law is wrong and this is just a particularly vivid example of it. Legalise marijuana completely and the issue of medicinal use exemption no longer arises. We can then do proper trials as to whether it is really helping people with this condition, MS, chronic pain, etc etc and decide when, if ever, it should be available on the NHS.JosiasJessop said:I cannot help but think of hard cases make bad law.
One sick boy apparently benefiting from cannabis oil proves nothing and is certainly no basis for decriminalisation.
By all means study whether cannabis may have some medicinal use and, if proven, use it. But permitting a potentially very harmful substance to be sold to the young without controls is a bloody daft idea. And, yes, I know we do it with alcohol. But just because we do does not mean that we should double up. After all, heroin and cocaine were (may well still be) used for pain relief (the Brompton cocktail) but that doesn’t mean we should decriminalise those.
The drug laws are a mess and inconsistent. A proper study is needed. But the effect of drugs on the young brain are pretty harmful - not just some youth being a bit spaced out at a party. And that harm needs to be taken pretty seriously, not dismissed or minimised just because decriminalisation is now the coming fashionable option.
https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mentalhealthinfo/problems/alcoholanddrugs/cannabisandmentalhealth.aspx0 -
Why is Ashley Young taking free kicks. Is that the best the team hasTheScreamingEagles said:I see my England as Carthage analogy from this morning is proving to be be true.
0 -
Has Theresa May been coaching the England team?0
-
Captain Kane has gone missing this half.0
-
He's overrated.tlg86 said:Captain Kane has gone missing this half.
0
This discussion has been closed.