Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A bet that seems like a guaranteed 14% return in just over 4 m

13

Comments

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,192
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    matt said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    Indeed. Sadly HMS Queen Elizabeth is in the mid-Atlantic at the moment, en route to the US to pick up her F35s, couldn't be further away from India.

    She's not going to "pick up" her F35s. They are going to conduct landing trials using US aircraft from the JOT at Pax River. These trials have to be done with "orange wired" instrumented a/c. The three British instrumented a/c are at Edwards AFB in California.

    The Indian Air Force has about 170 Mi-8/17s. If the RAF moved heaven and earth they could probably position 3-4 Pumas or Chinooks. Sorting out fuel, flight plans, security, crew accomodation, mx support would be the job of some beleaguered Indian Flt Lt who is already having the busiest week of their life. The very minor increase in RW lift that the UK would provide isn't worth the administrative and operational headaches they would bring with them.

    A US CVW/CVN would be a different matter as they would bring a lot more capacity and would self-sufficient.

    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    I know you have doubts of the RAF's abilities, but we should still offer to move heaven and earth for the Indians if they need it in the face of a humanitarian disaster.
    Why should we offer at all? Blah blah, global Britain. Like the Indian government gives a fuck.
    We should offer because we are humans, and other humans need help at the moment.
    The RAF currently have 60 chinooks, 14 of which are practically brand new and can probably fly and everything. I am sure that they could be of considerable assistance.
    Wow, not just aircraft, but *serviceable* aircraft. :)

    It's worrying how many people think that we shouldn't offer every resource we have available in the face of a massive humanitarian disaster. Every country has a duty to help others in these situations.
    I agree. And since we have by far the largest chinook fleet in Europe we should be better positioned to do so than most.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    matt said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    Indeed. Sadly HMS Queen Elizabeth is in the mid-Atlantic at the moment, en route to the US to pick up her F35s, couldn't be further away from India.

    She's not going to "pick up" her F35s. They are going to conduct landing trials using US aircraft from the JOT at Pax River. These trials have to be done with "orange wired" instrumented a/c. The three British instrumented a/c are at Edwards AFB in California.

    The Indian Air Force has about 170 Mi-8/17s. If the RAF moved heaven and earth they could probably position 3-4 Pumas or Chinooks. Sorting out fuel, flight plans, security, crew accomodation, mx support would be the job of some beleaguered Indian Flt Lt who is already having the busiest week of their life. The very minor increase in RW lift that the UK would provide isn't worth the administrative and operational headaches they would bring with them.

    A US CVW/CVN would be a different matter as they would bring a lot more capacity and would self-sufficient.

    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    I know you have doubts of the RAF's abilities, but we should still offer to move heaven and earth for the Indians if they need it in the face of a humanitarian disaster.
    Why should we offer at all? Blah blah, global Britain. Like the Indian government gives a fuck.
    We should offer because we are humans, and other humans need help at the moment.
    The RAF currently have 60 chinooks, 14 of which are practically brand new and can probably fly and everything. I am sure that they could be of considerable assistance.
    We have no way to transport them to India I bet, we would need US to send us a carrier to get them there, by Christmas anything doable will be done.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 57,323
    Mr. HYUFD, point of order: food banks began under Blair, during the economic boom.

    Their number has increased through boom, financial crisis, recession, recovery through to our current situation.

    Mr. Recidivist, Blair was leader for over a decade. Remind me how many protests occurred by Jews worried about rising anti-Semitism?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389
    edited August 2018
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Isn't the bet for a contest, rather than a successful one? In which case, the fact that Jezza is likely to win is beside the point.

    I think a further challenge (perhaps over the #peoplesvote) is far more likely than SDP2.

    If they'd lose why would they challenge? Last time they might have thought they could win at least.

    I think he'll back a second referendum anyway. Another way he'll compromise a bit, whichyet further undermines his opponents who then don't leave.
    Corbyn has made abundantly clear he backs Brexit and opposes a second vote.

    If he concedes that he gives huge momentum to the Umunna faction in Labour
    Except we know the membership are on his side and yet more inclined to a second abour do not have to risk a no deal by not supporting the government's crappy deal - the people will decide.
    Firstly the majority of the marginal seats the Tories hold Corbyn needs to become PM voted Leave and he knows that.Plus Corbyn is reluctant to back the single market which would undermine his nationalisation plans.

    Second if Labour backs a "People's Vote' not impossible May could call her own 'People's Vote' next autumn after Brexit, just the only choice being back the Chequers Deal terms Brexit or No Deal Brexit.

    As Leave won the referendum she could argue there does not need to be another Remain option again
    If the Tories divide, formally or otherwise, on the issue, Corbyn can win a lot of places that he didn't win before.

    Better he is in the EU and in government and able to do something than out of the EU and out of government. It is incredibly naiive to think he actually is as rigid as people pretend - he is not as flexible as most leaders, but he has learned. Furthermore, by going with a second referendum we might indeed still leave, so it doesn't prevent him from doing things.

    Yes there remain significant issues with how a second referendum would end up being called and what options would be on it.
    As I said he needs to win enough seats at the next general election to become PM to implement a 'People's Vote' anyway even if Labour voted for one at conference and he backed one.

    As I also said May might then call the bluff of 'People's Vote' campaigners and resolve the matter anyway by calling a referendum next autumn if Brexit achieved with a Deal with the EU on roughly Chequers Deal terms asking voters whether they back the Deal or want to go to No Deal Brexit instead. That would resolve Tory divisions and she could also say given Remain lost in the last referendum 2 Leave options only would still respect democracy
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480

    HYUFD said:



    A Corbyn Govt would use the UK as a sandpit for a full blown 21st Century experiment in neo-marxist economics.

    Would it? That wasn't what the last manifesto said. And nothing they have said has hinted at anything like that. What makes you think it will be the case?
    Of course it wouldn't. Yes I have seen some Kali Ma cultists sat in the pub waving Beetroots shouting "Fuck Capitalism" for the cameras. But when it comes down to it they want people in well paid secure jobs with right - and that means profitable businesses. Which means capitalism. What you would see under Labour is an end to the kind of predatory capitalism which ultimately derails itself - the likes of Carillion - and by building homes that people can afford to live in we stop so much of people's disposable incomes being hoovered up in unsecure rent.

    I don't agree with Tory posters on here and they don't agree with me - thats politics. But my point about McVey and the DWP stands - the Tory ministers know their policies are literally killing people. Literally forcing people into abject poverty supported by food banks. At best they are ignoring their own evidence. At worst they don't care. A party which is "fuck business" as well as doing more than Thatcher ever did to fuck people needs to removed.

    What will upset the Corbyn cultists is when the Corbyn government starts making compromises of "principles". Life isn't the start black and white they think it is, its all shades and too often the options are how much you lose not whether you win or not. They don't understand that. Yet for all that he gets attacked McDonnell does - he ran a tight ship at the GLC...
    Unemployment is half the level Labour left under the Tories
    One of the more astonishing changes in UK politics is that "Tory unemployment!!" is no longer a weapon in Labour's armoury.
    they are all on zero hours contracts now, new names same results.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,192
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    matt said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    Indeed. Sadly HMS Queen Elizabeth is in the mid-Atlantic at the moment, en route to the US to pick up her F35s, couldn't be further away from India.

    She's not going to "pick up" her F35s. They are going to conduct landing trials using US aircraft from the JOT at Pax River. These trials have to be done with "orange wired" instrumented a/c. The three British instrumented a/c are at Edwards AFB in California.

    The Indian Air Force has about 170 Mi-8/17s. If the RAF moved heaven and earth they could probably position 3-4 Pumas or Chinooks. Sorting out fuel, flight plans, security, crew accomodation, mx support would be the job of some beleaguered Indian Flt Lt who is already having the busiest week of their life. The very minor increase in RW lift that the UK would provide isn't worth the administrative and operational headaches they would bring with them.

    A US CVW/CVN would be a different matter as they would bring a lot more capacity and would self-sufficient.

    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    I know you have doubts of the RAF's abilities, but we should still offer to move heaven and earth for the Indians if they need it in the face of a humanitarian disaster.
    Why should we offer at all? Blah blah, global Britain. Like the Indian government gives a fuck.
    We should offer because we are humans, and other humans need help at the moment.
    The RAF currently have 60 chinooks, 14 of which are practically brand new and can probably fly and everything. I am sure that they could be of considerable assistance.
    We have no way to transport them to India I bet, we would need US to send us a carrier to get them there, by Christmas anything doable will be done.
    Malcolm, I may be wrong about this but can't they fly?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 20,853

    Nigelb said:

    Labour are in something of a bind.
    As this Politico article argues, on the one hand, there is a pretty strong belief on the socialist left that Corbyn is essential to their electoral appeal, and prospects of ever forming a government (and that is probably correct); on the other, Corbyn is extremely unlikely to resile from positions he he sees as justified by his personal beliefs.
    https://www.politico.eu/article/jeremy-corbyn-anti-semitism-labour-wont-compromise-no-matter-the-cost/

    His leadership is likely safe for quite some time. Whether his rather strange moral certainties will convince enough people for him ever to be prime minister is another matter.

    Jeremy Corbyn as the Mrs Thatcher de nos jours? It is a long time since we've had a prime minister with strange moral certainties.
    Ahem ..... you heard it from me first some 7 months ago - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/31/jeremy-corbyn-the-new-maggie-thatcher/
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    A Corbyn Govt would use the UK as a sandpit for a full blown 21st Century experiment in neo-marxist economics.

    Would it? That wasn't what the last manifesto said. And nothing they have said has hinted at anything like that. What makes you think it will be the case?
    Of course it wouldn't. Yes I have seen some Kali Ma cultists sat in the pub waving Beetroots shouting "Fuck Capitalism" for the cameras. But when it comes down to it they want people in well paid secure jobs with right - and that means profitable businesses. Which means capitalism. What you would see under Labour is an end to the kind of predatory capitalism which ultimately derails itself - the likes of Carillion - and by building homes that people can afford to live in we stop so much of people's disposable incomes being hoovered up in unsecure rent.

    I don't agree with Tory posters on here and they don't agree with me - thats politics. But my point about McVey and the DWP stands - the Tory ministers know their policies are literally killing people. Literally forcing people into abject poverty supported by food banks. At best they are ignoring their own evidence. At worst they don't care. A party which is "fuck business" as well as doing more than Thatcher ever did to fuck people needs to removed.

    What will upset the Corbyn cultists is when the Corbyn government starts making compromises of "principles". Life isn't the start black and white they think it is, its all shades and too often the options are how much you lose not whether you win or not. They don't understand that. Yet for all that he gets attacked McDonnell does - he ran a tight ship at the GLC...
    Unemployment is half the level Labour left under the Tories
    One of the more astonishing changes in UK politics is that "Tory unemployment!!" is no longer a weapon in Labour's armoury.
    No hence they cry 'food banks' etc which first arose under Brown
    multiplied hundreds of times by the Tories policies , Tories take something for the few and make sure it is needed for the many, whilst lining their own pockets.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 57,323
    Mr. G, worth noting that most of those on zero hours contracts are content with them.

    Zero hours is used as shorthand for evil wickedness, and there are some abuses, but mostly they're a good thing.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,893
    edited August 2018
    Sandpit said:


    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    I know you have doubts of the RAF's abilities, but we should still offer to move heaven and earth for the Indians if they need it in the face of a humanitarian disaster.

    I don't doubt the RAF's capabilities; it's that the very marginal increase in capacity isn't worth the disproportionate increase in hassle to the Indians.

    Orange wired (I don't know if the wiring is still literally orange) or IPAs are productions standard aircraft that have additional instruments, sensors and data capture equipment to measure and record things like g-loading and structural flex. They will be testing (among other things) how the a/c will react to a deck landing on the QEC.

    HMS QE is designated for a Pacific cruise in 2021 as its first operational deployment. The second operational squadron 809 "NAS" (irony quotes because it's going to be a Naval Air Squadron in name only) won't be operational until 2022 so it's of limited use until then as we're totally dependent on the junior bomber squadron.

    It's interesting that none of the Harrier nameplates (899,800 and the best one 801) are being revived for F-35.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389
    edited August 2018
    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    A very powerful argument against No Deal Brexit.
    If Tories are sanguine about "f*** business", then why shouldn't the rest of us say the same about other economic policies?

    Tories are not sanguine over business. That comment lost Boris to me. This conservative is 100% pro business and also totally anti no deal
    Which leaves the Tories choosing between No Deal Brexit, Chequers minus, A50 suspension or Limbo Transition to nowhere Brexit.
    The Tory reputation for economic competence is trashed.
    You say that from a remainer point of view.
    The choice on what happens will be made by all mps when they vote on the deal or no deal
    The conservative government have the responsiblity of dealing with Brexit and are bound to come under fire from the two extremes - hard Brexit or remain
    Or the choice will be via a #peoplesvote :)

    Brexit will be an albatross around the Tory neck. Chequers is unpopular, and only a starting point as far as the EU is concerned. Other MPs are not going to vote for it.

    Personally, I think Transition Limbo BINO Brexit is the most likely place that we will be next year.
    Yet most polling shows Chequers Deal plus No Deal still ahead of Remain
    Doesn`t it also show that Remain plus Chequers is way ahead of No Deal?
    True (albeit No Deal still gets around 40%). Which is why May might be tempted by a Chequers Deal v No Deal Brexit referendum next autumn
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    Anyway todays big story is the terrble floods in India

    6,000 miles of roads washed away and despair abounds

    I would like to think TM will offer help to India paid out of our foreign aid budget.

    Surely that is what it is for

    It's exactly what a foreign aid budget is there for. We should be offering every available military plane and helicopter, alongside specialist men and equipment.
    The Indian air force ME and RW fleets are 4-5x larger than the RAF. Any token effort the UK made would just complicate and hinder due to the effort taken to integrate them into the operation.

    Also, it would just be an excuse for a great number of senior officers to get on the curries and Kingfisher in New Delhi.

    Also, it's "people" not "men". It's 2018.
    Surely they need every single helo they can get their hands on?

    From reports it sounds like there could be *millions* of people needing to be physically evacuated.
    Its the sort of thing that HMS Ocean would have been very useful for but she was decommissioned earlier this year.
    Maybe send our 200 Admirals over , see if they are good for anything.
    I think the Indians have enough problems without that kind of help Malcolm.
    They will surely need people who can drive boats David.
    What's with the toucan Malcolm?
    Was just fed up seeing Ruthie riding that Buffalo and when I went to my pictures I saw that lovely Toucan picture and thought why not brighten up the tedium of brexit and antisemitism posts. Pretty nice I thought and very colourful.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 57,323
    Mr. HYUFD, would that pass in the Commons?

    Can't see why May would want it. Too much time, effort, etc.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,609
    edited August 2018

    The Home Office is sending police business the way of Amazon, so that's more money the Chancellor will never see again. Police systems are being moved to the cloud, specifically AWS.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/08/17/police_it_move_aws_home_office_contract/

    Can anyone imagine even the smallest American police force using a foreign company like this? The government needs to get behind British business like the American government does for its own, to give them a fighting chance of becoming competitive in a world market (and in the meantime employing British staff who spend their money in British shops, and who unlike Amazon, pay British taxes.

    US policing is done locally and isn't famous for it's technical competence. I doubt most of them have the faintest idea which countries their data is stored in.

    And then there was the case where the Office of Personnel Management, which is responsible for maintaining and reviewing detailed personal records for everyone who needs security clearance, outsourced their database management to a guy in Argentina, who passed it on to somebody in China.
    https://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-agency-plundered-by-chinese-hackers-made-one-of-the-dumbest-security-moves-possible-2015-6
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,192
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    Anyway todays big story is the terrble floods in India

    6,000 miles of roads washed away and despair abounds

    I would like to think TM will offer help to India paid out of our foreign aid budget.

    Surely that is what it is for

    It's exactly what a foreign aid budget is there for. We should be offering every available military plane and helicopter, alongside specialist men and equipment.
    The Indian air force ME and RW fleets are 4-5x larger than the RAF. Any token effort the UK made would just complicate and hinder due to the effort taken to integrate them into the operation.

    Also, it would just be an excuse for a great number of senior officers to get on the curries and Kingfisher in New Delhi.

    Also, it's "people" not "men". It's 2018.
    Surely they need every single helo they can get their hands on?

    From reports it sounds like there could be *millions* of people needing to be physically evacuated.
    Its the sort of thing that HMS Ocean would have been very useful for but she was decommissioned earlier this year.
    Maybe send our 200 Admirals over , see if they are good for anything.
    I think the Indians have enough problems without that kind of help Malcolm.
    They will surely need people who can drive boats David.
    What's with the toucan Malcolm?
    Was just fed up seeing Ruthie riding that Buffalo and when I went to my pictures I saw that lovely Toucan picture and thought why not brighten up the tedium of brexit and antisemitism posts. Pretty nice I thought and very colourful.
    It's certainly that. And clearly an SNP supporter to boot!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    Mr. HYUFD, point of order: food banks began under Blair, during the economic boom.

    Their number has increased through boom, financial crisis, recession, recovery through to our current situation.

    Mr. Recidivist, Blair was leader for over a decade. Remind me how many protests occurred by Jews worried about rising anti-Semitism?

    Points taken
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,523
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    A Corbyn Govt would use the UK as a sandpit for a full blown 21st Century experiment in neo-marxist economics.

    Would it? That wasn't what the last manifesto said. And nothing they have said has hinted at anything like that. What makes you think it will be the case?
    Of course it wouldn't. Yes I have seen some Kali Ma cultists sat in the pub waving Beetroots shouting "Fuck Capitalism" for the cameras. But when it comes down to it they want people in well paid secure jobs with right - and that means profitable businesses. Which means capitalism. What you would see under Labour is an end to the kind of predatory capitalism which ultimately derails itself - the likes of Carillion - and by building homes that people can afford to live in we stop so much of people's disposable incomes being hoovered up in unsecure rent.

    I don't agree with Tory posters on here and they don't agree with me - thats politics. But my point about McVey and the DWP stands - the Tory ministers know their policies are literally killing people. Literally forcing people into abject poverty supported by food banks. At best they are ignoring their own evidence. At worst they don't care. A party which is "fuck business" as well as doing more than Thatcher ever did to fuck people needs to removed.

    What will upset the Corbyn cultists is when the Corbyn government starts making compromises of "principles". Life isn't the start black and white they think it is, its all shades and too often the options are how much you lose not whether you win or not. They don't understand that. Yet for all that he gets attacked McDonnell does - he ran a tight ship at the GLC...
    Unemployment is half the level Labour left under the Tories
    One of the more astonishing changes in UK politics is that "Tory unemployment!!" is no longer a weapon in Labour's armoury.
    No hence they cry 'food banks' etc which first arose under Brown
    Clearly, the people who cry "food banks!!" would rather the poor starve - and that the food gets taken to the landfill. Heartless bastards.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    A Corbyn Govt would use the UK as a sandpit for a full blown 21st Century experiment in neo-marxist economics.

    Would it? That wasn't what the last manifesto said. And nothing they have said has hinted at anything like that. What makes you think it will be the case?
    Of course it wouldn't. Yes I have seen some Kali Ma cultists sat in the pub waving Beetroots shouting "Fuck Capitalism" for the cameras. But when it comes down to it they want people in well paid secure jobs with right - and that means profitable businesses. Which means capitalism. What you would see under Labour is an end to the kind of predatory capitalism which ultimately derails itself - the likes of Carillion - and by building homes that people can afford to live in we stop so much of people's disposable incomes being hoovered up in unsecure rent.

    I don't agree with Tory posters on here and they don't agree with me - thats politics. But my point about McVey and the DWP stands - the Tory ministers know their policies are literally killing people. Literally forcing people into abject poverty supported by food banks. At best they are ignoring their own evidence. At worst they don't care. A party which is "fuck business" as well as doing more than Thatcher ever did to fuck people needs to removed.

    What will upset the Corbyn cultists is when the Corbyn government starts making compromises of "principles". Life isn't the start black and white they think it is, its all shades and too often the options are how much you lose not whether you win or not. They don't understand that. Yet for all that he gets attacked McDonnell does - he ran a tight ship at the GLC...
    Unemployment is half the level Labour left under the Tories
    One of the more astonishing changes in UK politics is that "Tory unemployment!!" is no longer a weapon in Labour's armoury.
    No hence they cry 'food banks' etc which first arose under Brown
    multiplied hundreds of times by the Tories policies , Tories take something for the few and make sure it is needed for the many, whilst lining their own pockets.
    Unemployment is half the level Labour left
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,192
    BTW, today is World Humanitarian Day. The list of things we have managed to do around the world in a lot more difficult areas than India is quite impressive: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/international-development-secretary-thanks-british-aid-workers
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    A Corbyn Govt would use the UK as a sandpit for a full blown 21st Century experiment in neo-marxist economics.

    Would it? That wasn't what the last manifesto said. And nothing they have said has hinted at anything like that. What makes you think it will be the case?
    Of course it wouldn't. Yes I have seen some Kali Ma cultists sat in the pub waving Beetroots shouting "Fuck Capitalism" for the cameras. But when it comes down to it they want people in well paid secure jobs with right - and that means profitable businesses. Which means capitalism. What you would see under Labour is an end to the kind of predatory capitalism which ultimately derails itself - the likes of Carillion - and by building homes that people can afford to live in we stop so much of people's disposable incomes being hoovered up in unsecure rent.

    I don't agree with Tory posters on here and they don't agree with me - thats politics. But my point about McVey and the DWP stands - the Tory ministers know their policies are literally killing people. Literally forcing people into abject poverty supported by food banks. At best they are ignoring their own evidence. At worst they don't care. A party which is "fuck business" as well as doing more than Thatcher ever did to fuck people needs to removed.

    What will upset the Corbyn cultists is when the Corbyn government starts making compromises of "principles". Life isn't the start black and white they think it is, its all shades and too often the options are how much you lose not whether you win or not. They don't understand that. Yet for all that he gets attacked McDonnell does - he ran a tight ship at the GLC...
    Unemployment is half the level Labour left under the Tories
    One of the more astonishing changes in UK politics is that "Tory unemployment!!" is no longer a weapon in Labour's armoury.
    No hence they cry 'food banks' etc which first arose under Brown
    Clearly, the people who cry "food banks!!" would rather the poor starve - and that the food gets taken to the landfill. Heartless bastards.
    Indeed. Food Banks are a good thing as whether the economy is growing or declining there will always be some in hard times
  • twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 1,045
    edited August 2018
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    matt said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    Indeed. Sadly HMS Queen Elizabeth is in the mid-Atlantic at the moment, en route to the US to pick up her F35s, couldn't be further away from India.



    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    r.
    Why should we offer at all? Blah blah, global Britain. Like the Indian government gives a fuck.
    We should offer because we are humans, and other humans need help at the moment.
    The RAF currently have 60 chinooks, 14 of which are practically brand new and can probably fly and everything. I am sure that they could be of considerable assistance.
    Wow, not just aircraft, but *serviceable* aircraft. :)

    It's worrying how many people think that we shouldn't offer every resource we have available in the face of a massive humanitarian disaster. Every country has a duty to help others in these situations.
    Years ago, I was involved with UKISAR, the UK Fire Service team for disaster relief, and trained in search and rescue, breaching, breaking, shoring and all aspects of technical rescue. I never was deployed abroad, but some of my mates did, and I can tell you from personal experience that it's hellishly difficult to get teams abroad in a timely fashion. I did a bit of logistical running around for the deployments to Japan and NZ. There was no way the RAF could just put us on a plane, as there were never any available to take 50-60 personnel plus all the required equipment. The teams had to go via regular flights or charters, which can make it a case of flying separately from each other and their kit. Getting visas and paperwork can take days, and countries need to ask for help before it can be offered. Another factor is that these disasters in far off places where our skills would be needed are, well, far away, and teams from the US, China, Japan and other wealthy nations in the region usually get there first so our teams tended to get there late for the party and don't always bring much to it.
    I'm not saying we shouldn't do it but it really isn't as easy as saying "Let's help them". It should be, perhaps it could be, but it ain't.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    matt said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    Indeed. Sadly HMS Queen Elizabeth is in the mid-Atlantic at the moment, en route to the US to pick up her F35s, couldn't be further away from India.

    She's not going to "pick up" her F35s. They are going to conduct landing trials using US aircraft from the JOT at Pax River. These trials have to be done with "orange wired" instrumented a/c. The three British instrumented a/c are at Edwards AFB in California.

    The Indian Air Force has about 170 Mi-8/17s. If the RAF moved heaven and earth they could probably position 3-4 Pumas or Chinooks. Sorting out fuel, flight plans, security, crew accomodation, mx support would be the job of some beleaguered Indian Flt Lt who is already having the busiest week of their life. The very minor increase in RW lift that the UK would provide isn't worth the administrative and operational headaches they would bring with them.

    A US CVW/CVN would be a different matter as they would bring a lot more capacity and would self-sufficient.

    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    I know you have doubts of the RAF's abilities, but we should still offer to move heaven and earth for the Indians if they need it in the face of a humanitarian disaster.
    Why should we offer at all? Blah blah, global Britain. Like the Indian government gives a fuck.
    We should offer because we are humans, and other humans need help at the moment.
    The RAF currently have 60 chinooks, 14 of which are practically brand new and can probably fly and everything. I am sure that they could be of considerable assistance.
    We have no way to transport them to India I bet, we would need US to send us a carrier to get them there, by Christmas anything doable will be done.
    Malcolm, I may be wrong about this but can't they fly?
    Not an expert but be a long way to India in a helicopter, not sure they would be up to it or at best would be knackered and out of service by time they arrived. I expect they are like planes and need extensive checks after a fixed number of hours flying. Typical range is 300 miles unless fitted with extra internal tanks etc.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389
    edited August 2018

    Mr. HYUFD, would that pass in the Commons?

    Can't see why May would want it. Too much time, effort, etc.

    Pro Chequers Deal Tories and No Deal Tories could back it given both would be options in the referendum as could the DUP as could Labour Leavers like Hoey and Field and Stringer and Mann.

    That would be enough to pass the Commons and defeat those who wanted a Remain or EEA option too.

    May would not back it now but if No Deal Tory backbencher rebels were holding up her programme with rebellions and Labour switched to back 'a People's Vote' she may decide to call their bluff
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480

    Mr. G, worth noting that most of those on zero hours contracts are content with them.

    Zero hours is used as shorthand for evil wickedness, and there are some abuses, but mostly they're a good thing.

    MD, not sure most will be , some might but doubt majority.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    Anyway todays big story is the terrble floods in India

    6,000 miles of roads washed away and despair abounds

    I would like to think TM will offer help to India paid out of our foreign aid budget.

    Surely that is what it is for

    It's exactly what a foreign aid budget is there for. We should be offering every available military plane and helicopter, alongside specialist men and equipment.
    The Indian air force ME and RW fleets are 4-5x larger than the RAF. Any token effort the UK made would just complicate and hinder due to the effort taken to integrate them into the operation.

    Also, it would just be an excuse for a great number of senior officers to get on the curries and Kingfisher in New Delhi.

    Also, it's "people" not "men". It's 2018.
    Surely they need every single helo they can get their hands on?

    From reports it sounds like there could be *millions* of people needing to be physically evacuated.
    Its the sort of thing that HMS Ocean would have been very useful for but she was decommissioned earlier this year.
    Maybe send our 200 Admirals over , see if they are good for anything.
    I think the Indians have enough problems without that kind of help Malcolm.
    They will surely need people who can drive boats David.
    What's with the toucan Malcolm?
    Was just fed up seeing Ruthie riding that Buffalo and when I went to my pictures I saw that lovely Toucan picture and thought why not brighten up the tedium of brexit and antisemitism posts. Pretty nice I thought and very colourful.
    It's certainly that. And clearly an SNP supporter to boot!
    LOL, unintentional on that.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,929
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    I know you have doubts of the RAF's abilities, but we should still offer to move heaven and earth for the Indians if they need it in the face of a humanitarian disaster.

    I don't doubt the RAF's capabilities; it's that the very marginal increase in capacity isn't worth the disproportionate increase in hassle to the Indians.

    Orange wired (I don't know if the wiring is still literally orange) or IPAs are productions standard aircraft that have additional instruments, sensors and data capture equipment to measure and record things like g-loading and structural flex. They will be testing (among other things) how the a/c will react to a deck landing on the QEC.

    HMS QE is designated for a Pacific cruise in 2021 as its first operational deployment. The second operational squadron 809 "NAS" (irony quotes because it's going to be a Naval Air Squadron in name only) won't be operational until 2022 so it's of limited use until then as we're totally dependent on the junior bomber squadron.

    It's interesting that none of the Harrier nameplates (899,800 and the best one 801) are being revived for F-35.
    Thanks for that, very useful.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,477
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Isn't the bet for a contest, rather than a successful one? In which case, the fact that Jezza is likely to win is beside the point.

    I think a further challenge

    If they'd lose why would they challenge? Last time they might have thought they could win at least.

    I think he'll back a second referendum anyway. Another way he'll compromise a bit, whichyet further undermines his opponents who then don't leave.
    Corbyn has made abundantly clear he backs Brexit and opposes a second vote.

    If he concedes that he gives huge momentum to the Umunna faction in Labour
    Except we know the membership are on his side and yet more inclined to a second abour do not have to risk a no deal by not supporting the government's crappy deal - the people will decide.
    Firstly the majority of the marginal seats the Tories hold Corbyn needs to become PM voted Leave and he knows that.Plus Corbyn is reluctant to back the single market which would undermine his nationalisation plans.

    Second if Labour backs a "People's Vote' not impossible May could call her own 'People's Vote' next autumn after Brexit, just the only choice being back the Chequers Deal terms Brexit or No Deal Brexit.

    As Leave won the referendum she could argue there does not need to be another Remain option again
    If the Tories divide, formally or otherwise, on the issue, Corbyn can win a lot of places that he didn't win before.

    Better he is in the EU and in government and able to do something than out of the EU and out of government. It is incredibly naiive to think he actually is as rigid as people pretend - he is not as flexible as most leaders, but he has learned. Furthermore, by going with a second referendum we might indeed still leave, so it doesn't prevent him from doing things.

    Yes there remain significant issues with how a second referendum would end up being called and what options would be on it.
    As I said he needs to win enough seats at the next general election to become PM to implement a 'People's Vote' anyway even if Labour voted for one at conference and he backed one.

    As I also said May might then call the bluff of 'People's Vote' campaigners and resolve the matter anyway by calling a referendum next autumn if Brexit achieved with a Deal with the EU on roughly Chequers Deal terms asking voters whether they back the Deal or want to go to No Deal Brexit instead. That would resolve Tory divisions and she could also say given Remain lost in the last referendum 2 Leave options only would still respect democracy
    A referendum that "resolves divisions" - what a novel idea.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,192
    malcolmg said:

    Mr. G, worth noting that most of those on zero hours contracts are content with them.

    Zero hours is used as shorthand for evil wickedness, and there are some abuses, but mostly they're a good thing.

    MD, not sure most will be , some might but doubt majority.
    I think it depends entirely what stage you are at. For students working around studies it is fine. For those for whom their zero hour contract is a second job it's ok because they need the flexibility as well as the money. But for those trying to keep a family and plan for their future it must be absolutely shite.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    A Corbyn Govt would use the UK as a sandpit for a full blown 21st Century experiment in neo-marxist economics.

    Would it? That wasn't what the last manifesto said. And nothing they have said has hinted at anything like that. What makes you think it will be the case?
    Of course it wouldn't. Yes I have seen some Kali Ma cultists sat in the pub waving Beetroots shouting "Fuck Capitalism" for the cameras. But when it comes down to it they want people in well paid secure jobs with right - and that means profitable businesses. Which means capitalism. What you would see under Labour is an end to the kind of predatory capitalism which ultimately derails itself - the likes of Carillion - and by building homes that people can afford to live in we stop so much of people's disposable incomes being hoovered up in unsecure rent.

    I don't agree with Tory posters on here and they don't agree with me - thats politics. But my point about McVey and the DWP stands - the Tory ministers know their policies are literally killing people. Literally forcing people into abject poverty supported by food banks. At best they are ignoring their own evidence. At worst they don't care. A party which is "fuck business" as well as doing more than Thatcher ever did to fuck people needs to removed.

    What will upset the Corbyn cultists is when the Corbyn government starts making compromises of "principles". Life isn't the start black and white they think it is, its all shades and too often the options are how much you lose not whether you win or not. They don't understand that. Yet for all that he gets attacked McDonnell does - he ran a tight ship at the GLC...
    Unemployment is half the level Labour left under the Tories
    One of the more astonishing changes in UK politics is that "Tory unemployment!!" is no longer a weapon in Labour's armoury.
    No hence they cry 'food banks' etc which first arose under Brown
    multiplied hundreds of times by the Tories policies , Tories take something for the few and make sure it is needed for the many, whilst lining their own pockets.
    Unemployment is half the level Labour left
    statistics, statistics and damned lies my dear
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 30,180

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    Indeed. Sadly HMS Queen Elizabeth is in the mid-Atlantic at the moment, en route to the US to pick up her F35s, couldn't be further away from India.

    She's not going to "pick up" her F35s. They are going to conduct landing trials using US aircraft from the JOT at Pax River. These trials have to be done with "orange wired" instrumented a/c. The three British instrumented a/c are at Edwards AFB in California.

    The Indian Air Force has about 170 Mi-8/17s. If the RAF moved heaven and earth they could probably position 3-4 Pumas or Chinooks. Sorting out fuel, flight plans, security, crew accomodation, mx support would be the job of some beleaguered Indian Flt Lt who is already having the busiest week of their life. The very minor increase in RW lift that the UK would provide isn't worth the administrative and operational headaches they would bring with them.

    A US CVW/CVN would be a different matter as they would bring a lot more capacity and would self-sufficient.

    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    I know you have doubts of the RAF's abilities, but we should still offer to move heaven and earth for the Indians if they need it in the face of a humanitarian disaster.
    As Dura_Ace says, we cannot usefully offer helicopters or manpower. A few years ago there was a television news report of a disaster in the Phillipines, iirc, and the sky behind the reporter was black with American helicopters. We simply do not have that capacity. India itself has more than a million soldiers and hundreds of helicopters and transport planes.
    https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=india

    Aside perhaps from stockpiled drugs, it is hard to see what we could usefully offer.
    Aren't we going to need those stockpiled drugs shortly?
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    edited August 2018

    Quite astounding how weirdly good the employment stats remain.

    Indeed. Even accepting that a large number of them are pretty crappy jobs, it's pretty amazing we came through the worst economic crash since the depression and unemployment only peaked at 8%, or whatever it was. I thought at the time it'd be catastrophic.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    A Corbyn Govt would use the UK as a sandpit for a full blown 21st Century experiment in neo-marxist economics.

    Would it? That wasn't what the last manifesto said. And nothing they have said has hinted at anything like that. What makes you think it will be the case?
    Of course it wouldn't. Yes I have seen some Kali Ma cultists sat in the pub waving Beetroots shouting "Fuck Capitalism" for the cameras. But when it comes down to it they want people in well paid secure jobs with right - and that means profitable businesses. Which means capitalism. What you would see under Labour is an end to the kind of predatory capitalism which ultimately derails itself - the likes of Carillion - and by building homes that people can afford to live in we stop so much of people's disposable incomes being hoovered up in unsecure rent.

    I don't agree with Tory posters on here and they don't agree with me - thats politics. But my point about McVey and the DWP stands - the Tory ministers know their policies are literally killing people. Literally forcing people into abject poverty supported by food banks. At best they are ignoring their own evidence. At worst they don't care. A party which is "fuck business" as well as doing more than Thatcher ever did to fuck people needs to removed.

    What will upset the Corbyn cultists is when the Corbyn government starts making compromises of "principles". Life isn't the start black and white they think it is, its all shades and too often the options are how much you lose not whether you win or not. They don't understand that. Yet for all that he gets attacked McDonnell does - he ran a tight ship at the GLC...
    Unemployment is half the level Labour left under the Tories
    One of the more astonishing changes in UK politics is that "Tory unemployment!!" is no longer a weapon in Labour's armoury.
    No hence they cry 'food banks' etc which first arose under Brown
    Clearly, the people who cry "food banks!!" would rather the poor starve - and that the food gets taken to the landfill. Heartless bastards.
    Indeed. Food Banks are a good thing as whether the economy is growing or declining there will always be some in hard times
    Rather people were treated decently to start with and did not have to be starving in the first place , Tories only use foodbanks as salve for their destructive policies.
  • BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    A Corbyn Govt would use the UK as a sandpit for a full blown 21st Century experiment in neo-marxist economics.

    Would it? That wasn't what the last manifesto said. And nothing they have said has hinted at anything like that. What makes you think it will be the case?
    Of course it wouldn't. Yes I have seen some Kali Ma cultists sat in the pub waving Beetroots shouting "Fuck Capitalism" for the cameras. But when it comes down to it they want people in well paid secure jobs with right - and that means profitable businesses. Which means capitalism. What you would see under Labour is an end to the kind of predatory capitalism which ultimately derails itself - the likes of Carillion - and by building homes that people can afford to live in we stop so much of people's disposable incomes being hoovered up in unsecure rent.

    I don't agree with Tory posters on here and they don't agree with me - thats politics. But my point about McVey and the DWP stands - the Tory ministers know their policies are literally killing people. Literally forcing people into abject poverty supported by food banks. At best they are ignoring their own evidence. At worst they don't care. A party which is "fuck business" as well as doing more than Thatcher ever did to fuck people needs to removed.

    What will upset the Corbyn cultists is when the Corbyn government starts making compromises of "principles". Life isn't the start black and white they think it is, its all shades and too often the options are how much you lose not whether you win or not. They don't understand that. Yet for all that he gets attacked McDonnell does - he ran a tight ship at the GLC...
    Unemployment is half the level Labour left under the Tories
    One of the more astonishing changes in UK politics is that "Tory unemployment!!" is no longer a weapon in Labour's armoury.
    No hence they cry 'food banks' etc which first arose under Brown
    Clearly, the people who cry "food banks!!" would rather the poor starve - and that the food gets taken to the landfill. Heartless bastards.
    Indeed. Food Banks are a good thing as whether the economy is growing or declining there will always be some in hard times
    You’ve obviously never had to use one. Heartless.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 30,180
    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,749
    HYUFD said:

    As I also said May might then call the bluff of 'People's Vote' campaigners and resolve the matter anyway by calling a referendum next autumn if Brexit achieved with a Deal with the EU on roughly Chequers Deal terms asking voters whether they back the Deal or want to go to No Deal Brexit instead. That would resolve Tory divisions and she could also say given Remain lost in the last referendum 2 Leave options only would still respect democracy

    Interesting to see you inching your way towards supporting a second referendum.
  • Mr. HYUFD, point of order: food banks began under Blair, during the economic boom.

    Their number has increased through boom, financial crisis, recession, recovery through to our current situation.

    There wasn't an economic boom under Blair.

    Debt soaring while home ownership, the stock market and industrial production all fall or stagnate are symptoms of a consumption bubble in a steadily more unbalanced economy.

    The last economic boom in the UK ended in 1989.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. G, worth noting that most of those on zero hours contracts are content with them.

    Zero hours is used as shorthand for evil wickedness, and there are some abuses, but mostly they're a good thing.

    MD, not sure most will be , some might but doubt majority.
    I think it depends entirely what stage you are at. For students working around studies it is fine. For those for whom their zero hour contract is a second job it's ok because they need the flexibility as well as the money. But for those trying to keep a family and plan for their future it must be absolutely shite.
    Yes , should always be an option for employee , otherwise it is just an excuse for greedy employers to exploit people.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 20,853
    edited August 2018
    daodao said:

    RobD said:
    Never heard of him.

    I am not a Corbynista, but am disgusted by the widespread hatred displayed towards Corbyn and his supporters, both on this site and in much of the media. It is reasonable to criticise, in a dignified way, his policies and also his lack of competence/ability, for which there is some evidence. However, he is a principled man and a tireless campaigner against racism and oppression in all its forms throughout the world, and deserves to be treated with respect, even if one disagrees with him.

    The British public don't like unfair treatment and can see which groups are hounding him; it is particularly unwise for a minority group to be at the forefront of these abusive attacks. They are also unnecessary - he is an elderly man and will step down as LOTO of his own free will sooner rather than later, although I agree not before 29/3/19. His opponents would be better advised to keep shtum and bide their time. The next GE is not due until 2022.
    Respect is earned not demanded.

    I respect the fact that Corbyn has chosen to speak up for the Palestinians. I do not respect the way he has gone about doing so which, IMO, undermines his claims to be principled and against racism.

    I find particularly repulsive and chilling the idea that a minority group should not speak up about their concerns because of the potential consequences for them. That sounds to me like a very nasty threat, which should have no place in British politics. And which no decent person should espouse.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    A Corbyn Govt would use the UK as a sandpit for a full blown 21st Century experiment in neo-marxist economics.

    Would it? That wasn't what the last manifesto said. And nothing they have said has hinted at anything like that. What makes you think it will be the case?
    Of course it wouldn't. Yes I have seen some Kali Ma cultists sat in the pub waving Beetroots shouting "Fuck Capitalism" for the cameras. But when it comes down to it they want people in well paid secure jobs with right - and that means profitable businesses. Which means capitalism. What you would see under Labour is an end to the kind of predatory capitalism which ultimately derails itself - the likes of Carillion - and by building homes that people can afford to live in we stop so much of people's disposable incomes being hoovered up in unsecure rent.

    I don't agree with Tory posters on here and they don't agree with me - thats politics. But my point about McVey and the DWP stands - the Tory ministers know their policies are literally killing people. Literally forcing people into abject poverty supported by food banks. At best they are ignoring their own evidence. At worst they don't care. A party which is "fuck business" as well as doing more than Thatcher ever did to fuck people needs to removed.

    What will upset the Corbyn cultists is when the Corbyn government starts making compromises of "principles". Life isn't the start black and white they think it is, its all shades and too often the options are how much you lose not whether you win or not. They don't understand that. Yet for all that he gets attacked McDonnell does - he ran a tight ship at the GLC...
    Unemployment is half the level Labour left under the Tories
    One of the more astonishing changes in UK politics is that "Tory unemployment!!" is no longer a weapon in Labour's armoury.
    No hence they cry 'food banks' etc which first arose under Brown
    Clearly, the people who cry "food banks!!" would rather the poor starve - and that the food gets taken to the landfill. Heartless bastards.
    Indeed. Food Banks are a good thing as whether the economy is growing or declining there will always be some in hard times
    You’ve obviously never had to use one. Heartless.
    Heartless does not cut it, typical uncaring evil Tory attitude.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,929
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    matt said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    Indeed. Sadly HMS Queen Elizabeth is in the mid-Atlantic at the moment, en route to the US to pick up her F35s, couldn't be further away from India.

    She's not going to "pick up" her F35s. They are going to conduct landing trials using US aircraft from the JOT at Pax River. These trials have to be done with "orange wired" instrumented a/c. The three British instrumented a/c are at Edwards AFB in California.

    The Indian Air Force has about 170 Mi-8/17s. If the RAF moved heaven and earth they could probably position 3-4 Pumas or Chinooks. Sorting out fuel, flight plans, security, crew accomodation, mx support would be the job of some beleaguered Indian Flt Lt who is already having the busiest week of their life. The very minor increase in RW lift that the UK would provide isn't worth the administrative and operational headaches they would bring with them.

    A US CVW/CVN would be a different matter as they would bring a lot more capacity and would self-sufficient.

    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    I know you have doubts of the RAF's abilities, but we should still offer to move heaven and earth for the Indians if they need it in the face of a humanitarian disaster.
    Why should we offer at all? Blah blah, global Britain. Like the Indian government gives a fuck.
    We should offer because we are humans, and other humans need help at the moment.
    The RAF currently have 60 chinooks, 14 of which are practically brand new and can probably fly and everything. I am sure that they could be of considerable assistance.
    We have no way to transport them to India I bet, we would need US to send us a carrier to get them there, by Christmas anything doable will be done.
    Malcolm, I may be wrong about this but can't they fly?
    Not an expert but be a long way to India in a helicopter, not sure they would be up to it or at best would be knackered and out of service by time they arrived. I expect they are like planes and need extensive checks after a fixed number of hours flying. Typical range is 300 miles unless fitted with extra internal tanks etc.
    Yes, sending Chinooks to India would be done with US C-5 transport planes, I think they’re too big to go in a C-17 which is the biggest plane we’ve got. The alternative would be the Antonov fleet of ex-Soviet heavy transporters. You cant fly helicopters to India, it would take weeks.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    Indeed. Sadly HMS Queen Elizabeth is in the mid-Atlantic at the moment, en route to the US to pick up her F35s, couldn't be further away from India.

    She's not going to "pick up" her F35s. They are going to conduct landing trials using US aircraft from the JOT at Pax River. These trials have to be done with "orange wired" instrumented a/c. The three British instrumented a/c are at Edwards AFB in California.

    The Indian Air Force has about 170 Mi-8/17s. If the RAF moved heaven and earth they could probably position 3-4 Pumas or Chinooks. Sorting out fuel, flight plans, security, crew accomodation, mx support would be the job of some beleaguered Indian Flt Lt who is already having the busiest week of their life. The very minor increase in RW lift that the UK would provide isn't worth the administrative and operational headaches they would bring with them.

    A US CVW/CVN would be a different matter as they would bring a lot more capacity and would self-sufficient.

    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    I know you have doubts of the RAF's abilities, but we should still offer to move heaven and earth for the Indians if they need it in the face of a humanitarian disaster.
    As Dura_Ace says, we cannot usefully offer helicopters or manpower. A few years ago there was a television news report of a disaster in the Phillipines, iirc, and the sky behind the reporter was black with American helicopters. We simply do not have that capacity. India itself has more than a million soldiers and hundreds of helicopters and transport planes.
    https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=india

    Aside perhaps from stockpiled drugs, it is hard to see what we could usefully offer.
    Aren't we going to need those stockpiled drugs shortly?
    Unlikely as it is for show, Tories planning to stay in at any cost, even if in name only.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 30,180
    IanB2 said:
    If a man who, beyond the age of 26, finds himself on a bus can count himself as a failure, how should one who got the cooties from a bus feel?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,192
    Andrew said:

    Quite astounding how weirdly good the employment stats remain.

    Indeed. Even accepting that a large number of them are pretty crappy jobs, it's pretty amazing we came through the worst economic crash since the depression and unemployment only peaked at ?1.6million, or whatever it was. I thought at the time it'd be 3 million bare minimum.
    And Blanchflower, who claims to be a labour market economist, said 5m. What I find even more remarkable is that many countries who were less directly affected by the GFC because they had much smaller financial services industries were very badly hit with unemployment and are still struggling to recover 10 years on. Some of this can be put down to ECB incompetence and German intransigence but it is still odd.

    My provisional, and somewhat optimistic, view is that the UK has significant advantages in a very flexible labour market and the ability to control our own stabilisers. If true this bodes well for our future.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    matt said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    Indeed. Sadly HMS Queen Elizabeth is in the mid-Atlantic at the moment, en route to the US to pick up her F35s, couldn't be further away from India.

    She's not going to "pick up" her F35s. They are going to conduct landing trials using US aircraft from the JOT at Pax River. These trials have to be done with "orange wired" instrumented a/c. The three British instrumented a/c are at Edwards AFB in California.



    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    I know you have doubts of the RAF's abilities, but we should still offer to move heaven and earth for the Indians if they need it in the face of a humanitarian disaster.
    Why should we offer at all? Blah blah, global Britain. Like the Indian government gives a fuck.
    We should offer because we are humans, and other humans need help at the moment.
    The RAF currently have 60 chinooks, 14 of which are practically brand new and can probably fly and everything. I am sure that they could be of considerable assistance.
    We have no way to transport them to India I bet, we would need US to send us a carrier to get them there, by Christmas anything doable will be done.
    Malcolm, I may be wrong about this but can't they fly?
    Not an expert but be a long way to India in a helicopter, not sure they would be up to it or at best would be knackered and out of service by time they arrived. I expect they are like planes and need extensive checks after a fixed number of hours flying. Typical range is 300 miles unless fitted with extra internal tanks etc.
    Yes, sending Chinooks to India would be done with US C-5 transport planes, I think they’re too big to go in a C-17 which is the biggest plane we’ve got. The alternative would be the Antonov fleet of ex-Soviet heavy transporters. You cant fly helicopters to India, it would take weeks.
    Be a nice little tour , see the world and about 20 stop overs minimum.
  • DavidL said:

    Andrew said:

    Quite astounding how weirdly good the employment stats remain.

    Indeed. Even accepting that a large number of them are pretty crappy jobs, it's pretty amazing we came through the worst economic crash since the depression and unemployment only peaked at ?1.6million, or whatever it was. I thought at the time it'd be 3 million bare minimum.
    And Blanchflower, who claims to be a labour market economist, said 5m. What I find even more remarkable is that many countries who were less directly affected by the GFC because they had much smaller financial services industries were very badly hit with unemployment and are still struggling to recover 10 years on. Some of this can be put down to ECB incompetence and German intransigence but it is still odd.

    My provisional, and somewhat optimistic, view is that the UK has significant advantages in a very flexible labour market and the ability to control our own stabilisers. If true this bodes well for our future.
    He doesn't like being reminded of that prediction on Twitter.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    edited August 2018
    DavidL said:

    Andrew said:

    Quite astounding how weirdly good the employment stats remain.

    Indeed. Even accepting that a large number of them are pretty crappy jobs, it's pretty amazing we came through the worst economic crash since the depression and unemployment only peaked at ?1.6million, or whatever it was. I thought at the time it'd be 3 million bare minimum.
    And Blanchflower, who claims to be a labour market economist, said 5m. What I find even more remarkable is that many countries who were less directly affected by the GFC because they had much smaller financial services industries were very badly hit with unemployment and are still struggling to recover 10 years on. Some of this can be put down to ECB incompetence and German intransigence but it is still odd.

    My provisional, and somewhat optimistic, view is that the UK has significant advantages in a very flexible labour market and the ability to control our own stabilisers. If true this bodes well for our future.
    David, why not just say zero hours contracts, it is a fiddle. They just massage how they count them.
    PS: Those other countries have welfare states and care about their people so they don't create low paid jobs that people are forced to take despite not being able to live on the pittance paid.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    Sandpit said:

    Yes, sending Chinooks to India would be done with US C-5 transport planes, I think they’re too big to go in a C-17 which is the biggest plane we’ve got.

    Pretty sure they'll go in a C17 - it'd be kinda useless having Chinooks if we had to ship them around by sea.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 25,144

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,893
    malcolmg said:

    \

    Not an expert but be a long way to India in a helicopter, not sure they would be up to it or at best would be knackered and out of service by time they arrived. I expect they are like planes and need extensive checks after a fixed number of hours flying. Typical range is 300 miles unless fitted with extra internal tanks etc.

    Flying Chinooks to India (presumably via Ramstein, Souda Bay, Jordan, Oman, etc.)? WTF? This the best idea yet. There would be a trail of broken CH-47s across Europe, ME and Central Asia with technical issues.

    The limiting factor in this relief operation probably isn't availability of RW platforms but air base capacity. The Indian Air Force's bases are largely positioned with a view to fighting Pakistan. ie in the centre and north of the country. The closest Indian Air Force base is Pune which isn't that close. INS Hansa in Goa is slightly closer but still not ideal. There is a NAE at Kochin airport which will be little more than a shed.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 7,197
    There are no more opponents of Corbyn's course and, if there are, they are mentally ill and need to be sent off for clinical examination. Corbyn is everywhere, Corbyn is everything, Corbyn is absolute, and Corbyn is indispensable.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    The Home Office is sending police business the way of Amazon, so that's more money the Chancellor will never see again. Police systems are being moved to the cloud, specifically AWS.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/08/17/police_it_move_aws_home_office_contract/

    Can anyone imagine even the smallest American police force using a foreign company like this? The government needs to get behind British business like the American government does for its own, to give them a fighting chance of becoming competitive in a world market (and in the meantime employing British staff who spend their money in British shops, and who unlike Amazon, pay British taxes.

    US policing is done locally and isn't famous for it's technical competence. I doubt most of them have the faintest idea which countries their data is stored in.

    And then there was the case where the Office of Personnel Management, which is responsible for maintaining and reviewing detailed personal records for everyone who needs security clearance, outsourced their database management to a guy in Argentina, who passed it on to somebody in China.
    https://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-agency-plundered-by-chinese-hackers-made-one-of-the-dumbest-security-moves-possible-2015-6
    America now has FedRAMP to approve cloud vendors for government and local government business. American support in American datacentres figures large.
    https://www.fedramp.gov/

    Whichever combination of national security and economic protectionism motivates Washington, the result is the same. The Americans are looking out for America, and so are we. The British government should support British businesses so they can become competitive.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,192

    DavidL said:

    Andrew said:

    Quite astounding how weirdly good the employment stats remain.

    Indeed. Even accepting that a large number of them are pretty crappy jobs, it's pretty amazing we came through the worst economic crash since the depression and unemployment only peaked at ?1.6million, or whatever it was. I thought at the time it'd be 3 million bare minimum.
    And Blanchflower, who claims to be a labour market economist, said 5m. What I find even more remarkable is that many countries who were less directly affected by the GFC because they had much smaller financial services industries were very badly hit with unemployment and are still struggling to recover 10 years on. Some of this can be put down to ECB incompetence and German intransigence but it is still odd.

    My provisional, and somewhat optimistic, view is that the UK has significant advantages in a very flexible labour market and the ability to control our own stabilisers. If true this bodes well for our future.
    He doesn't like being reminded of that prediction on Twitter.
    Nope, not even that is enough to get me to join Twitter.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 821
    edited August 2018
    Cyclefree said:



    I find particularly repulsive and chilling the idea that a minority group should not speak up about their concerns because of the potential consequences for them. That sounds to me like a very nasty threat, which should have no place in British politics. And which no decent person should espouse.

    In an ideal world, people/groups should not be targeted for expressing their concerns. However, in practice they are, which is why I used the word "unwise" - I am fearful that there will be a backlash. I am in no way espousing such a threat, merely intimating indirectly that sadly such a threat exists.
  • HYUFD said:

    Clearly, the people who cry "food banks!!" would rather the poor starve - and that the food gets taken to the landfill. Heartless bastards.

    Indeed. Food Banks are a good thing as whether the economy is growing or declining there will always be some in hard times
    You’ve obviously never had to use one. Heartless.
    It is better to be in hard times and have the food bank available than to be in hard times and not have it available. Food banks are no different in that respect than a safety net. Why would you support safety nets but be against food banks? You're the heartless one.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,192
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Andrew said:

    Quite astounding how weirdly good the employment stats remain.

    Indeed. Even accepting that a large number of them are pretty crappy jobs, it's pretty amazing we came through the worst economic crash since the depression and unemployment only peaked at ?1.6million, or whatever it was. I thought at the time it'd be 3 million bare minimum.
    And Blanchflower, who claims to be a labour market economist, said 5m. What I find even more remarkable is that many countries who were less directly affected by the GFC because they had much smaller financial services industries were very badly hit with unemployment and are still struggling to recover 10 years on. Some of this can be put down to ECB incompetence and German intransigence but it is still odd.

    My provisional, and somewhat optimistic, view is that the UK has significant advantages in a very flexible labour market and the ability to control our own stabilisers. If true this bodes well for our future.
    David, why not just say zero hours contracts, it is a fiddle. They just massage how they count them.
    PS: Those other countries have welfare states and care about their people so they don't create low paid jobs that people are forced to take despite not being able to live on the pittance paid.
    The number of people on zero hour contracts has been shrinking of late whilst those in FTE continues to rise. A significant part of our higher employment is that we have in work benefits which make employment much more attractive, even at minimum wage. Those countries which have not gone down that path have higher unemployment because many poor paying jobs are unaffordable without it.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 30,180

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    Just so, enacting social policy that Alfred Sherman could only dream of.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 20,853
    daodao said:

    Cyclefree said:



    I find particularly repulsive and chilling the idea that a minority group should not speak up about their concerns because of the potential consequences for them. That sounds to me like a very nasty threat, which should have no place in British politics. And which no decent person should espouse.

    In an ideal world, people/groups should not be targeted for expressing their concerns. However, in practice they are, which is why I used the word "unwise" - I am fearful that there will be a backlash. I am in no way espousing such a threat, merely intimating indirectly that sadly such a threat exists.
    I am glad to hear that you do not espouse such a threat.

    If a threat exists we should deal with it, not tell the victims to appease those who seek to bully them into silence.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,929
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    matt said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    Indeed. Sadly HMS Queen Elizabeth is in the mid-Atlantic at the moment, en route to the US to pick up her F35s, couldn't be further away from India.

    She's not going to "pick up" her F35s. They are going to conduct landing trials using US aircraft from the JOT at Pax River. These trials have to be done with "orange wired" instrumented a/c. The three British instrumented a/c are at Edwards AFB in California.



    What are the "orange wired" planes, are they calibrating stuff on the ship?
    When do you reckon HMS QE will be fully operational?

    I know you have doubts of the RAF's abilities, but we should still offer to move heaven and earth for the Indians if they need it in the face of a humanitarian disaster.
    Why should we offer at all? Blah blah, global Britain. Like the Indian government gives a fuck.
    We should offer because we are humans, and other humans need help at the moment.
    The RAF currently have 60 chinooks, 14 of which are practically brand new and can probably fly and everything. I am sure that they could be of considerable assistance.
    We have no way to transport them to India I bet, we would need US to send us a carrier to get them there, by Christmas anything doable will be done.
    Malcolm, I may be wrong about this but can't they fly?
    Not an expert but be a long way to India in a helicopter, not sure they would be up to it or at best would be knackered and out of service by time they arrived. I expect they are like planes and need extensive checks after a fixed number of hours flying. Typical range is 300 miles unless fitted with extra internal tanks etc.
    Yes, sending Chinooks to India would be done with US C-5 transport planes, I think they’re too big to go in a C-17 which is the biggest plane we’ve got. The alternative would be the Antonov fleet of ex-Soviet heavy transporters. You cant fly helicopters to India, it would take weeks.
    Be a nice little tour , see the world and about 20 stop overs minimum.
    It could probably be done in about three days in an emergency, but the logistics would be horrendous. You’d need lots of pilots positioned on the route, and fuel and servicing stops - although I believe the newest Chinook can actually be refuelled midair. It’s not actually impossible to do now I think a little more about it, although you’d definitely just load them on a big cargo plane given the choice.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So Labour would now ban food banks and you get your DWP handout and nothing else?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,893
    edited August 2018
    Sandpit said:


    Yes, sending Chinooks to India would be done with US C-5 transport planes, I think they’re too big to go in a C-17 which is the biggest plane we’ve got. The alternative would be the Antonov fleet of ex-Soviet heavy transporters. You cant fly helicopters to India, it would take weeks.

    A Chinook will fit in a C-17 but you have to take the rear rotor head off. Putting it back together at the other end is no easy task for the luckless ginger to which it is assigned.

    The C-17 fleet is a bit fucked for crews at the moment and the RAF multi engine training stream is considerably more than a bit fucked because they've mid-air'ed two (ie 40%)of their new Phenoms.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 57,323
    Mr. HYUFD, nonsense. You'd be asked how much you loved Jeremy, and given food, or not, accordingly.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Andrew said:

    Quite astounding how weirdly good the employment stats remain.

    Indeed. Even accepting that a large number of them are pretty crappy jobs, it's pretty amazing we came through the worst economic crash since the depression and unemployment only peaked at ?1.6million, or whatever it was. I thought at the time it'd be 3 million bare minimum.
    And Blanchflower, who claims to be a labour market economist, said 5m. What I find even more remarkable is that many countries who were less directly affected by the GFC because they had much smaller financial services industries were very badly hit with unemployment and are still struggling to recover 10 years on. Some of this can be put down to ECB incompetence and German intransigence but it is still odd.

    My provisional, and somewhat optimistic, view is that the UK has significant advantages in a very flexible labour market and the ability to control our own stabilisers. If true this bodes well for our future.
    David, why not just say zero hours contracts, it is a fiddle. They just massage how they count them.
    PS: Those other countries have welfare states and care about their people so they don't create low paid jobs that people are forced to take despite not being able to live on the pittance paid.
    Actually bar France, Germany, the Benelux and Nordic countries, Ireland and arguably Australia and New Zealand the UK even now has a more generous welfare system than virtually anywhere else in the world and we also have a much lower contributory element
  • HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So the need was always there.

    How is it any better to need to go through a bureaucratic emergency grant process than to have the food readily available?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    HYUFD said:

    As I also said May might then call the bluff of 'People's Vote' campaigners and resolve the matter anyway by calling a referendum next autumn if Brexit achieved with a Deal with the EU on roughly Chequers Deal terms asking voters whether they back the Deal or want to go to No Deal Brexit instead. That would resolve Tory divisions and she could also say given Remain lost in the last referendum 2 Leave options only would still respect democracy

    Interesting to see you inching your way towards supporting a second referendum.
    I would support a Chequers Deal v No Deal Brexit referendum given Leave beat Remain in the last referendum but there are differences of opinion on what Leave should mean
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,929
    Andrew said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yes, sending Chinooks to India would be done with US C-5 transport planes, I think they’re too big to go in a C-17 which is the biggest plane we’ve got.

    Pretty sure they'll go in a C17 - it'd be kinda useless having Chinooks if we had to ship them around by sea.
    A little research says it can be done, but one at a time and lots of dismantling required!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 25,144
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So Labour would now ban food banks and you get your DWP handout and nothing else?
    I have no idea what Labour would do; I’m not a party member. Not even a regular Labour voter.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,609


    America now has FedRAMP to approve cloud vendors for government and local government business. American support in American datacentres figures large.
    https://www.fedramp.gov/

    I was just about to say that if I was a sysadmin with a job to do I'd run a mile from that or anything like it, then I tried to look at the approved products list and the page wouldn't load...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Very well with those who support the voluntary sector and that the state should not have a monopoly on welfare
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So Labour would now ban food banks and you get your DWP handout and nothing else?
    I have no idea what Labour would do; I’m not a party member. Not even a regular Labour voter.
    That is though the leftist mindset ie charity is a symptom of the fact the state provided welfare state is not big enough
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,523

    HYUFD said:

    Clearly, the people who cry "food banks!!" would rather the poor starve - and that the food gets taken to the landfill. Heartless bastards.

    Indeed. Food Banks are a good thing as whether the economy is growing or declining there will always be some in hard times
    You’ve obviously never had to use one. Heartless.
    It is better to be in hard times and have the food bank available than to be in hard times and not have it available. Food banks are no different in that respect than a safety net. Why would you support safety nets but be against food banks? You're the heartless one.
    It is also totally demeaning to all those thousands of caring people who support foodbanks with their time, to just paint them as Tory stooges.

    Perhaps they just shouldn't bother?

    To suggets that food poverty was not a problem until 2010 is crass in the extreme. Those who use foodbanks as political footballs really are the heartless bastards. I take it as a great thing that there is increased provision of foodbanks. The alternative is hungry people. Who wants that?
  • BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113

    HYUFD said:

    Clearly, the people who cry "food banks!!" would rather the poor starve - and that the food gets taken to the landfill. Heartless bastards.

    Indeed. Food Banks are a good thing as whether the economy is growing or declining there will always be some in hard times
    You’ve obviously never had to use one. Heartless.
    It is better to be in hard times and have the food bank available than to be in hard times and not have it available. Food banks are no different in that respect than a safety net. Why would you support safety nets but be against food banks? You're the heartless one.
    People would rather have the dignity of having enough money to buy food for themselves and their children rather than rely on charitable handouts.

    Humanity isn’t your specialist subject, is it?
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 7,197
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So Labour would now ban food banks and you get your DWP handout and nothing else?
    Food banks are a ridiculous and awful idea. Their viability depends on voluntary donations. How helpful they are to the individual depends on whether an official decides to hand out vouchers on a whim. At best arbitrary; at worst beneficial only to those who can work the system.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    Mr. HYUFD, nonsense. You'd be asked how much you loved Jeremy, and given food, or not, accordingly.

    Yes, you better learn to love 'the Dear Leader'
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    Dura_Ace said:

    malcolmg said:

    \

    Not an expert but be a long way to India in a helicopter, not sure they would be up to it or at best would be knackered and out of service by time they arrived. I expect they are like planes and need extensive checks after a fixed number of hours flying. Typical range is 300 miles unless fitted with extra internal tanks etc.

    Flying Chinooks to India (presumably via Ramstein, Souda Bay, Jordan, Oman, etc.)? WTF? This the best idea yet. There would be a trail of broken CH-47s across Europe, ME and Central Asia with technical issues.

    The limiting factor in this relief operation probably isn't availability of RW platforms but air base capacity. The Indian Air Force's bases are largely positioned with a view to fighting Pakistan. ie in the centre and north of the country. The closest Indian Air Force base is Pune which isn't that close. INS Hansa in Goa is slightly closer but still not ideal. There is a NAE at Kochin airport which will be little more than a shed.
    Thank you for putting more colour to my slightly terse, “logistics”. Still, I’m sure they can all be based in RNB Trincomalee and RAF China Bay. That appears to be the world some think we live in.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 25,144
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So Labour would now ban food banks and you get your DWP handout and nothing else?
    I have no idea what Labour would do; I’m not a party member. Not even a regular Labour voter.
    That is though the leftist mindset ie charity is a symptom of the fact the state provided welfare state is not big enough
    The answer is reasonably paid jobs and reasonable, affordable housing. I became politically aware in the 50’s and while there was quite a lot of poor housing, public policy was to sort it out, not make the situation worse.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,523

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So Labour would now ban food banks and you get your DWP handout and nothing else?
    Food banks are a ridiculous and awful idea. Their viability depends on voluntary donations. How helpful they are to the individual depends on whether an official decides to hand out vouchers on a whim. At best arbitrary; at worst beneficial only to those who can work the system.
    The State must provide. And only The State.

    FFS....

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,929

    HYUFD said:

    Clearly, the people who cry "food banks!!" would rather the poor starve - and that the food gets taken to the landfill. Heartless bastards.

    Indeed. Food Banks are a good thing as whether the economy is growing or declining there will always be some in hard times
    You’ve obviously never had to use one. Heartless.
    It is better to be in hard times and have the food bank available than to be in hard times and not have it available. Food banks are no different in that respect than a safety net. Why would you support safety nets but be against food banks? You're the heartless one.
    It is also totally demeaning to all those thousands of caring people who support foodbanks with their time, to just paint them as Tory stooges.

    Perhaps they just shouldn't bother?

    To suggets that food poverty was not a problem until 2010 is crass in the extreme. Those who use foodbanks as political footballs really are the heartless bastards. I take it as a great thing that there is increased provision of foodbanks. The alternative is hungry people. Who wants that?
    Quite. Should't we all approve of social safety nets that stop people going hungry?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389
    edited August 2018
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    As I also said May might then call the bluff of 'People's Vote' campaigners and resolve the matter anyway by calling a referendum next autumn if Brexit achieved with a Deal with the EU on roughly Chequers Deal terms asking voters whether they back the Deal or want to go to No Deal Brexit instead. That would resolve Tory divisions and she could also say given Remain lost in the last referendum 2 Leave options only would still respect democracy

    Interesting to see you inching your way towards supporting a second referendum.
    I would support a Chequers Deal v No Deal Brexit referendum given Leave beat Remain in the last referendum but there are differences of opinion on what Leave should mean
    There was an interesting article in ConHome the other day comparing Gove to Michael Collins. After fighting to win independence from Britain with De Valera the deal Collins backed with the British to create the Free State was seen by Irish nationalists like De Valera (for whom Mogg is compared amongst Leavers in distancing himself from any deal) as a sell out.

    'They would exercise control over only 26 of Ireland’s 32 counties. But other restrictions on sovereignty were also severe. The 26 counties would not be a fully independent country, as the entity called the “Irish Free State” became officially a Dominion of the British Empire. The Royal Navy retained control of the strategic ports of Berehaven, Queenstown (now Cobh) and Lough Swilly; and the King’s Governor-General continued to reside in what had previously
    been the Viceregal lodge in Dublin’s Phoenix Park.'

    Yet given the alternative was all out war with Britain (for now read hard Brexit and WTO terms tariffs) Collins felt he may have not got full independence yet, but he had won “the freedom to win freedom.” 'The post of Governor-General was abolished in 1936. The Royal Navy gave up the ports in 1938. Ireland became a Republic in 1949. And though the six counties in Ulster would remain part of the United Kingdom, the Belfast Agreement of 1998 created institutions based on there being two communities in that part of the island. Ireland became independent, but by degrees.'


    A similar comparison is made to the land Israel gained by the UN Partition Plan of 1947 which was significantly smaller than the land Israel comprises now.

    https://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2018/08/garvan-walshe-gove-is-setting-himself-up-as-brexits-michael-collins.html
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 7,197

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So Labour would now ban food banks and you get your DWP handout and nothing else?
    Food banks are a ridiculous and awful idea. Their viability depends on voluntary donations. How helpful they are to the individual depends on whether an official decides to hand out vouchers on a whim. At best arbitrary; at worst beneficial only to those who can work the system.
    The State must provide. And only The State.

    FFS....

    Why not? We all pay enough in taxes for it to do so. Or are you okay with the state frittering away billions and then expecting volunteers to plug the gap caused by its ineptitude?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So Labour would now ban food banks and you get your DWP handout and nothing else?
    Food banks are a ridiculous and awful idea. Their viability depends on voluntary donations. How helpful they are to the individual depends on whether an official decides to hand out vouchers on a whim. At best arbitrary; at worst beneficial only to those who can work the system.
    Yet I am not proposing abolishing the welfare state and replacing it with foodbanks, I support the system as now with food banks as an add on to the welfare state
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300


    America now has FedRAMP to approve cloud vendors for government and local government business. American support in American datacentres figures large.
    https://www.fedramp.gov/

    I was just about to say that if I was a sysadmin with a job to do I'd run a mile from that or anything like it, then I tried to look at the approved products list and the page wouldn't load...
    And if I were an American entrepreneur wanting to launch a new cloud, support or software business, I'd want to see which forms to fill in to qualify for government business, right down to the local dog-catcher's office. A British entrepreneur would look at UK G-cloud's digital marketplace and see our government sending business to American companies.

    Forget computers. Look out of your Tokyo window. Who makes your police cars? We put the steering wheel on the right side but do you see any foreign cars there?

    Other countries start from the presumption in any industry that home suppliers are best. Even with the EU rules, are the Berlin police driving Peugeots or the Paris police driving BMWs? I see both round here.
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,307

    HYUFD said:

    Clearly, the people who cry "food banks!!" would rather the poor starve - and that the food gets taken to the landfill. Heartless bastards.

    Indeed. Food Banks are a good thing as whether the economy is growing or declining there will always be some in hard times
    You’ve obviously never had to use one. Heartless.
    .
    It is also totally demeaning to all those thousands of caring people who support foodbanks with their time, to just paint them as Tory stooges.

    Perhaps they just shouldn't bother?

    To suggets that food poverty was not a problem until 2010 is crass in the extreme. Those who use foodbanks as political footballs really are the heartless bastards. I take it as a great thing that there is increased provision of foodbanks. The alternative is hungry people. Who wants that?
    I often donate food to our local foodbank. In the absence of any alternatives, it is the only way to help address food poverty.

    However, it has always struck me as a massively inefficient process. Firstly, people like me have to decide what food to buy from the shop and then put it in the box at the supermarket. Then someone has to collect the food (cost) and store it (significant cost), taking account of the fact that most of the food is perishable. It then has to be sorted out, presumably by volunteers.

    OK, if you then need to use the foodbank you need to get to it (either by bus: £4.30 day ticket) or taxi (£10+ round trip), if you don't have a car or access to a car. In our case, it is on the ring road, it is several miles from deprived areas of the town, it isn't somewhere you can easily walk to.

    You then have to wait at the foodbank (lost time you could be doing something more productive, like looking for a job), then recieve some sort of counselling.

    For what? a couple of bags of food? Surely you could buy a weeks worth of very basic food from asda, lidl or aldi for the price of the bus fare to the foodbank (eg bread, cheese, beans, tinned tomatoes, rice, pasta, etc), with these supermarkets also having the advantage of being located within walking distance of the deprived parts of town.

    I would rather fund a system where anyone who is identified as being in food poverty just gets a package of basic food delivered to them by supermarket home delivery. It would surely cost next to nothing. The effort in running the foodbank would be more productively spent teaching people home economics and basic cookery skills. If people still starve after that, then they clearly have mental health problems.

    Am I missing something? Glad to be enlightened by any food bank volunteers on here.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So Labour would now ban food banks and you get your DWP handout and nothing else?
    I have no idea what Labour would do; I’m not a party member. Not even a regular Labour voter.
    That is though the leftist mindset ie charity is a symptom of the fact the state provided welfare state is not big enough
    The answer is reasonably paid jobs and reasonable, affordable housing. I became politically aware in the 50’s and while there was quite a lot of poor housing, public policy was to sort it out, not make the situation worse.
    That would be why the Tories (and to be fair the LDs) raised the minimum wage and took the lowest paid out of tax. That would be why councils across the country are agreeing Local Plans to build more affordable housing.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    Dura_Ace said:

    malcolmg said:

    \

    Not an expert but be a long way to India in a helicopter, not sure they would be up to it or at best would be knackered and out of service by time they arrived. I expect they are like planes and need extensive checks after a fixed number of hours flying. Typical range is 300 miles unless fitted with extra internal tanks etc.

    Flying Chinooks to India (presumably via Ramstein, Souda Bay, Jordan, Oman, etc.)? WTF? This the best idea yet. There would be a trail of broken CH-47s across Europe, ME and Central Asia with technical issues.

    The limiting factor in this relief operation probably isn't availability of RW platforms but air base capacity. The Indian Air Force's bases are largely positioned with a view to fighting Pakistan. ie in the centre and north of the country. The closest Indian Air Force base is Pune which isn't that close. INS Hansa in Goa is slightly closer but still not ideal. There is a NAE at Kochin airport which will be little more than a shed.
    Hence my post on David's jocular comment that they could fly.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 57,323
    Mr. HYUFD, the Empire was tending to give up colonies then. The EU tends to increase integration and demand ever more power. Gove would be making, I suspect, a critical mistake if we end up with a departure in name only.

    As with all such things, we'll find out in due course.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 25,144
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So Labour would now ban food banks and you get your DWP handout and nothing else?
    I have no idea what Labour would do; I’m not a party member. Not even a regular Labour voter.
    That is though the leftist mindset ie charity is a symptom of the fact the state provided welfare state is not big enough
    The answer is reasonably paid jobs and reasonable, affordable housing. I became politically aware in the 50’s and while there was quite a lot of poor housing, public policy was to sort it out, not make the situation worse.
    That would be why the Tories (and to be fair the LDs) raised the minimum wage and took the lowest paid out of tax. That would be why councils across the country are agreeing Local Plans to build more affordable housing.
    Affordable housing? Buying them? Are you joking? We need decent rentable housing. Agree.of course with increasing the tax threshold, although that also benefits people at the top of the scale.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Andrew said:

    Quite astounding how weirdly good the employment stats remain.

    Indeed. Even accepting that a large number of them are pretty crappy jobs, it's pretty amazing we came through the worst economic crash since the depression and unemployment only peaked at ?1.6million, or whatever it was. I thought at the time it'd be 3 million bare minimum.
    And Blanchflower, who claims to be a labour market economist, said 5m. What I find even more remarkable is that many countries who were less directly affected by the GFC because they had much smaller financial services industries were very badly hit with unemployment and are still struggling to recover 10 years on. Some of this can be put down to ECB incompetence and German intransigence but it is still odd.

    My provisional, and somewhat optimistic, view is that the UK has significant advantages in a very flexible labour market and the ability to control our own stabilisers. If true this bodes well for our future.
    David, why not just say zero hours contracts, it is a fiddle. They just massage how they count them.
    PS: Those other countries have welfare states and care about their people so they don't create low paid jobs that people are forced to take despite not being able to live on the pittance paid.
    Actually bar France, Germany, the Benelux and Nordic countries, Ireland and arguably Australia and New Zealand the UK even now has a more generous welfare system than virtually anywhere else in the world and we also have a much lower contributory element
    So bar most of the developed world we are are generous
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So the need was always there.

    How is it any better to need to go through a bureaucratic emergency grant process than to have the food readily available?
    Food begged off the public to save the government doing their job , another "I am all right jack cosy Tory" viewpoint.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    Mr. HYUFD, the Empire was tending to give up colonies then. The EU tends to increase integration and demand ever more power. Gove would be making, I suspect, a critical mistake if we end up with a departure in name only.

    As with all such things, we'll find out in due course.

    The Empire was only giving up power gradually then eg dominion status for Canada, Australia and South Africa and Ireland. Decolonisation in the likes of India and Africa and the move of Ireland to become a Republic did not happen until after WW2.

    I think the point is a Brexit which gradually moves away from an increasingly Federal EU would be more likely to be a longterm success than a Brexit that jumps straight from the EU to WTO terms, No Deal hard Brexit but as you say we shall see
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 11,589
    On topic

    Getting a full 14% yield on the max bet of £6.99
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,480

    HYUFD said:

    Clearly, the people who cry "food banks!!" would rather the poor starve - and that the food gets taken to the landfill. Heartless bastards.

    Indeed. Food Banks are a good thing as whether the economy is growing or declining there will always be some in hard times
    You’ve obviously never had to use one. Heartless.
    It is better to be in hard times and have the food bank available than to be in hard times and not have it available. Food banks are no different in that respect than a safety net. Why would you support safety nets but be against food banks? You're the heartless one.
    It is also totally demeaning to all those thousands of caring people who support foodbanks with their time, to just paint them as Tory stooges.

    Perhaps they just shouldn't bother?

    To suggets that food poverty was not a problem until 2010 is crass in the extreme. Those who use foodbanks as political footballs really are the heartless bastards. I take it as a great thing that there is increased provision of foodbanks. The alternative is hungry people. Who wants that?
    The alternative would be the government doing what they are elected for, the people are hungry due to heartless Tory policies. Only a smug comfortable overfed Tory could see it as a great thing that thousands have to volunteer and beg for food donations to help starving people.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 57,323
    Mr. HYUFD, aye, it's a bit irksome, the nature of reality being we only get to see how one circumstance turns out, rather than both courses. It's interesting to try and guess counter-factuals and alternate histories, but given that the rise of Islam (in a geographical and military sense) owed a lot to the Eastern Roman Emperor refusing to increase expenditure on footwear, trying to predict reality or even how the past might have gone with one difference is very hard indeed.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389
    edited August 2018
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Andrew said:

    Quite astounding how weirdly good the employment stats remain.

    Indeed. Even accepting that a large number of them are pretty crappy jobs, it's pretty amazing we came through the worst economic crash since the depression and unemployment only peaked at ?1.6million, or whatever it was. I thought at the time it'd be 3 million bare minimum.
    And Blanchflower, who claims to be a labour market economist, said 5m. What I find even more remarkable is that many countries who were less directly affected by the GFC because they had much smaller financial services industries were very badly hit with unemployment and are still struggling to recover 10 years on. Some of this can be put down to ECB incompetence and German intransigence but it is still odd.

    My provisional, and somewhat optimistic, view is that the UK has significant advantages in a very flexible labour market and the ability to control our own stabilisers. If true this bodes well for our future.
    David, why not just say zero hours contracts, it is a fiddle. They just massage how they count them.
    PS: Those other countries have welfare states and care about their people so they don't create low paid jobs that people are forced to take despite not being able to live on the pittance paid.
    Actually bar France, Germany, the Benelux and Nordic countries, Ireland and arguably Australia and New Zealand the UK even now has a more generous welfare system than virtually anywhere else in the world and we also have a much lower contributory element
    So bar most of the developed world we are are generous
    No. The USA for example has no universal state healthcare.

    In Canada, the USA, Japan, Italy and Spain the only unemployment benefits you can get are those which have been contributed to out of a national insurance system unlike our non contributory JSA. Benefits also tend to be time limited.


    If people want to complain about foodbanks here, they should try the USA!

  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    On topic

    Getting a full 14% yield on the max bet of £6.99

    And people wonder why we need foodbanks.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,929
    Sandpit said:

    Finely balanced Test match could bring some good betting today.
    England 2.8
    India 2.2
    Draw 5.2

    Value a little with England at this point, and lay the draw as there’s not rain forecast.
    Laying the draw provides a better return than TSE’s tip, doesn’t require knowledge of the intricacies of Labour MPs’ thoughts, and it’ll pay out in the next four days. :tongue:

    And whose silly idea was it to start on Saturday? I’d forgotten it was on until the first day had finished.

    All out for 329 in 40 minutes, good effort from the bowlers this morning.

    England now 2.14
    India 2.5
    Draw 7.4
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Food Banks are a good thing

    Can you let us know how 'food banks are a good thing' goes down on the doorsteps during your next tussle with the electorate?

    Once upon a time the DWP or the DHSS or similar used to be able to give emergency grants for food.
    Mrs May talked about the Tories being the Nasty Party; seems to me they’ve metamorphosed into the Cruel Party.
    So Labour would now ban food banks and you get your DWP handout and nothing else?
    I have no idea what Labour would do; I’m not a party member. Not even a regular Labour voter.
    That is though the leftist mindset ie charity is a symptom of the fact the state provided welfare state is not big enough
    The answer is reasonably paid jobs and reasonable, affordable housing. I became politically aware in the 50’s and while there was quite a lot of poor housing, public policy was to sort it out, not make the situation worse.
    That would be why the Tories (and to be fair the LDs) raised the minimum wage and took the lowest paid out of tax. That would be why councils across the country are agreeing Local Plans to build more affordable housing.
    Affordable housing? Buying them? Are you joking? We need decent rentable housing. Agree.of course with increasing the tax threshold, although that also benefits people at the top of the scale.
    Social housing is also part of Local Plans.

    Increasing the tax threshold had the biggest net benefit for the lowest earners as a proportion of their income.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,192
    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    malcolmg said:

    \

    Not an expert but be a long way to India in a helicopter, not sure they would be up to it or at best would be knackered and out of service by time they arrived. I expect they are like planes and need extensive checks after a fixed number of hours flying. Typical range is 300 miles unless fitted with extra internal tanks etc.

    Flying Chinooks to India (presumably via Ramstein, Souda Bay, Jordan, Oman, etc.)? WTF? This the best idea yet. There would be a trail of broken CH-47s across Europe, ME and Central Asia with technical issues.

    The limiting factor in this relief operation probably isn't availability of RW platforms but air base capacity. The Indian Air Force's bases are largely positioned with a view to fighting Pakistan. ie in the centre and north of the country. The closest Indian Air Force base is Pune which isn't that close. INS Hansa in Goa is slightly closer but still not ideal. There is a NAE at Kochin airport which will be little more than a shed.
    Hence my post on David's jocular comment that they could fly.
    That seems to have been taken a bit more seriously than I intended but it has been informative none the less.
  • Full House!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,389

    Mr. HYUFD, aye, it's a bit irksome, the nature of reality being we only get to see how one circumstance turns out, rather than both courses. It's interesting to try and guess counter-factuals and alternate histories, but given that the rise of Islam (in a geographical and military sense) owed a lot to the Eastern Roman Emperor refusing to increase expenditure on footwear, trying to predict reality or even how the past might have gone with one difference is very hard indeed.

    True but we can still see the historical parallels
This discussion has been closed.