politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Print journalism needs a revolution to avoid a slow death: mic
Options
Comments
-
Ah thank you - there is ndeed a photo on the Wikipedia page which matches very well, including his natty necktie.Black_Rook said:
Is it meant to be Frederick Douglass?Carnyx said:
Who's the gent to the right (our right) of Mr Trump?MrEd said:
I'm going to buy that for Kinablu with the £10 I win off him when Trump gets re-electedTheuniondivvie said:This is a boney fidee shit painting, not even redeemed by crude folkiness.
https://twitter.com/McNaughtonArt/status/1286327028807905282?s=20
'Internationally acclaimed for his patriotic paintings such as The Forgotten Man. #MAGA'0 -
And with your change?MrEd said:
I'm going to buy that for Kinablu with the £10 I win off him when Trump gets re-electedTheuniondivvie said:This is a boney fidee shit painting, not even redeemed by crude folkiness.
https://twitter.com/McNaughtonArt/status/1286327028807905282?s=20
'Internationally acclaimed for his patriotic paintings such as The Forgotten Man. #MAGA'1 -
If that happened (I don't think it will) England and Wales would end up rejoining the EU very quickly.Black_Rook said:
My view is that the end point of our current constitutional upheavals is an Anglo-Welsh state. Scotland goes first, then Northern Ireland goes next, for a variety of reasons: (1) Scottish secession obviously breaks up the current British state and greatly encourages the nationalists; (2) Scotland is the NI Unionists' closest partner in the Union in terms both of geography and culture - it's abandonment of the state will leave them demoralised and isolated; (3) there's limited interest in Britain in retaining the province as it is, and this will presumably only lessen once it's left out on a limb; (4) ditching Northern Ireland rids the British Government of a bottomless money pit and removes one of the major obstacles to better relations with the EU.Beibheirli_C said:
Would that be when England is finally independent? What about that little extra bit to the west known as "Wales"? Or is that merely Extreme Western England these days?Black_Rook said:... Our major divisions take the form of constitutional battles over where accountability and power should lie. One of those, the EU question, has been settled; once Scotland and Northern Ireland are also resolved then we ought finally to have some peace and quiet for a change.
The English and the Welsh then sit down, ask if carrying on together is worth it, and probably conclude that it is. The two have been joined at the hip for seven centuries, are heavily integrated, and Wales has a weaker nationalist movement and a much stronger anti-devolution movement than Scotland does. That's not to say that this state of affairs will endure forever, but that's the way things are now and are likely to remain for some time.
And so, after Scotland leaves the UK, rejoins the EU and the border posts and fences go up, we end up with three states occupying (as good as) three islands, and we can all do our own thing.0 -
I think its also a problem that people keep changing the idea of what works as a diet and in particular the overabundance of sugar and processed foods in quick and easy foods.Black_Rook said:
I've spent much of my adult life being obese, which is not recommended for healthy lung function either, so I feel your pain. Although I imagine that did more damage to my joints. I'm just hoping that my slightly dodgy knees can take the abuse, knees being a common source of difficulty as one advances in years, of course.kinabalu said:
That's all quite impressive compared to me. Then again, I have a quarter of a million fags inside of me so if we handicap for that I'm Mo Farah class.Black_Rook said:
At the risk of sounding like a total arse, I've managed to get my 5K time down below 22 minutes, given favourable conditions and a flat course. How much more I've got in my middle aged legs, I don't know. I'm close to, and think I've a better chance of getting, sub-45 for 10K than sub-20 for 5K. We shall see.kinabalu said:
5k in 25m is good. I can do 3k in 20m. Think I'd need at least 35m for 5k unless being chased.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I'm going to cut the running down a tad as it's the calories I am struggling to get in, I'm trying gain weight/muscle and it's tough to get all the calories in with the amount of running I do.kinabalu said:
Plus 50k a week running? Yikes!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Pull ups, press ups, ab wheel, floor bench press and some curls. Going well so far thanks for asking.Gallowgate said:
How’s the weightlifting going by the way? What sort of movements are you doing?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Much rather go to the pub, go for a run, etc. They don't appeal to me in any way.MaxPB said:
That's sad. Newspapers are a good past time on the weekend.CorrectHorseBattery said:Never bought a newspaper, never will.
You'll have yourself in "muscles" BoJo shape if you keep that up.
The main thing has been getting my 5K time below 25 minutes which I've nearly achieved now.
However, these things are all relative. There's a bloke at work that can get round 5K in 18 minutes, which is sickening enough. The track world record is under 13 minutes which, after you've ended up in a panting heap taking nearly twice as long as that, gives you a new appreciation of exactly how able even the also-rans in professional races really are.
I think the central problem is that humans simply haven't had long enough to adapt to being bipedal, let alone having food readily and consistently available enough so that we don't need to lay down all our spare energy as blubber for times of famine. It'll all be so much easier in another 10 million years...
I've yo-yo'd throughout my adult life. Changed my diet at the start of lockdown - trying for the first time what has ended up as a "keto" diet (high fat, very low carb) and cooking for myself every meal. So far this is working very well for me, I've lost 40 pounds so far this year but its hard to find ideas for anything convenient. Going to the supermarket and even "healthy" convenience food is normally selling itself on low-fat or fat-free which is the polar opposite of what I find is working for me. Very hard to find many high fat, carb-free convenient snacks.
So far I've found pistachio nuts and pork scratchings.0 -
Strips of marine mammal blubber? The Inuit swear by them, I believe.Philip_Thompson said:
I think its also a problem that people keep changing the idea of what works as a diet and in particular the overabundance of sugar and processed foods in quick and easy foods.Black_Rook said:
I've spent much of my adult life being obese, which is not recommended for healthy lung function either, so I feel your pain. Although I imagine that did more damage to my joints. I'm just hoping that my slightly dodgy knees can take the abuse, knees being a common source of difficulty as one advances in years, of course.kinabalu said:
That's all quite impressive compared to me. Then again, I have a quarter of a million fags inside of me so if we handicap for that I'm Mo Farah class.Black_Rook said:
At the risk of sounding like a total arse, I've managed to get my 5K time down below 22 minutes, given favourable conditions and a flat course. How much more I've got in my middle aged legs, I don't know. I'm close to, and think I've a better chance of getting, sub-45 for 10K than sub-20 for 5K. We shall see.kinabalu said:
5k in 25m is good. I can do 3k in 20m. Think I'd need at least 35m for 5k unless being chased.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I'm going to cut the running down a tad as it's the calories I am struggling to get in, I'm trying gain weight/muscle and it's tough to get all the calories in with the amount of running I do.kinabalu said:
Plus 50k a week running? Yikes!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Pull ups, press ups, ab wheel, floor bench press and some curls. Going well so far thanks for asking.Gallowgate said:
How’s the weightlifting going by the way? What sort of movements are you doing?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Much rather go to the pub, go for a run, etc. They don't appeal to me in any way.MaxPB said:
That's sad. Newspapers are a good past time on the weekend.CorrectHorseBattery said:Never bought a newspaper, never will.
You'll have yourself in "muscles" BoJo shape if you keep that up.
The main thing has been getting my 5K time below 25 minutes which I've nearly achieved now.
However, these things are all relative. There's a bloke at work that can get round 5K in 18 minutes, which is sickening enough. The track world record is under 13 minutes which, after you've ended up in a panting heap taking nearly twice as long as that, gives you a new appreciation of exactly how able even the also-rans in professional races really are.
I think the central problem is that humans simply haven't had long enough to adapt to being bipedal, let alone having food readily and consistently available enough so that we don't need to lay down all our spare energy as blubber for times of famine. It'll all be so much easier in another 10 million years...
I've yo-yo'd throughout my adult life. Changed my diet at the start of lockdown - trying for the first time what has ended up as a "keto" diet (high fat, very low carb) and cooking for myself every meal. So far this is working very well for me, I've lost 40 pounds so far this year but its hard to find ideas for anything convenient. Going to the supermarket and even "healthy" convenience food is normally selling itself on low-fat or fat-free which is the polar opposite of what I find is working for me. Very hard to find many high fat, carb-free convenient snacks.
So far I've found pistachio nuts and pork scratchings.
EDdit: s|orry, couldn't resist. But your comments about a keto diet did make me think of them, hunter gatherer and so on.0 -
Extremely unlikely.LadyG said:
If that happened (I don't think it will) England and Wales would end up rejoining the EU very quickly.Black_Rook said:
My view is that the end point of our current constitutional upheavals is an Anglo-Welsh state. Scotland goes first, then Northern Ireland goes next, for a variety of reasons: (1) Scottish secession obviously breaks up the current British state and greatly encourages the nationalists; (2) Scotland is the NI Unionists' closest partner in the Union in terms both of geography and culture - it's abandonment of the state will leave them demoralised and isolated; (3) there's limited interest in Britain in retaining the province as it is, and this will presumably only lessen once it's left out on a limb; (4) ditching Northern Ireland rids the British Government of a bottomless money pit and removes one of the major obstacles to better relations with the EU.Beibheirli_C said:
Would that be when England is finally independent? What about that little extra bit to the west known as "Wales"? Or is that merely Extreme Western England these days?Black_Rook said:... Our major divisions take the form of constitutional battles over where accountability and power should lie. One of those, the EU question, has been settled; once Scotland and Northern Ireland are also resolved then we ought finally to have some peace and quiet for a change.
The English and the Welsh then sit down, ask if carrying on together is worth it, and probably conclude that it is. The two have been joined at the hip for seven centuries, are heavily integrated, and Wales has a weaker nationalist movement and a much stronger anti-devolution movement than Scotland does. That's not to say that this state of affairs will endure forever, but that's the way things are now and are likely to remain for some time.
And so, after Scotland leaves the UK, rejoins the EU and the border posts and fences go up, we end up with three states occupying (as good as) three islands, and we can all do our own thing.0 -
Probably would be very good.Carnyx said:
Strips of marine mammal blubber? The Inuit swear by them, I believe.Philip_Thompson said:
I think its also a problem that people keep changing the idea of what works as a diet and in particular the overabundance of sugar and processed foods in quick and easy foods.Black_Rook said:
I've spent much of my adult life being obese, which is not recommended for healthy lung function either, so I feel your pain. Although I imagine that did more damage to my joints. I'm just hoping that my slightly dodgy knees can take the abuse, knees being a common source of difficulty as one advances in years, of course.kinabalu said:
That's all quite impressive compared to me. Then again, I have a quarter of a million fags inside of me so if we handicap for that I'm Mo Farah class.Black_Rook said:
At the risk of sounding like a total arse, I've managed to get my 5K time down below 22 minutes, given favourable conditions and a flat course. How much more I've got in my middle aged legs, I don't know. I'm close to, and think I've a better chance of getting, sub-45 for 10K than sub-20 for 5K. We shall see.kinabalu said:
5k in 25m is good. I can do 3k in 20m. Think I'd need at least 35m for 5k unless being chased.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I'm going to cut the running down a tad as it's the calories I am struggling to get in, I'm trying gain weight/muscle and it's tough to get all the calories in with the amount of running I do.kinabalu said:
Plus 50k a week running? Yikes!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Pull ups, press ups, ab wheel, floor bench press and some curls. Going well so far thanks for asking.Gallowgate said:
How’s the weightlifting going by the way? What sort of movements are you doing?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Much rather go to the pub, go for a run, etc. They don't appeal to me in any way.MaxPB said:
That's sad. Newspapers are a good past time on the weekend.CorrectHorseBattery said:Never bought a newspaper, never will.
You'll have yourself in "muscles" BoJo shape if you keep that up.
The main thing has been getting my 5K time below 25 minutes which I've nearly achieved now.
However, these things are all relative. There's a bloke at work that can get round 5K in 18 minutes, which is sickening enough. The track world record is under 13 minutes which, after you've ended up in a panting heap taking nearly twice as long as that, gives you a new appreciation of exactly how able even the also-rans in professional races really are.
I think the central problem is that humans simply haven't had long enough to adapt to being bipedal, let alone having food readily and consistently available enough so that we don't need to lay down all our spare energy as blubber for times of famine. It'll all be so much easier in another 10 million years...
I've yo-yo'd throughout my adult life. Changed my diet at the start of lockdown - trying for the first time what has ended up as a "keto" diet (high fat, very low carb) and cooking for myself every meal. So far this is working very well for me, I've lost 40 pounds so far this year but its hard to find ideas for anything convenient. Going to the supermarket and even "healthy" convenience food is normally selling itself on low-fat or fat-free which is the polar opposite of what I find is working for me. Very hard to find many high fat, carb-free convenient snacks.
So far I've found pistachio nuts and pork scratchings.
I'll have to keep an eye out for that next time I'm at Morrisons. Not sure what aisle that would be in?0 -
FIFTY pounds.MrEd said:
I'm going to buy that for Kinablu with the £10 I win off him when Trump gets re-electedTheuniondivvie said:This is a boney fidee shit painting, not even redeemed by crude folkiness.
https://twitter.com/McNaughtonArt/status/1286327028807905282?s=20
'Internationally acclaimed for his patriotic paintings such as The Forgotten Man. #MAGA'
Trump wins - You win £50.
Trump loses AND under 200 in the EC - I win £50.
AOR - Flat.
Remember?0 -
Actually might be a bit dodgy - concentration of pollutants. And I'm not even sure if it is legal in the UK - even seals might be protected.Philip_Thompson said:
Probably would be very good.Carnyx said:
Strips of marine mammal blubber? The Inuit swear by them, I believe.Philip_Thompson said:
I think its also a problem that people keep changing the idea of what works as a diet and in particular the overabundance of sugar and processed foods in quick and easy foods.Black_Rook said:
I've spent much of my adult life being obese, which is not recommended for healthy lung function either, so I feel your pain. Although I imagine that did more damage to my joints. I'm just hoping that my slightly dodgy knees can take the abuse, knees being a common source of difficulty as one advances in years, of course.kinabalu said:
That's all quite impressive compared to me. Then again, I have a quarter of a million fags inside of me so if we handicap for that I'm Mo Farah class.Black_Rook said:
At the risk of sounding like a total arse, I've managed to get my 5K time down below 22 minutes, given favourable conditions and a flat course. How much more I've got in my middle aged legs, I don't know. I'm close to, and think I've a better chance of getting, sub-45 for 10K than sub-20 for 5K. We shall see.kinabalu said:
5k in 25m is good. I can do 3k in 20m. Think I'd need at least 35m for 5k unless being chased.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I'm going to cut the running down a tad as it's the calories I am struggling to get in, I'm trying gain weight/muscle and it's tough to get all the calories in with the amount of running I do.kinabalu said:
Plus 50k a week running? Yikes!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Pull ups, press ups, ab wheel, floor bench press and some curls. Going well so far thanks for asking.Gallowgate said:
How’s the weightlifting going by the way? What sort of movements are you doing?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Much rather go to the pub, go for a run, etc. They don't appeal to me in any way.MaxPB said:
That's sad. Newspapers are a good past time on the weekend.CorrectHorseBattery said:Never bought a newspaper, never will.
You'll have yourself in "muscles" BoJo shape if you keep that up.
The main thing has been getting my 5K time below 25 minutes which I've nearly achieved now.
However, these things are all relative. There's a bloke at work that can get round 5K in 18 minutes, which is sickening enough. The track world record is under 13 minutes which, after you've ended up in a panting heap taking nearly twice as long as that, gives you a new appreciation of exactly how able even the also-rans in professional races really are.
I think the central problem is that humans simply haven't had long enough to adapt to being bipedal, let alone having food readily and consistently available enough so that we don't need to lay down all our spare energy as blubber for times of famine. It'll all be so much easier in another 10 million years...
I've yo-yo'd throughout my adult life. Changed my diet at the start of lockdown - trying for the first time what has ended up as a "keto" diet (high fat, very low carb) and cooking for myself every meal. So far this is working very well for me, I've lost 40 pounds so far this year but its hard to find ideas for anything convenient. Going to the supermarket and even "healthy" convenience food is normally selling itself on low-fat or fat-free which is the polar opposite of what I find is working for me. Very hard to find many high fat, carb-free convenient snacks.
So far I've found pistachio nuts and pork scratchings.
I'll have to keep an eye out for that next time I'm at Morrisons. Not sure what aisle that would be in?0 -
France is surely more centralised than the UK.Fishing said:
That is the profile of a protest vote rather than a party that had convinced people ideologically - cf the Greens in the late 80s.justin124 said:
I have never been a fan of Devolution and still view it as a serious mistake , but it was a response to the rise in nationalism which had already occurred. As far back as October 1974 GE ,the SNP polled 30% of the vote in Scotland - though that did fall away subsequently.
I think some form of devolution was inevitable and right in the most centralised country in the democratic world, but, as I said below, how Blair did it - asymmetrically and obviously as a sop rather than because he genuinely believed in what he was doing - was almost certain to cause it to fail.0 -
Have you seen Midsommar? I ask because it has a rare cinematic portrayal of a bloodeagle in what I think is a hen house. Which might be of interest to a lady newt-painter.LadyG said:
If that happened (I don't think it will) England and Wales would end up rejoining the EU very quickly.Black_Rook said:
My view is that the end point of our current constitutional upheavals is an Anglo-Welsh state. Scotland goes first, then Northern Ireland goes next, for a variety of reasons: (1) Scottish secession obviously breaks up the current British state and greatly encourages the nationalists; (2) Scotland is the NI Unionists' closest partner in the Union in terms both of geography and culture - it's abandonment of the state will leave them demoralised and isolated; (3) there's limited interest in Britain in retaining the province as it is, and this will presumably only lessen once it's left out on a limb; (4) ditching Northern Ireland rids the British Government of a bottomless money pit and removes one of the major obstacles to better relations with the EU.Beibheirli_C said:
Would that be when England is finally independent? What about that little extra bit to the west known as "Wales"? Or is that merely Extreme Western England these days?Black_Rook said:... Our major divisions take the form of constitutional battles over where accountability and power should lie. One of those, the EU question, has been settled; once Scotland and Northern Ireland are also resolved then we ought finally to have some peace and quiet for a change.
The English and the Welsh then sit down, ask if carrying on together is worth it, and probably conclude that it is. The two have been joined at the hip for seven centuries, are heavily integrated, and Wales has a weaker nationalist movement and a much stronger anti-devolution movement than Scotland does. That's not to say that this state of affairs will endure forever, but that's the way things are now and are likely to remain for some time.
And so, after Scotland leaves the UK, rejoins the EU and the border posts and fences go up, we end up with three states occupying (as good as) three islands, and we can all do our own thing.0 -
Fasting. Try it.Philip_Thompson said:
I think its also a problem that people keep changing the idea of what works as a diet and in particular the overabundance of sugar and processed foods in quick and easy foods.Black_Rook said:
I've spent much of my adult life being obese, which is not recommended for healthy lung function either, so I feel your pain. Although I imagine that did more damage to my joints. I'm just hoping that my slightly dodgy knees can take the abuse, knees being a common source of difficulty as one advances in years, of course.kinabalu said:
That's all quite impressive compared to me. Then again, I have a quarter of a million fags inside of me so if we handicap for that I'm Mo Farah class.Black_Rook said:
At the risk of sounding like a total arse, I've managed to get my 5K time down below 22 minutes, given favourable conditions and a flat course. How much more I've got in my middle aged legs, I don't know. I'm close to, and think I've a better chance of getting, sub-45 for 10K than sub-20 for 5K. We shall see.kinabalu said:
5k in 25m is good. I can do 3k in 20m. Think I'd need at least 35m for 5k unless being chased.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I'm going to cut the running down a tad as it's the calories I am struggling to get in, I'm trying gain weight/muscle and it's tough to get all the calories in with the amount of running I do.kinabalu said:
Plus 50k a week running? Yikes!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Pull ups, press ups, ab wheel, floor bench press and some curls. Going well so far thanks for asking.Gallowgate said:
How’s the weightlifting going by the way? What sort of movements are you doing?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Much rather go to the pub, go for a run, etc. They don't appeal to me in any way.MaxPB said:
That's sad. Newspapers are a good past time on the weekend.CorrectHorseBattery said:Never bought a newspaper, never will.
You'll have yourself in "muscles" BoJo shape if you keep that up.
The main thing has been getting my 5K time below 25 minutes which I've nearly achieved now.
However, these things are all relative. There's a bloke at work that can get round 5K in 18 minutes, which is sickening enough. The track world record is under 13 minutes which, after you've ended up in a panting heap taking nearly twice as long as that, gives you a new appreciation of exactly how able even the also-rans in professional races really are.
I think the central problem is that humans simply haven't had long enough to adapt to being bipedal, let alone having food readily and consistently available enough so that we don't need to lay down all our spare energy as blubber for times of famine. It'll all be so much easier in another 10 million years...
I've yo-yo'd throughout my adult life. Changed my diet at the start of lockdown - trying for the first time what has ended up as a "keto" diet (high fat, very low carb) and cooking for myself every meal. So far this is working very well for me, I've lost 40 pounds so far this year but its hard to find ideas for anything convenient. Going to the supermarket and even "healthy" convenience food is normally selling itself on low-fat or fat-free which is the polar opposite of what I find is working for me. Very hard to find many high fat, carb-free convenient snacks.
So far I've found pistachio nuts and pork scratchings.
It it amazing. You not only get the benefit of weight loss but you get a kind of euphoria by about day two, and your IQ goes up by 5-15 points. This is because the body no longer has to divert so much energy to digestion, so it gives all the spare energy to the brain (also the body is presuming there is a famine, so you need to be thinking hard and sharply about that next meal, and where it might come from).
It is genuinely mindblowing. Silicon valley billionaires go on fasts when they need to crack a particularly difficult problem.
I have found it hugely useful when I have a difficult newt to paint.
And: we are meant to fast. The human body is superbly adapted to a famine-feast lifestyle, as that is how we evolved for a million years on the African plains. We didn't have three square meals a day, every day.
We eat too much, too often.
Finally, if you fast, it means you can eat whatever the fuck you like when you break the fast. Though don't overdo it on the first meal, or you will fall asleep straight after. It has happened to me.
I fast 4 days out of 7 on average, now. I love it.
1 -
As I say, it hasn't failed as far as I'm concerned.Fishing said:
You think it has killed nationalism stone dead?Theuniondivvie said:
Hasn't failed afaic.Fishing said:
That is the profile of a protest vote rather than a party that had convinced people ideologically - cf the Greens in the late 80s.justin124 said:
I have never been a fan of Devolution and still view it as a serious mistake , but it was a response to the rise in nationalism which had already occurred. As far back as October 1974 GE ,the SNP polled 30% of the vote in Scotland - though that did fall away subsequently.
I think some form of devolution was inevitable and right in the most centralised country in the democratic world, but, as I said below, how Blair did it - asymmetrically and obviously as a sop rather than because he genuinely believed in what he was doing - was almost certain to cause it to fail.
If you don't turn up to the debate (as the Tories refused to do), you can't really complain about how it pans out. I agree that Blair didn't have any real feeling for devolution, but plenty of Scottish Labour big beasts did (I don't include George Robertson, coiner of the stone dead meme; he has the political nous of an old kilt sock). However as the big beasts left the stage and SLab turned itself into a obstructive force against the SNP, devo died on its arse.2 -
Sudden thought: you could more economically replicate scratchings (and safer for your teeth) by baking strips of pork belly till fairly dry?Philip_Thompson said:
Probably would be very good.Carnyx said:
Strips of marine mammal blubber? The Inuit swear by them, I believe.Philip_Thompson said:
I think its also a problem that people keep changing the idea of what works as a diet and in particular the overabundance of sugar and processed foods in quick and easy foods.Black_Rook said:
I've spent much of my adult life being obese, which is not recommended for healthy lung function either, so I feel your pain. Although I imagine that did more damage to my joints. I'm just hoping that my slightly dodgy knees can take the abuse, knees being a common source of difficulty as one advances in years, of course.kinabalu said:
That's all quite impressive compared to me. Then again, I have a quarter of a million fags inside of me so if we handicap for that I'm Mo Farah class.Black_Rook said:
At the risk of sounding like a total arse, I've managed to get my 5K time down below 22 minutes, given favourable conditions and a flat course. How much more I've got in my middle aged legs, I don't know. I'm close to, and think I've a better chance of getting, sub-45 for 10K than sub-20 for 5K. We shall see.kinabalu said:
5k in 25m is good. I can do 3k in 20m. Think I'd need at least 35m for 5k unless being chased.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I'm going to cut the running down a tad as it's the calories I am struggling to get in, I'm trying gain weight/muscle and it's tough to get all the calories in with the amount of running I do.kinabalu said:
Plus 50k a week running? Yikes!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Pull ups, press ups, ab wheel, floor bench press and some curls. Going well so far thanks for asking.Gallowgate said:
How’s the weightlifting going by the way? What sort of movements are you doing?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Much rather go to the pub, go for a run, etc. They don't appeal to me in any way.MaxPB said:
That's sad. Newspapers are a good past time on the weekend.CorrectHorseBattery said:Never bought a newspaper, never will.
You'll have yourself in "muscles" BoJo shape if you keep that up.
The main thing has been getting my 5K time below 25 minutes which I've nearly achieved now.
However, these things are all relative. There's a bloke at work that can get round 5K in 18 minutes, which is sickening enough. The track world record is under 13 minutes which, after you've ended up in a panting heap taking nearly twice as long as that, gives you a new appreciation of exactly how able even the also-rans in professional races really are.
I think the central problem is that humans simply haven't had long enough to adapt to being bipedal, let alone having food readily and consistently available enough so that we don't need to lay down all our spare energy as blubber for times of famine. It'll all be so much easier in another 10 million years...
I've yo-yo'd throughout my adult life. Changed my diet at the start of lockdown - trying for the first time what has ended up as a "keto" diet (high fat, very low carb) and cooking for myself every meal. So far this is working very well for me, I've lost 40 pounds so far this year but its hard to find ideas for anything convenient. Going to the supermarket and even "healthy" convenience food is normally selling itself on low-fat or fat-free which is the polar opposite of what I find is working for me. Very hard to find many high fat, carb-free convenient snacks.
So far I've found pistachio nuts and pork scratchings.
I'll have to keep an eye out for that next time I'm at Morrisons. Not sure what aisle that would be in?0 -
Uplifting stuff, in theory. In practice if I were a corrupt government I'd go with jury trials every time, so easy to nobble with dark state resources at your disposal.rcs1000 said:
Well said.Sean_F said:
Jury nullification is potentially useful. A jury can acquit, if it considers that the law is oppressive, or the prosecution is unfair. It's an important check on oppression by the authorities.IshmaelZ said:
The sky did not fall in when the Diplock courts were introduced. Nor when we pretty much abolished civil juries in 1933 - and a civil judge can feck up your liberties as a subject just as effectively as a criminal court can, by for instance bankrupting you, taking your children away from you, and making orders for breach of which you can be imprisoned.Malmesbury said:
Anyone recall the lawyers for the PIRA arguing that the Diplock courts were against human rights, since there were no juries? Just a panel of judges.IshmaelZ said:
Why? If the claim is made that trial by jury is uniquely English (by origin) and uniquely good, then surely the charge of English exceptionalism is a perfect fit? It doesn't even matter whether the claim is valid or not, because the question then is only whether the exceptionalism is justified or not.kle4 said:
I love that that even the concept of support for trial by jury is now being derided as mere english exceptionalism. It's one of those terms which is so overused it is becoming meaningless.Cyclefree said:
Wrong on so many levels. No-one commenting sat through every day of the trial and heard the evidence (I assume) nor the judge’s directions on the law nor the summing up.IshmaelZ said:
?TheWhiteRabbit said:
Recklessness is not sufficient to establish murder, and, I would have thought, the basis for the jury's decision.DavidL said:
As a lawyer, albeit a Scots lawyer, I simply don’t understand this decision. Murder is when you intend to kill or show a reckless indifference to the consequences of your actions. Where you are involved in a criminal act that indifference is readily inferred.isam said:Hopefully their lack of remorse will play a part in the sentencing. This was from an earlier trial, but yesterday they were laughing as the details of PC Harper’s death were read.
https://twitter.com/mollygiles2015/status/1286745326485897219?s=21
I can only think that the trial judge either failed to explain this or the jury were not listening. Allowing them bail for reports is equally bizarre. What on earth was he thinking?
I don’t have the time to deal with this today so I will just leave these 2 articles here and will come back later to sweep up the brickbats.
https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/06/24/12-good-men/
https://barry-walsh.co.uk/on-juries-and-experts/
They argued this in front of the European courts. In front of panels of judges. With no juries.....
Two massive flaws in the jury system have been highlighted - inability to understand points of law, and intimidation. Judge only trials obviate theses difficulties at a stroke, and the countervailing argument is what? that judges are more corruptible, or more likely to act as puppets of the state, than random jurors? That makes no sense even if it is true, because the corruption opportunities are in civil trials and so are the puppet of the state opportunities - as we have repeatedly seen in brexit litigation over the last four years. No juries in that lot in the first place. I honestly don't see what the case for juries actually is, except for a lot of ill-informed historical fustian about Magna Carta.
Edit to clarify that I don't say that the courts in fact acted as puppets of the state in the brexit litigation, only that the opportunity was there.
Knowledge of the law is not terribly important for a juror, since the jury is ruling on matters of fact, not matters of law.
In my view, the existence of trial by jury strengthens public confidence in the working of the judicial system. It's a check against bias. Judges, inevitably, are drawn from quite a narrow social circle, overwhelmingly upper middle class. Even if they are unbiased (as I'm sure most are) it would be easy enough to accuse them of bias. And, my experience is that jurors do take their duties seriously.0 -
Why? The net effect of Scotland falling off will simply be to tip the balance of the country (and we must bear in mind that England and Wales constitute approximately 90% thereof) in favour of people who vote Tory and people who voted Leave. Beyond that, there's also no desire, amongst anyone other than the more committed pro-EU minority, to go through years more wrangling over this topic, let alone accession negotiations. And I don't think they'd want us back either, at the very least not that fast.LadyG said:
If that happened (I don't think it will) England and Wales would end up rejoining the EU very quickly.Black_Rook said:
My view is that the end point of our current constitutional upheavals is an Anglo-Welsh state. Scotland goes first, then Northern Ireland goes next, for a variety of reasons: (1) Scottish secession obviously breaks up the current British state and greatly encourages the nationalists; (2) Scotland is the NI Unionists' closest partner in the Union in terms both of geography and culture - it's abandonment of the state will leave them demoralised and isolated; (3) there's limited interest in Britain in retaining the province as it is, and this will presumably only lessen once it's left out on a limb; (4) ditching Northern Ireland rids the British Government of a bottomless money pit and removes one of the major obstacles to better relations with the EU.Beibheirli_C said:
Would that be when England is finally independent? What about that little extra bit to the west known as "Wales"? Or is that merely Extreme Western England these days?Black_Rook said:... Our major divisions take the form of constitutional battles over where accountability and power should lie. One of those, the EU question, has been settled; once Scotland and Northern Ireland are also resolved then we ought finally to have some peace and quiet for a change.
The English and the Welsh then sit down, ask if carrying on together is worth it, and probably conclude that it is. The two have been joined at the hip for seven centuries, are heavily integrated, and Wales has a weaker nationalist movement and a much stronger anti-devolution movement than Scotland does. That's not to say that this state of affairs will endure forever, but that's the way things are now and are likely to remain for some time.
And so, after Scotland leaves the UK, rejoins the EU and the border posts and fences go up, we end up with three states occupying (as good as) three islands, and we can all do our own thing.0 -
If they vote. Trump's camapign has to convince them that Biden is just as shit an option.stodge said:Just noted the latest Gravis poll in Pennsylvania which puts Biden up by just three - 48-45 compared to Fox News which gave Biden an 11-point advantage (50-39).
Gravis also did polls in Michigan (Biden up 51-42) and Wisconsin (Biden up 50-42).
Gravis notes undecided voters look to be breaking strongly for Biden.1 -
anyone who can do sub 20 for 5 K will do sub 45 for 10k . The equivalent is more like 42-43 mins for a 20 min 5K runnerkinabalu said:
That's all quite impressive compared to me. Then again, I have a quarter of a million fags inside of me so if we handicap for that I'm Mo Farah class.Black_Rook said:
At the risk of sounding like a total arse, I've managed to get my 5K time down below 22 minutes, given favourable conditions and a flat course. How much more I've got in my middle aged legs, I don't know. I'm close to, and think I've a better chance of getting, sub-45 for 10K than sub-20 for 5K. We shall see.kinabalu said:
5k in 25m is good. I can do 3k in 20m. Think I'd need at least 35m for 5k unless being chased.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I'm going to cut the running down a tad as it's the calories I am struggling to get in, I'm trying gain weight/muscle and it's tough to get all the calories in with the amount of running I do.kinabalu said:
Plus 50k a week running? Yikes!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Pull ups, press ups, ab wheel, floor bench press and some curls. Going well so far thanks for asking.Gallowgate said:
How’s the weightlifting going by the way? What sort of movements are you doing?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Much rather go to the pub, go for a run, etc. They don't appeal to me in any way.MaxPB said:
That's sad. Newspapers are a good past time on the weekend.CorrectHorseBattery said:Never bought a newspaper, never will.
You'll have yourself in "muscles" BoJo shape if you keep that up.
The main thing has been getting my 5K time below 25 minutes which I've nearly achieved now.
However, these things are all relative. There's a bloke at work that can get round 5K in 18 minutes, which is sickening enough. The track world record is under 13 minutes which, after you've ended up in a panting heap taking nearly twice as long as that, gives you a new appreciation of exactly how able even the also-rans in professional races really are.
1 -
On the subject of the US, it's entirely possible that two of the four members of the "awkward squad" lose primary challenges in the next couple of weeks.
Probably incrementally helpful to Biden at the margin.0 -
I hadn't remembered the sub-200 bit but happy with thatkinabalu said:
FIFTY pounds.MrEd said:
I'm going to buy that for Kinablu with the £10 I win off him when Trump gets re-electedTheuniondivvie said:This is a boney fidee shit painting, not even redeemed by crude folkiness.
https://twitter.com/McNaughtonArt/status/1286327028807905282?s=20
'Internationally acclaimed for his patriotic paintings such as The Forgotten Man. #MAGA'
Trump wins - You win £50.
Trump loses AND under 200 in the EC - I win £50.
AOR - Flat.
Remember? 0 -
If the UK was reduced to E&W we would be shrunken in every way, geographically, culturally, demographically, geopolitically, and also - most importantly - economically.Philip_Thompson said:
Extremely unlikely.LadyG said:
If that happened (I don't think it will) England and Wales would end up rejoining the EU very quickly.Black_Rook said:
My view is that the end point of our current constitutional upheavals is an Anglo-Welsh state. Scotland goes first, then Northern Ireland goes next, for a variety of reasons: (1) Scottish secession obviously breaks up the current British state and greatly encourages the nationalists; (2) Scotland is the NI Unionists' closest partner in the Union in terms both of geography and culture - it's abandonment of the state will leave them demoralised and isolated; (3) there's limited interest in Britain in retaining the province as it is, and this will presumably only lessen once it's left out on a limb; (4) ditching Northern Ireland rids the British Government of a bottomless money pit and removes one of the major obstacles to better relations with the EU.Beibheirli_C said:
Would that be when England is finally independent? What about that little extra bit to the west known as "Wales"? Or is that merely Extreme Western England these days?Black_Rook said:... Our major divisions take the form of constitutional battles over where accountability and power should lie. One of those, the EU question, has been settled; once Scotland and Northern Ireland are also resolved then we ought finally to have some peace and quiet for a change.
The English and the Welsh then sit down, ask if carrying on together is worth it, and probably conclude that it is. The two have been joined at the hip for seven centuries, are heavily integrated, and Wales has a weaker nationalist movement and a much stronger anti-devolution movement than Scotland does. That's not to say that this state of affairs will endure forever, but that's the way things are now and are likely to remain for some time.
And so, after Scotland leaves the UK, rejoins the EU and the border posts and fences go up, we end up with three states occupying (as good as) three islands, and we can all do our own thing.
Scottish independence by itself would be such a calamitous wrench it would send Scotland into Depression (and maybe default?) and England into deep recession, further years of turmoil (on top of Covid) would deter investors in both countries. Intra "UK" trade would suffer. It would be the hottest of messes.
All sides would be mightily demoralised. Up north, a few ardent Scot Nats would be happy that their dream was realised, for most Scots this would then quickly turn sour as the economic reality (no central bank, no currency, huge deficit, newly hostile England as a neighbour) hit home, the Scots would desperately seek EU membership but that would take years even if the EU was utterly receptive (a moot point).
Would Scotland be in a fiscal position to join the euro? Does newly indy Scotland want to give up so much sovereignty just after gaining it? The EU is Federalising: see their recent agreement to borrow debt mutually. This is a federal EU state finally emerging.
It would need another referendum. Basically Scotland would have a decade of hell.
The great slump in Scotland would spread south. London might benefit from a few finance and law firms fleeing Edinburgh but then London might be dead from Covid by then anyway. England would stagnate badly.
At this point a Labour government would come along and say let's rejoin the EU, we're fucked now, what have we got to lose and at least we get to retire in the Algarve, and the referendum would pass.
However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.1 -
Whilst I'm open to the idea that slightly different solutions work for different people (especially if one has to take account of specific food intolerances,) the idea of what works as a sustainable pattern for healthy eating (as distinct from one of these fad diets) actually hasn't changed fundamentally, and may most succinctly be described as "moderation." And the reason why so many people struggle with moderation is that they get into bad habits, which are then very hard to break. My Jabba the Hutt physique was down mainly to the completely unrestrained consumption of biscuits.Philip_Thompson said:
I think its also a problem that people keep changing the idea of what works as a diet and in particular the overabundance of sugar and processed foods in quick and easy foods.Black_Rook said:
I've spent much of my adult life being obese, which is not recommended for healthy lung function either, so I feel your pain. Although I imagine that did more damage to my joints. I'm just hoping that my slightly dodgy knees can take the abuse, knees being a common source of difficulty as one advances in years, of course.kinabalu said:
That's all quite impressive compared to me. Then again, I have a quarter of a million fags inside of me so if we handicap for that I'm Mo Farah class.Black_Rook said:
At the risk of sounding like a total arse, I've managed to get my 5K time down below 22 minutes, given favourable conditions and a flat course. How much more I've got in my middle aged legs, I don't know. I'm close to, and think I've a better chance of getting, sub-45 for 10K than sub-20 for 5K. We shall see.kinabalu said:
5k in 25m is good. I can do 3k in 20m. Think I'd need at least 35m for 5k unless being chased.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I'm going to cut the running down a tad as it's the calories I am struggling to get in, I'm trying gain weight/muscle and it's tough to get all the calories in with the amount of running I do.kinabalu said:
Plus 50k a week running? Yikes!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Pull ups, press ups, ab wheel, floor bench press and some curls. Going well so far thanks for asking.Gallowgate said:
How’s the weightlifting going by the way? What sort of movements are you doing?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Much rather go to the pub, go for a run, etc. They don't appeal to me in any way.MaxPB said:
That's sad. Newspapers are a good past time on the weekend.CorrectHorseBattery said:Never bought a newspaper, never will.
You'll have yourself in "muscles" BoJo shape if you keep that up.
The main thing has been getting my 5K time below 25 minutes which I've nearly achieved now.
However, these things are all relative. There's a bloke at work that can get round 5K in 18 minutes, which is sickening enough. The track world record is under 13 minutes which, after you've ended up in a panting heap taking nearly twice as long as that, gives you a new appreciation of exactly how able even the also-rans in professional races really are.
I think the central problem is that humans simply haven't had long enough to adapt to being bipedal, let alone having food readily and consistently available enough so that we don't need to lay down all our spare energy as blubber for times of famine. It'll all be so much easier in another 10 million years...
I've yo-yo'd throughout my adult life. Changed my diet at the start of lockdown - trying for the first time what has ended up as a "keto" diet (high fat, very low carb) and cooking for myself every meal. So far this is working very well for me, I've lost 40 pounds so far this year but its hard to find ideas for anything convenient. Going to the supermarket and even "healthy" convenience food is normally selling itself on low-fat or fat-free which is the polar opposite of what I find is working for me. Very hard to find many high fat, carb-free convenient snacks.
So far I've found pistachio nuts and pork scratchings.
The best way to lose weight is to eat meals that are filling but low in energy density (low fat, low sugar,) and the best way to keep it off is not to get too carried away on the same things. The mass market slimming organisations (Weight Watchers and Slimming World) both steer people in this direction. Exercise is helpful - it enables you to lose weight more rapidly, and to enjoy more treats once the excess weight is off - but has to be regarded, primarily, as something that's worthwhile in its own right. The hard slog of controlling one's weight is achieved through good nutrition, and that in turn is only possible when you ditch the bad habits.
If that sounds like I'm making out that it's all so terribly easy, then that's absolutely not the case. If not getting fat were easy then something approaching two-thirds of the entire population would not be overweight or obese.0 -
What about calories from alcohol?LadyG said:
Fasting. Try it.Philip_Thompson said:
I think its also a problem that people keep changing the idea of what works as a diet and in particular the overabundance of sugar and processed foods in quick and easy foods.Black_Rook said:
I've spent much of my adult life being obese, which is not recommended for healthy lung function either, so I feel your pain. Although I imagine that did more damage to my joints. I'm just hoping that my slightly dodgy knees can take the abuse, knees being a common source of difficulty as one advances in years, of course.kinabalu said:
That's all quite impressive compared to me. Then again, I have a quarter of a million fags inside of me so if we handicap for that I'm Mo Farah class.Black_Rook said:
At the risk of sounding like a total arse, I've managed to get my 5K time down below 22 minutes, given favourable conditions and a flat course. How much more I've got in my middle aged legs, I don't know. I'm close to, and think I've a better chance of getting, sub-45 for 10K than sub-20 for 5K. We shall see.kinabalu said:
5k in 25m is good. I can do 3k in 20m. Think I'd need at least 35m for 5k unless being chased.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I'm going to cut the running down a tad as it's the calories I am struggling to get in, I'm trying gain weight/muscle and it's tough to get all the calories in with the amount of running I do.kinabalu said:
Plus 50k a week running? Yikes!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Pull ups, press ups, ab wheel, floor bench press and some curls. Going well so far thanks for asking.Gallowgate said:
How’s the weightlifting going by the way? What sort of movements are you doing?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Much rather go to the pub, go for a run, etc. They don't appeal to me in any way.MaxPB said:
That's sad. Newspapers are a good past time on the weekend.CorrectHorseBattery said:Never bought a newspaper, never will.
You'll have yourself in "muscles" BoJo shape if you keep that up.
The main thing has been getting my 5K time below 25 minutes which I've nearly achieved now.
However, these things are all relative. There's a bloke at work that can get round 5K in 18 minutes, which is sickening enough. The track world record is under 13 minutes which, after you've ended up in a panting heap taking nearly twice as long as that, gives you a new appreciation of exactly how able even the also-rans in professional races really are.
I think the central problem is that humans simply haven't had long enough to adapt to being bipedal, let alone having food readily and consistently available enough so that we don't need to lay down all our spare energy as blubber for times of famine. It'll all be so much easier in another 10 million years...
I've yo-yo'd throughout my adult life. Changed my diet at the start of lockdown - trying for the first time what has ended up as a "keto" diet (high fat, very low carb) and cooking for myself every meal. So far this is working very well for me, I've lost 40 pounds so far this year but its hard to find ideas for anything convenient. Going to the supermarket and even "healthy" convenience food is normally selling itself on low-fat or fat-free which is the polar opposite of what I find is working for me. Very hard to find many high fat, carb-free convenient snacks.
So far I've found pistachio nuts and pork scratchings.
It it amazing. You not only get the benefit of weight loss but you get a kind of euphoria by about day two, and your IQ goes up by 5-15 points. This is because the body no longer has to divert so much energy to digestion, so it gives all the spare energy to the brain (also the body is presuming there is a famine, so you need to be thinking hard and sharply about that next meal, and where it might come from).
It is genuinely mindblowing. Silicon valley billionaires go on fasts when they need to crack a particularly difficult problem.
I have found it hugely useful when I have a difficult newt to paint.
And: we are meant to fast. The human body is superbly adapted to a famine-feast lifestyle, as that is how we evolved for a million years on the African plains. We didn't have three square meals a day, every day.
We eat too much, too often.
Finally, if you fast, it means you can eat whatever the fuck you like when you break the fast. Though don't overdo it on the first meal, or you will fall asleep straight after. It has happened to me.
I fast 4 days out of 7 on average, now. I love it.0 -
Fundamentally the only way to lose or gain weight is to eat less calories than you consume, or do lots of exercise to account for eating too much. As long as you're in a calorie deficit you will lose weight given time.
If fasting is the way you do that then great.0 -
Biden is a terrible option, a monumentally poor candidate.MarqueeMark said:
If they vote. Trump's camapign has to convince them that Biden is just as shit an option.stodge said:Just noted the latest Gravis poll in Pennsylvania which puts Biden up by just three - 48-45 compared to Fox News which gave Biden an 11-point advantage (50-39).
Gravis also did polls in Michigan (Biden up 51-42) and Wisconsin (Biden up 50-42).
Gravis notes undecided voters look to be breaking strongly for Biden.
But he doesn't forment division. Which, I'm sad to say, Trump does.0 -
Really good red wine, eg North Macedonian Barovo Tikves Single Vineyard*, isn't a food stuff, it is medicine. And is counted as suchrcs1000 said:
What about calories from alcohol?LadyG said:
Fasting. Try it.Philip_Thompson said:
I think its also a problem that people keep changing the idea of what works as a diet and in particular the overabundance of sugar and processed foods in quick and easy foods.Black_Rook said:
I've spent much of my adult life being obese, which is not recommended for healthy lung function either, so I feel your pain. Although I imagine that did more damage to my joints. I'm just hoping that my slightly dodgy knees can take the abuse, knees being a common source of difficulty as one advances in years, of course.kinabalu said:
That's all quite impressive compared to me. Then again, I have a quarter of a million fags inside of me so if we handicap for that I'm Mo Farah class.Black_Rook said:
At the risk of sounding like a total arse, I've managed to get my 5K time down below 22 minutes, given favourable conditions and a flat course. How much more I've got in my middle aged legs, I don't know. I'm close to, and think I've a better chance of getting, sub-45 for 10K than sub-20 for 5K. We shall see.kinabalu said:
5k in 25m is good. I can do 3k in 20m. Think I'd need at least 35m for 5k unless being chased.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I'm going to cut the running down a tad as it's the calories I am struggling to get in, I'm trying gain weight/muscle and it's tough to get all the calories in with the amount of running I do.kinabalu said:
Plus 50k a week running? Yikes!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Pull ups, press ups, ab wheel, floor bench press and some curls. Going well so far thanks for asking.Gallowgate said:
How’s the weightlifting going by the way? What sort of movements are you doing?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Much rather go to the pub, go for a run, etc. They don't appeal to me in any way.MaxPB said:
That's sad. Newspapers are a good past time on the weekend.CorrectHorseBattery said:Never bought a newspaper, never will.
You'll have yourself in "muscles" BoJo shape if you keep that up.
The main thing has been getting my 5K time below 25 minutes which I've nearly achieved now.
However, these things are all relative. There's a bloke at work that can get round 5K in 18 minutes, which is sickening enough. The track world record is under 13 minutes which, after you've ended up in a panting heap taking nearly twice as long as that, gives you a new appreciation of exactly how able even the also-rans in professional races really are.
I think the central problem is that humans simply haven't had long enough to adapt to being bipedal, let alone having food readily and consistently available enough so that we don't need to lay down all our spare energy as blubber for times of famine. It'll all be so much easier in another 10 million years...
I've yo-yo'd throughout my adult life. Changed my diet at the start of lockdown - trying for the first time what has ended up as a "keto" diet (high fat, very low carb) and cooking for myself every meal. So far this is working very well for me, I've lost 40 pounds so far this year but its hard to find ideas for anything convenient. Going to the supermarket and even "healthy" convenience food is normally selling itself on low-fat or fat-free which is the polar opposite of what I find is working for me. Very hard to find many high fat, carb-free convenient snacks.
So far I've found pistachio nuts and pork scratchings.
It it amazing. You not only get the benefit of weight loss but you get a kind of euphoria by about day two, and your IQ goes up by 5-15 points. This is because the body no longer has to divert so much energy to digestion, so it gives all the spare energy to the brain (also the body is presuming there is a famine, so you need to be thinking hard and sharply about that next meal, and where it might come from).
It is genuinely mindblowing. Silicon valley billionaires go on fasts when they need to crack a particularly difficult problem.
I have found it hugely useful when I have a difficult newt to paint.
And: we are meant to fast. The human body is superbly adapted to a famine-feast lifestyle, as that is how we evolved for a million years on the African plains. We didn't have three square meals a day, every day.
We eat too much, too often.
Finally, if you fast, it means you can eat whatever the fuck you like when you break the fast. Though don't overdo it on the first meal, or you will fall asleep straight after. It has happened to me.
I fast 4 days out of 7 on average, now. I love it.
*It's also bloody good. Like a grand superTuscan but half the price0 -
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.0 -
Up to today I hadn't realised they were travellers. That being the case I am now even more convinced that they have been told to expect a suspended sentence or at most an extremely light one. The reason for that is they have been let free on bail.....anyone exoecting a life sentence has nothing to lose by doing a runner and its not like they come from a community that is likely to inform the police of their current whereabouts.
So a) they are already out the country or b) they got a nod and a wink that there would be minimal sentence imposed.
Frankly this is a bet I would love to lose0 -
We become a society which gets streaming content on demand from YouTube.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
That doesn't actually sound *that* bad0 -
The best way for Trump I think is not to denigrate Biden per se as he has enough of a track record as not to scare people. It is to portray him as weak and / or mentally incompetent to stop other more radical factions controlling the showrcs1000 said:
Biden is a terrible option, a monumentally poor candidate.MarqueeMark said:
If they vote. Trump's camapign has to convince them that Biden is just as shit an option.stodge said:Just noted the latest Gravis poll in Pennsylvania which puts Biden up by just three - 48-45 compared to Fox News which gave Biden an 11-point advantage (50-39).
Gravis also did polls in Michigan (Biden up 51-42) and Wisconsin (Biden up 50-42).
Gravis notes undecided voters look to be breaking strongly for Biden.
But he doesn't forment division. Which, I'm sad to say, Trump does.0 -
£50, don't forget our bet.Pagan2 said:Up to today I hadn't realised they were travellers. That being the case I am now even more convinced that they have been told to expect a suspended sentence or at most an extremely light one. The reason for that is they have been let free on bail.....anyone exoecting a life sentence has nothing to lose by doing a runner and its not like they come from a community that is likely to inform the police of their current whereabouts.
So a) they are already out the country or b) they got a nod and a wink that there would be minimal sentence imposed.
Frankly this is a bet I would love to lose0 -
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.0 -
Perhaps you as a kind doting son could do what I did and let her have the logon to your amazon prime or netflix....those services are accessible from a number of devices.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
If you have neither help her set up an account for herself it is still cheaper than the bbc extortion by about 50% and frankly then she wont have no choice but to watch ghastly lifestyle programs unless she wants to.
Your appeal to community is really an appeal for mediocrity , show the poor old lady some better options0 -
I in fact mentioned the bet Robert, I hope that wasn't an insinuation that I might dorcs1000 said:
£50, don't forget our bet.Pagan2 said:Up to today I hadn't realised they were travellers. That being the case I am now even more convinced that they have been told to expect a suspended sentence or at most an extremely light one. The reason for that is they have been let free on bail.....anyone exoecting a life sentence has nothing to lose by doing a runner and its not like they come from a community that is likely to inform the police of their current whereabouts.
So a) they are already out the country or b) they got a nod and a wink that there would be minimal sentence imposed.
Frankly this is a bet I would love to lose0 -
OMG so they will have to go from watching Strictly Come Dancing and The Voice UK (BBC) to Britain's Got Talent and Love Island UK (ITV)kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
I somehow feel the poor elderly pensioners of the nation will endure this horrific rupture.0 -
Cutting you some slack, big softy that I am. I now have to be VERY right to win.MrEd said:
I hadn't remembered the sub-200 bit but happy with thatkinabalu said:
FIFTY pounds.MrEd said:
I'm going to buy that for Kinablu with the £10 I win off him when Trump gets re-electedTheuniondivvie said:This is a boney fidee shit painting, not even redeemed by crude folkiness.
https://twitter.com/McNaughtonArt/status/1286327028807905282?s=20
'Internationally acclaimed for his patriotic paintings such as The Forgotten Man. #MAGA'
Trump wins - You win £50.
Trump loses AND under 200 in the EC - I win £50.
AOR - Flat.
Remember?0 -
How is everyone's Saturday0
-
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.0 -
Digging out bindweed when it isn't raining, doing a navigation exam when it is.CorrectHorseBattery said:How is everyone's Saturday
0 -
The implications of 4 more years of Mr Johnson in power are worth considering.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.0 -
I know, I'm just super excited to win £50. Staying out on bail (when it had previously been granted) is not that unusual.Pagan2 said:
I in fact mentioned the bet Robert, I hope that wasn't an insinuation that I might dorcs1000 said:
£50, don't forget our bet.Pagan2 said:Up to today I hadn't realised they were travellers. That being the case I am now even more convinced that they have been told to expect a suspended sentence or at most an extremely light one. The reason for that is they have been let free on bail.....anyone exoecting a life sentence has nothing to lose by doing a runner and its not like they come from a community that is likely to inform the police of their current whereabouts.
So a) they are already out the country or b) they got a nod and a wink that there would be minimal sentence imposed.
Frankly this is a bet I would love to lose0 -
Its local government has more discretion and less imposed control than we have from Whitehall.rcs1000 said:
France is surely more centralised than the UK.Fishing said:
That is the profile of a protest vote rather than a party that had convinced people ideologically - cf the Greens in the late 80s.justin124 said:
I have never been a fan of Devolution and still view it as a serious mistake , but it was a response to the rise in nationalism which had already occurred. As far back as October 1974 GE ,the SNP polled 30% of the vote in Scotland - though that did fall away subsequently.
I think some form of devolution was inevitable and right in the most centralised country in the democratic world, but, as I said below, how Blair did it - asymmetrically and obviously as a sop rather than because he genuinely believed in what he was doing - was almost certain to cause it to fail.0 -
The difference is we are DEFINITELY about to crash into a whole new world of economic pain (above and beyond anything like No Deal Brexit, but that might be added in to the mix, just for fun). This is not a threat like Project Fear, it is our new reality looming.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.
This is going to happen in the next 6 months. It's in the post.
Now it is possible the economic situation will be so harsh the Scots will think fuck it, it can't get any worse, let's take the risk of worsening the pain even with 15% unemployment, but my reading of human nature says this is not probable.
Besides, I agree with you, with the polls as they are Boris is just going to stonewall. He won't want to go down as the PM who lost the union, he will simply refuse a vote and hope the SNP blows up before 2024. And if they don't and Scotland still wants indy, then prime minister Starmer or Sunak will have to deal with the growing constitutional crisis.
But by then we could all be living in a post-plague robot world, so who knows.0 -
No. If the Scots vote for the SNP to seek a new referendum and the Tories simply refuse to let it happen then the resentment will be stoked up and boil over at the first opportunity even if its when Labour have just taken over.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.
The fact that the Tories have gone won't reverse their resentment at being ignored and mistreated for years and the risk it could happen again in the future.0 -
I don't see BBC TV and Radio as mediocre. In fact if it went subscription I would be prepared to pay more than the current LF.Pagan2 said:
Perhaps you as a kind doting son could do what I did and let her have the logon to your amazon prime or netflix....those services are accessible from a number of devices.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
If you have neither help her set up an account for herself it is still cheaper than the bbc extortion by about 50% and frankly then she wont have no choice but to watch ghastly lifestyle programs unless she wants to.
Your appeal to community is really an appeal for mediocrity , show the poor old lady some better options1 -
Jeez. Just noticed.
America had nearly 80,000 new cases yesterday
Brazil had nearly 60,000
India had nearly 50,000
And it was a global record of 290,000 new cases overall0 -
And so cycling mania gathers pace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We would do well to remember at this juncture that, back in March/April time, cyclists and runners were being demonised (largely, I suspect, by the same censorious types who are a bit too eager to scream about people not wearing masks nowadays) as nasty, selfish plague spreaders whose heavy breathing was responsible for butchering legions of defenceless old ladies with lethal aerosol clouds.
Now, just a few months on (and with our knowledge of the relative safety of outdoor environments and the risk of the virus to fat people having advanced somewhat,) cyclists are Heroes of the Revolution. Use of bikes for exercise and transportation alike is now deemed so desirable that our towns and cities should be redesigned to encourage it.
Funny how received wisdom so often turns out to be total bollocks, ain't it?1 -
Said record liable to be a gross underestimate, of course.LadyG said:Jeez. Just noticed.
America had nearly 80,000 new cases yesterday
Brazil had nearly 60,000
India had nearly 50,000
And it was a global record of 290,000 new cases overall0 -
Weather has been shite, so some catch-up TV whilst sorting out the ID for a bunch of recently trapped moths. Plus, thousands of images to file for submitting to the County Moth Recorder at year end.CorrectHorseBattery said:How is everyone's Saturday
As exciting as THAT! But going out to a top restaurant tonight.2 -
Revolutions happen for one of two reasons: people think "things are great, we can afford this", or "things are awful, how can they possibly get any worse".LadyG said:
The difference is we are DEFINITELY about to crash into a whole new world of economic pain (above and beyond anything like No Deal Brexit, but that might be added in to the mix, just for fun). This is not a threat like Project Fear, it is our new reality looming.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.
This is going to happen in the next 6 months. It's in the post.
Now it is possible the economic situation will be so harsh the Scots will think fuck it, it can't get any worse, let's take the risk of worsening the pain even with 15% unemployment, but my reading of human nature says this is not probable.
Besides, I agree with you, with the polls as they are Boris is just going to stonewall. He won't want to go down as the PM who lost the union, he will simply refuse a vote and hope the SNP blows up before 2024. And if they don't and Scotland still wants indy, then prime minister Starmer or Sunak will have to deal with the growing constitutional crisis.
But by then we could all be living in a post-plague robot world, so who knows.
Hence the 17th Century, with the mini ice age, and collapsing crop yields, saw an enormous uptick in revolutions. (See Parker's magisterial Global Crisis.)0 -
Hmm. Maybe. But we are becoming so atomized and although it's to some extent inevitable I think it should be resisted in places.rcs1000 said:
We become a society which gets streaming content on demand from YouTube.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
That doesn't actually sound *that* bad0 -
Went out for lunch earlier, Dad came to town. First time I've actually seen him (as distinct from via a screen) since March. Very good.CorrectHorseBattery said:How is everyone's Saturday
Now sat back in the flat watching it rain and getting fidgety. Not so good.1 -
That's Sturgeon's strategy: get rebuffed by Johnson, and be able to portray this as "the Brits hate the Scots so much they won't even let us vote."Philip_Thompson said:
No. If the Scots vote for the SNP to seek a new referendum and the Tories simply refuse to let it happen then the resentment will be stoked up and boil over at the first opportunity even if its when Labour have just taken over.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.
The fact that the Tories have gone won't reverse their resentment at being ignored and mistreated for years and the risk it could happen again in the future.1 -
I don't think those two things are contradictory.Black_Rook said:
And so cycling mania gathers pace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We would do well to remember at this juncture that, back in March/April time, cyclists and runners were being demonised (largely, I suspect, by the same censorious types who are a bit too eager to scream about people not wearing masks nowadays) as nasty, selfish plague spreaders whose heavy breathing was responsible for butchering legions of defenceless old ladies with lethal aerosol clouds.
Now, just a few months on (and with our knowledge of the relative safety of outdoor environments and the risk of the virus to fat people having advanced somewhat,) cyclists are Heroes of the Revolution. Use of bikes for exercise and transportation alike is now deemed so desirable that our towns and cities should be redesigned to encourage it.
Funny how received wisdom so often turns out to be total bollocks, ain't it?
We've been keen to increase the amount of cycling for a long time - whether for environmental, personal health or other reasons.
And early on in the CV-19 epidemic, we were being extra cautious.0 -
It is now, but I wouldn't say it was between the Mauroy reforms of 1982 and the devolution of 1997. A matter of opinion, though.rcs1000 said:
France is surely more centralised than the UK.Fishing said:
That is the profile of a protest vote rather than a party that had convinced people ideologically - cf the Greens in the late 80s.justin124 said:
I have never been a fan of Devolution and still view it as a serious mistake , but it was a response to the rise in nationalism which had already occurred. As far back as October 1974 GE ,the SNP polled 30% of the vote in Scotland - though that did fall away subsequently.
I think some form of devolution was inevitable and right in the most centralised country in the democratic world, but, as I said below, how Blair did it - asymmetrically and obviously as a sop rather than because he genuinely believed in what he was doing - was almost certain to cause it to fail.0 -
It's either No Deal (which might result in Tory remainers going Starmer or LD) or capitulation deal (which results in Johnson coalition splitting).
This seems like the highest the Tories will poll, at their GE19 level which to be fair is still very good.0 -
Even that example, selected to be damaging to my argument, illustrates something of what I mean. There's a world of difference between Strictly and Love Island. The former is capable of genuinely lifting national spirits - e.g. the Ed Balls "salsa" pls see below - whereas Love Island generates nothing but high profile suicides.LadyG said:
OMG so they will have to go from watching Strictly Come Dancing and The Voice UK (BBC) to Britain's Got Talent and Love Island UK (ITV)kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
I somehow feel the poor elderly pensioners of the nation will endure this horrific rupture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Czqtjk_iGFU0 -
Yes try YouTube. Or Amazon Prime. Or Netflix. Or a plethora of other options.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
I see no reason why people who don't want to watch the BBC should be compelled to pay for it, just so others can watch Bergerac. That's not community.
The problem with the BBC now is that it is just crap. YouTube, Netflix etc are superior at what they do. Compelling people to pay for an inferior option is not a long-term solution.0 -
Excellent article, and agree totally. Though I doubt whether micro payments will prove a get rich quick scheme. The newspaper's central difficulty is that there is space for the 24 hour instant news and update service, which can only be online, radio or telly; and there is space for the longer term considered view provided by The Spectator (flourishing), Economist (less good than it was) and New Statesman (pretty good) and such stuff is popular in hard copy.
For loads of people hard copy is still the preferred way of reading anything medium length or long, and when you pay for it you feel you are getting something you can handle and even keep.
But there isn't a lot of room for the daily newspaper, which used to be the 'first draft of history' but no longer has that capacity or desire, can't be first with the story because someone else online will be, and has gone out of date by the time you read it.
And when a newspaper has something important and distinctive to say you will usually see it referred to or summarised on PB or somewhere in Twitterland hours before the newspaper has got to your increasingly impoverished newsagent.0 -
And some here gleefully want to play into her hands and have the gall to call themselves "unionists"rcs1000 said:
That's Sturgeon's strategy: get rebuffed by Johnson, and be able to portray this as "the Brits hate the Scots so much they won't even let us vote."Philip_Thompson said:
No. If the Scots vote for the SNP to seek a new referendum and the Tories simply refuse to let it happen then the resentment will be stoked up and boil over at the first opportunity even if its when Labour have just taken over.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.
The fact that the Tories have gone won't reverse their resentment at being ignored and mistreated for years and the risk it could happen again in the future.0 -
...and more corruption. I must remember to give the Mayor that bung to get my planning permission through.IanB2 said:
Its local government has more discretion and less imposed control than we have from Whitehall.rcs1000 said:
France is surely more centralised than the UK.Fishing said:
That is the profile of a protest vote rather than a party that had convinced people ideologically - cf the Greens in the late 80s.justin124 said:
I have never been a fan of Devolution and still view it as a serious mistake , but it was a response to the rise in nationalism which had already occurred. As far back as October 1974 GE ,the SNP polled 30% of the vote in Scotland - though that did fall away subsequently.
I think some form of devolution was inevitable and right in the most centralised country in the democratic world, but, as I said below, how Blair did it - asymmetrically and obviously as a sop rather than because he genuinely believed in what he was doing - was almost certain to cause it to fail.0 -
I doubt a Labour government would agree to one has soon as they got elected though. They'd want at least 2 years to demonstrate "all the good things we are doing for Scotland", and hope any built up resentment would recede in that time period.Carnyx said:
The implications of 4 more years of Mr Johnson in power are worth considering.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.0 -
Hi @Mexicanpete, how's it going mate0
-
@kinabalu I sent you a PM0
-
That's what people were saying before Halloween and look what happened: Boris got a deal he sold as a great new deal to his supporters.CorrectHorseBattery said:It's either No Deal (which might result in Tory remainers going Starmer or LD) or capitulation deal (which results in Johnson coalition splitting).
This seems like the highest the Tories will poll, at their GE19 level which to be fair is still very good.
I expect history will repeat itself.0 -
Good for you. They should do that then and you can do that and everyone's happy and you can continue to fund Antiques Roadshow or whatever else it is you love.kinabalu said:
I don't see BBC TV and Radio as mediocre. In fact if it went subscription I would be prepared to pay more than the current LF.Pagan2 said:
Perhaps you as a kind doting son could do what I did and let her have the logon to your amazon prime or netflix....those services are accessible from a number of devices.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
If you have neither help her set up an account for herself it is still cheaper than the bbc extortion by about 50% and frankly then she wont have no choice but to watch ghastly lifestyle programs unless she wants to.
Your appeal to community is really an appeal for mediocrity , show the poor old lady some better options
Just don't compel the rest of us to buy subscriptions by law if we want to watch any other TV live.0 -
Early on in the pandemic, a lot of people were being hysterical and very nasty. They wanted people doing exercise shot with crossbows and such like.rcs1000 said:
I don't think those two things are contradictory.Black_Rook said:
And so cycling mania gathers pace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We would do well to remember at this juncture that, back in March/April time, cyclists and runners were being demonised (largely, I suspect, by the same censorious types who are a bit too eager to scream about people not wearing masks nowadays) as nasty, selfish plague spreaders whose heavy breathing was responsible for butchering legions of defenceless old ladies with lethal aerosol clouds.
Now, just a few months on (and with our knowledge of the relative safety of outdoor environments and the risk of the virus to fat people having advanced somewhat,) cyclists are Heroes of the Revolution. Use of bikes for exercise and transportation alike is now deemed so desirable that our towns and cities should be redesigned to encourage it.
Funny how received wisdom so often turns out to be total bollocks, ain't it?
We've been keen to increase the amount of cycling for a long time - whether for environmental, personal health or other reasons.
And early on in the CV-19 epidemic, we were being extra cautious.
Later on in the pandemic, the same people are still being hysterical and very nasty. They've just switched hobby horses. Now they want people who dislike mask wearing shot with crossbows and such like. They were wrong about exercise and they might yet turn out to be wrong about masks, but that's entirely incidental to the main motivation which is to feel self-righteous and to enjoy bullying others.
Give it another few months and the same people will be bludgeoning and shaming the enemy into submission for not balancing a fluorescent green hexagon on their heads, or whatever the infraction du jour happens to be.2 -
That makes the heroic assumption that Labour can get all the way to an overall majority, rather than being critically dependent on SNP votes.RandallFlagg said:
I doubt a Labour government would agree to one has soon as they got elected though. They'd want at least 2 years to demonstrate "all the good things we are doing for Scotland", and hope any built up resentment would recede in that time period.Carnyx said:
The implications of 4 more years of Mr Johnson in power are worth considering.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.0 -
He sold us a pup. He will sell us another in January.Philip_Thompson said:
That's what people were saying before Halloween and look what happened: Boris got a deal he sold as a great new deal to his supporters.CorrectHorseBattery said:It's either No Deal (which might result in Tory remainers going Starmer or LD) or capitulation deal (which results in Johnson coalition splitting).
This seems like the highest the Tories will poll, at their GE19 level which to be fair is still very good.
I expect history will repeat itself.3 -
They won't be as reliant on the SNP if they can help the Lib Dems to win a few of their 100 target seatsBlack_Rook said:
That makes the heroic assumption that Labour can get all the way to an overall majority, rather than being critically dependent on SNP votes.RandallFlagg said:
I doubt a Labour government would agree to one has soon as they got elected though. They'd want at least 2 years to demonstrate "all the good things we are doing for Scotland", and hope any built up resentment would recede in that time period.Carnyx said:
The implications of 4 more years of Mr Johnson in power are worth considering.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.1 -
Who's to say he doesnt? And different things work for different people, even finding enjoyment in jogging which I personally find a hell of a grind.nichomar said:
All that time alone, the damaged joints in later life. Join a club or society and get out and meet peopleCorrectHorseBattery said:
What's the point in anything? It's something to achieve, something to do. My mental health is so much better now I've been exercising so much. Achieving things has helped me in work too.nichomar said:
What’s the point?CorrectHorseBattery said:
The ultimate aim is below 20 minutes - then I will feel like I've "made it" - but it's a longer term goal.kinabalu said:
5k in 25m is good. I can do 3k in 20m. Think I'd need at least 35m for 5k unless being chased.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I'm going to cut the running down a tad as it's the calories I am struggling to get in, I'm trying gain weight/muscle and it's tough to get all the calories in with the amount of running I do.kinabalu said:
Plus 50k a week running? Yikes!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Pull ups, press ups, ab wheel, floor bench press and some curls. Going well so far thanks for asking.Gallowgate said:
How’s the weightlifting going by the way? What sort of movements are you doing?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Much rather go to the pub, go for a run, etc. They don't appeal to me in any way.MaxPB said:
That's sad. Newspapers are a good past time on the weekend.CorrectHorseBattery said:Never bought a newspaper, never will.
You'll have yourself in "muscles" BoJo shape if you keep that up.
The main thing has been getting my 5K time below 25 minutes which I've nearly achieved now.
For now it's: 25 minute 5K > getting bigger and stronger > 20 minute 5K
Each to their own. I doubt many would advise posting on PB to relax but it works.0 -
You either need their support, or you don't. The numbers count for little.CorrectHorseBattery said:
They won't be as reliant on the SNP if they can help the Lib Dems to win a few of their 100 target seatsBlack_Rook said:
That makes the heroic assumption that Labour can get all the way to an overall majority, rather than being critically dependent on SNP votes.RandallFlagg said:
I doubt a Labour government would agree to one has soon as they got elected though. They'd want at least 2 years to demonstrate "all the good things we are doing for Scotland", and hope any built up resentment would recede in that time period.Carnyx said:
The implications of 4 more years of Mr Johnson in power are worth considering.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.0 -
I think that's what they'd offer Sturgeon if they needed SNP votes and were even open to a deal with them. If that failed, SKS could just say "we tried to form a government, and we respected the principle of a second indyref, but Sturgeon's demands were unreasonable. Not our fault the SNP *joined with the Tories* to vote down our Queen's Speech."Black_Rook said:
That makes the heroic assumption that Labour can get all the way to an overall majority, rather than being critically dependent on SNP votes.RandallFlagg said:
I doubt a Labour government would agree to one has soon as they got elected though. They'd want at least 2 years to demonstrate "all the good things we are doing for Scotland", and hope any built up resentment would recede in that time period.Carnyx said:
The implications of 4 more years of Mr Johnson in power are worth considering.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.1 -
Saw a piece on this chap on Colbert years ago. Let's just say subtlety of message is not his artistic aim.Theuniondivvie said:This is a boney fidee shit painting, not even redeemed by crude folkiness.
https://twitter.com/McNaughtonArt/status/1286327028807905282?s=20
'Internationally acclaimed for his patriotic paintings such as The Forgotten Man. #MAGA'0 -
In 1996 the Met Office had just started publishing weather forecasts on-line and were seeking ways to monetise personal forecasts using micro payments, but there were no obvious ways to achieve this. Following a meeting with them we outlined a possible way to do this and IBM subsequently patented the method proposed. "the present invention solves the problem of effecting low cost transactions in association with the services provided"
https://patents.google.com/patent/JP2003050922A/en?q=H04L12/1457&inventor=Derrick+John+Byford
Twenty four years later!0 -
I don't want anyone shot for not wearing a mask.Black_Rook said:
Early on in the pandemic, a lot of people were being hysterical and very nasty. They wanted people doing exercise shot with crossbows and such like.rcs1000 said:
I don't think those two things are contradictory.Black_Rook said:
And so cycling mania gathers pace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We would do well to remember at this juncture that, back in March/April time, cyclists and runners were being demonised (largely, I suspect, by the same censorious types who are a bit too eager to scream about people not wearing masks nowadays) as nasty, selfish plague spreaders whose heavy breathing was responsible for butchering legions of defenceless old ladies with lethal aerosol clouds.
Now, just a few months on (and with our knowledge of the relative safety of outdoor environments and the risk of the virus to fat people having advanced somewhat,) cyclists are Heroes of the Revolution. Use of bikes for exercise and transportation alike is now deemed so desirable that our towns and cities should be redesigned to encourage it.
Funny how received wisdom so often turns out to be total bollocks, ain't it?
We've been keen to increase the amount of cycling for a long time - whether for environmental, personal health or other reasons.
And early on in the CV-19 epidemic, we were being extra cautious.
Later on in the pandemic, the same people are still being hysterical and very nasty. They've just switched hobby horses. Now they want people who dislike mask wearing shot with crossbows and such like. They were wrong about exercise and they might yet turn out to be wrong about masks, but that's entirely incidental to the main motivation which is to feel self-righteous and to enjoy bullying others.
Give it another few months and the same people will be bludgeoning and shaming the enemy into submission for not balancing a fluorescent green hexagon on their heads, or whatever the infraction du jour happens to be.
But all the "anti mask" research is about protecting yourself from the virus. Which entirely misses the point. You wear a mask - just as a surgeon wears a mask - to stop *you* spreading the virus.
It's really not complicated.0 -
It's the LAW compelling you and you should comply unless and until it is changed. We are one nation under the law.Philip_Thompson said:
Good for you. They should do that then and you can do that and everyone's happy and you can continue to fund Antiques Roadshow or whatever else it is you love.kinabalu said:
I don't see BBC TV and Radio as mediocre. In fact if it went subscription I would be prepared to pay more than the current LF.Pagan2 said:
Perhaps you as a kind doting son could do what I did and let her have the logon to your amazon prime or netflix....those services are accessible from a number of devices.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
If you have neither help her set up an account for herself it is still cheaper than the bbc extortion by about 50% and frankly then she wont have no choice but to watch ghastly lifestyle programs unless she wants to.
Your appeal to community is really an appeal for mediocrity , show the poor old lady some better options
Just don't compel the rest of us to buy subscriptions by law if we want to watch any other TV live.0 -
And remember the LDs might be tempted into coalition with the Tories again.CorrectHorseBattery said:
They won't be as reliant on the SNP if they can help the Lib Dems to win a few of their 100 target seatsBlack_Rook said:
That makes the heroic assumption that Labour can get all the way to an overall majority, rather than being critically dependent on SNP votes.RandallFlagg said:
I doubt a Labour government would agree to one has soon as they got elected though. They'd want at least 2 years to demonstrate "all the good things we are doing for Scotland", and hope any built up resentment would recede in that time period.Carnyx said:
The implications of 4 more years of Mr Johnson in power are worth considering.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.0 -
Yes and I'm stumped for an answer.CorrectHorseBattery said:@kinabalu I sent you a PM
1 -
It's obvious what it will be: doing your bit for the economy. Public sector workers, of course, will be exempt.Black_Rook said:
Early on in the pandemic, a lot of people were being hysterical and very nasty. They wanted people doing exercise shot with crossbows and such like.rcs1000 said:
I don't think those two things are contradictory.Black_Rook said:
And so cycling mania gathers pace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We would do well to remember at this juncture that, back in March/April time, cyclists and runners were being demonised (largely, I suspect, by the same censorious types who are a bit too eager to scream about people not wearing masks nowadays) as nasty, selfish plague spreaders whose heavy breathing was responsible for butchering legions of defenceless old ladies with lethal aerosol clouds.
Now, just a few months on (and with our knowledge of the relative safety of outdoor environments and the risk of the virus to fat people having advanced somewhat,) cyclists are Heroes of the Revolution. Use of bikes for exercise and transportation alike is now deemed so desirable that our towns and cities should be redesigned to encourage it.
Funny how received wisdom so often turns out to be total bollocks, ain't it?
We've been keen to increase the amount of cycling for a long time - whether for environmental, personal health or other reasons.
And early on in the CV-19 epidemic, we were being extra cautious.
Later on in the pandemic, the same people are still being hysterical and very nasty. They've just switched hobby horses. Now they want people who dislike mask wearing shot with crossbows and such like. They were wrong about exercise and they might yet turn out to be wrong about masks, but that's entirely incidental to the main motivation which is to feel self-righteous and to enjoy bullying others.
Give it another few months and the same people will be bludgeoning and shaming the enemy into submission for not balancing a fluorescent green hexagon on their heads, or whatever the infraction du jour happens to be.0 -
TV Licence Fee = TV Poll Tax!kinabalu said:
I don't see BBC TV and Radio as mediocre. In fact if it went subscription I would be prepared to pay more than the current LF.Pagan2 said:
Perhaps you as a kind doting son could do what I did and let her have the logon to your amazon prime or netflix....those services are accessible from a number of devices.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
If you have neither help her set up an account for herself it is still cheaper than the bbc extortion by about 50% and frankly then she wont have no choice but to watch ghastly lifestyle programs unless she wants to.
Your appeal to community is really an appeal for mediocrity , show the poor old lady some better options0 -
I think if Labour can win 300+ seats they could probably form a government without needing SNP support, if the Lib Dems made a handful of gains as well. They could definitely do it with 310.CorrectHorseBattery said:
They won't be as reliant on the SNP if they can help the Lib Dems to win a few of their 100 target seatsBlack_Rook said:
That makes the heroic assumption that Labour can get all the way to an overall majority, rather than being critically dependent on SNP votes.RandallFlagg said:
I doubt a Labour government would agree to one has soon as they got elected though. They'd want at least 2 years to demonstrate "all the good things we are doing for Scotland", and hope any built up resentment would recede in that time period.Carnyx said:
The implications of 4 more years of Mr Johnson in power are worth considering.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.1 -
Bergerac is no longer on the BBC. You need UK Drama to be able to see repeats.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes try YouTube. Or Amazon Prime. Or Netflix. Or a plethora of other options.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
I see no reason why people who don't want to watch the BBC should be compelled to pay for it, just so others can watch Bergerac. That's not community.
The problem with the BBC now is that it is just crap. YouTube, Netflix etc are superior at what they do. Compelling people to pay for an inferior option is not a long-term solution.
Here's a classic scene from its heyday -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVshpj2jbRE0 -
So you need to riot in Trafalgar Square about it then.Sunil_Prasannan said:
TV Licence Fee = TV Poll Tax!kinabalu said:
I don't see BBC TV and Radio as mediocre. In fact if it went subscription I would be prepared to pay more than the current LF.Pagan2 said:
Perhaps you as a kind doting son could do what I did and let her have the logon to your amazon prime or netflix....those services are accessible from a number of devices.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
If you have neither help her set up an account for herself it is still cheaper than the bbc extortion by about 50% and frankly then she wont have no choice but to watch ghastly lifestyle programs unless she wants to.
Your appeal to community is really an appeal for mediocrity , show the poor old lady some better options
Otherwise - hand in pocket and pay up.0 -
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labourRandallFlagg said:
I think if Labour can win 300+ seats they could probably form a government without needing SNP support, if the Lib Dems made a handful of gains as well. They could definitely do it with 310.CorrectHorseBattery said:
They won't be as reliant on the SNP if they can help the Lib Dems to win a few of their 100 target seatsBlack_Rook said:
That makes the heroic assumption that Labour can get all the way to an overall majority, rather than being critically dependent on SNP votes.RandallFlagg said:
I doubt a Labour government would agree to one has soon as they got elected though. They'd want at least 2 years to demonstrate "all the good things we are doing for Scotland", and hope any built up resentment would recede in that time period.Carnyx said:
The implications of 4 more years of Mr Johnson in power are worth considering.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.
Labour seats on 202 seats, to achieve 310 seats they'd need to make 108 gains.
108 gains would need a swing of 9%, more than Blair achieved in 1997 which doesn't seem very likely to me.
However, realistically they could probably get away with more like 290 seats, a 7% swing. Even a terrible night for the SNP would result in a Labour minority Government, it would seem.
If the Lib Dems can even get into the 20s (Lib Dem target 13 has a 4280 majority), that number tumbles.
We really need to get it on the left, the Lib Dems doing well helps us.0 -
He went on in his late police career to Midsomerkinabalu said:
Bergerac is no longer on the BBC. You need UK Drama to be able to see repeats.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes try YouTube. Or Amazon Prime. Or Netflix. Or a plethora of other options.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
I see no reason why people who don't want to watch the BBC should be compelled to pay for it, just so others can watch Bergerac. That's not community.
The problem with the BBC now is that it is just crap. YouTube, Netflix etc are superior at what they do. Compelling people to pay for an inferior option is not a long-term solution.
Here's a classic scene from its heyday -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVshpj2jbRE0 -
Its not going to happen with a pro Brexit Tory party. More chance of a Labour Tory coalition!Carnyx said:
And remember the LDs might be tempted into coalition with the Tories again.CorrectHorseBattery said:
They won't be as reliant on the SNP if they can help the Lib Dems to win a few of their 100 target seatsBlack_Rook said:
That makes the heroic assumption that Labour can get all the way to an overall majority, rather than being critically dependent on SNP votes.RandallFlagg said:
I doubt a Labour government would agree to one has soon as they got elected though. They'd want at least 2 years to demonstrate "all the good things we are doing for Scotland", and hope any built up resentment would recede in that time period.Carnyx said:
The implications of 4 more years of Mr Johnson in power are worth considering.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.1 -
It will. "Boris" will indeed get a deal and he will indeed it sell it to his supporters as being "great". Nothing more certain. Wish there was a suitable BF market to clean up on.Philip_Thompson said:
That's what people were saying before Halloween and look what happened: Boris got a deal he sold as a great new deal to his supporters.CorrectHorseBattery said:It's either No Deal (which might result in Tory remainers going Starmer or LD) or capitulation deal (which results in Johnson coalition splitting).
This seems like the highest the Tories will poll, at their GE19 level which to be fair is still very good.
I expect history will repeat itself.0 -
It is spoken quietly, but UKTV is a substantially BBC owned joint venture, is it not?kinabalu said:
Bergerac is no longer on the BBC. You need UK Drama to be able to see repeats.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes try YouTube. Or Amazon Prime. Or Netflix. Or a plethora of other options.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
I see no reason why people who don't want to watch the BBC should be compelled to pay for it, just so others can watch Bergerac. That's not community.
The problem with the BBC now is that it is just crap. YouTube, Netflix etc are superior at what they do. Compelling people to pay for an inferior option is not a long-term solution.
Here's a classic scene from its heyday -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVshpj2jbRE
Not making a particular point about the BBC's future in this, just pointing that one out.0 -
Some cyclists and joggers were criticised, and rightly so, for their loutish and selfish behaviour at the time. For example taking their exercise in crowded residential areas and expecting everyone else to make way for them.Black_Rook said:
And so cycling mania gathers pace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We would do well to remember at this juncture that, back in March/April time, cyclists and runners were being demonised (largely, I suspect, by the same censorious types who are a bit too eager to scream about people not wearing masks nowadays) as nasty, selfish plague spreaders whose heavy breathing was responsible for butchering legions of defenceless old ladies with lethal aerosol clouds.
Now, just a few months on (and with our knowledge of the relative safety of outdoor environments and the risk of the virus to fat people having advanced somewhat,) cyclists are Heroes of the Revolution. Use of bikes for exercise and transportation alike is now deemed so desirable that our towns and cities should be redesigned to encourage it.
Funny how received wisdom so often turns out to be total bollocks, ain't it?0 -
Really? I did not know that. But it figures when I think about it. The quality is quite high.Pro_Rata said:
It is spoken quietly, but UKTV is a substantially BBC owned joint venture, is it not?kinabalu said:
Bergerac is no longer on the BBC. You need UK Drama to be able to see repeats.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes try YouTube. Or Amazon Prime. Or Netflix. Or a plethora of other options.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
I see no reason why people who don't want to watch the BBC should be compelled to pay for it, just so others can watch Bergerac. That's not community.
The problem with the BBC now is that it is just crap. YouTube, Netflix etc are superior at what they do. Compelling people to pay for an inferior option is not a long-term solution.
Here's a classic scene from its heyday -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVshpj2jbRE
Not making a particular point about the BBC's future in this, just pointing that one out.1 -
Yep. My mum loves that too. ITV unfortunately - but it stars Nettles and that's the main thing.state_go_away said:
He went on in his late police career to Midsomerkinabalu said:
Bergerac is no longer on the BBC. You need UK Drama to be able to see repeats.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes try YouTube. Or Amazon Prime. Or Netflix. Or a plethora of other options.kinabalu said:
Liberating. Terrific. But if others follow suit it will leave a funding gap and before too long there will be people all over the country, some elderly, some poor, some just a little unadventurous (no crime), who used to count on the BBC as being there for them, supplying them with something familiar and comforting and trusted each day, who will have this whipped out from under them. Not so terrific for them. And what do we say to these people? People like my mum who likes to watch endless repeats of Bergerac (or indeed anything with prime-of-life John Nettles in it). "Tough titty. Try YouTube." Is that what we tell them? If so, what sort of society are we becoming? C'mon. Sense of community please.LadyG said:I subscribe to the Times, the FT, the Economist and the Fortean Times.
I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but for some reason I still get it free because I subbed years ago.
TBH I would not especially miss any of them, and I may let most of them fall away.
I stopped paying my BBC licence fee a couple of months ago.Very liberating. Fuck the BBC.
I see no reason why people who don't want to watch the BBC should be compelled to pay for it, just so others can watch Bergerac. That's not community.
The problem with the BBC now is that it is just crap. YouTube, Netflix etc are superior at what they do. Compelling people to pay for an inferior option is not a long-term solution.
Here's a classic scene from its heyday -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVshpj2jbRE2 -
She doesn't really need a strategy any more. The number of independence supporters is so great that the Union is already beyond saving.rcs1000 said:
That's Sturgeon's strategy: get rebuffed by Johnson, and be able to portray this as "the Brits hate the Scots so much they won't even let us vote."Philip_Thompson said:
No. If the Scots vote for the SNP to seek a new referendum and the Tories simply refuse to let it happen then the resentment will be stoked up and boil over at the first opportunity even if its when Labour have just taken over.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.
The fact that the Tories have gone won't reverse their resentment at being ignored and mistreated for years and the risk it could happen again in the future.
Any concessions to the Scottish Government are banked and then more are demanded. No concessions can ever be sufficient, of course, if your ultimate aim is full sovereignty and anything less is portrayed as an insult to Scotland.
Any concessions that are withheld are, on the other hand... portrayed as an insult to Scotland.
The independence supporters, of course, agree with all of this. As far as they are concerned, Scotland is a colony, the UK Government is the oppressor, and everything it has done and ever will do is an insult to Scotland.
There is no way to counter this conviction, especially given that Scotland has begun to elect, and will continue to elect until independence, an endless series of nationalist governments. The SNP is too strong to be beaten, and in any event the Unionist parties are hopelessly divided and show no interest in even trying.0 -
The ones I encountered didn't even wait for others to make way for them! Just went on within 1 metre.another_richard said:
Some cyclists and joggers were criticised, and rightly so, for their loutish and selfish behaviour at the time. For example taking their exercise in crowded residential areas and expecting everyone else to make way for them.Black_Rook said:
And so cycling mania gathers pace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We would do well to remember at this juncture that, back in March/April time, cyclists and runners were being demonised (largely, I suspect, by the same censorious types who are a bit too eager to scream about people not wearing masks nowadays) as nasty, selfish plague spreaders whose heavy breathing was responsible for butchering legions of defenceless old ladies with lethal aerosol clouds.
Now, just a few months on (and with our knowledge of the relative safety of outdoor environments and the risk of the virus to fat people having advanced somewhat,) cyclists are Heroes of the Revolution. Use of bikes for exercise and transportation alike is now deemed so desirable that our towns and cities should be redesigned to encourage it.
Funny how received wisdom so often turns out to be total bollocks, ain't it?0 -
Pre-pandemic very visible portion of both running & cycling community were public nuisances and much disliked by pedestrians and motorists.another_richard said:
Some cyclists and joggers were criticised, and rightly so, for their loutish and selfish behaviour at the time. For example taking their exercise in crowded residential areas and expecting everyone else to make way for them.Black_Rook said:
And so cycling mania gathers pace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We would do well to remember at this juncture that, back in March/April time, cyclists and runners were being demonised (largely, I suspect, by the same censorious types who are a bit too eager to scream about people not wearing masks nowadays) as nasty, selfish plague spreaders whose heavy breathing was responsible for butchering legions of defenceless old ladies with lethal aerosol clouds.
Now, just a few months on (and with our knowledge of the relative safety of outdoor environments and the risk of the virus to fat people having advanced somewhat,) cyclists are Heroes of the Revolution. Use of bikes for exercise and transportation alike is now deemed so desirable that our towns and cities should be redesigned to encourage it.
Funny how received wisdom so often turns out to be total bollocks, ain't it?
Since the pandemic started, the asshole cyclists are not quite so annoying BUT the asshole runners more than make up for it.2 -
Such isolated examples typically being used as a weapon with which to beat all of them about the head, of course.another_richard said:
Some cyclists and joggers were criticised, and rightly so, for their loutish and selfish behaviour at the time. For example taking their exercise in crowded residential areas and expecting everyone else to make way for them.Black_Rook said:
And so cycling mania gathers pace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We would do well to remember at this juncture that, back in March/April time, cyclists and runners were being demonised (largely, I suspect, by the same censorious types who are a bit too eager to scream about people not wearing masks nowadays) as nasty, selfish plague spreaders whose heavy breathing was responsible for butchering legions of defenceless old ladies with lethal aerosol clouds.
Now, just a few months on (and with our knowledge of the relative safety of outdoor environments and the risk of the virus to fat people having advanced somewhat,) cyclists are Heroes of the Revolution. Use of bikes for exercise and transportation alike is now deemed so desirable that our towns and cities should be redesigned to encourage it.
Funny how received wisdom so often turns out to be total bollocks, ain't it?0 -
More to it than that.Black_Rook said:
She doesn't really need a strategy any more. The number of independence supporters is so great that the Union is already beyond saving.rcs1000 said:
That's Sturgeon's strategy: get rebuffed by Johnson, and be able to portray this as "the Brits hate the Scots so much they won't even let us vote."Philip_Thompson said:
No. If the Scots vote for the SNP to seek a new referendum and the Tories simply refuse to let it happen then the resentment will be stoked up and boil over at the first opportunity even if its when Labour have just taken over.tlg86 said:
Does Scottish Independence not require the referendum to happen with the Tories in power at Westminster? The "we didn't vote for the Tories" factor is a big part of the equation, in my opinion.Black_Rook said:
Almost the whole of the political and business class of the country told the electorate that leaving the EU would be calamitous. The electorate voted to leave anyway.LadyG said:However, and this an important point, I think the horrors of Covid mean that Scots indy is unlikely in the next few years. The desire might by there, but the practicalities of our new poverty make it impossible.
The main obstacle to independence isn't the economy, it's Boris Johnson's stonewalling. The Scottish independence vote most likely happens 6-12 months after the Conservatives next go into Opposition at Westminster.
The fact that the Tories have gone won't reverse their resentment at being ignored and mistreated for years and the risk it could happen again in the future.
Any concessions to the Scottish Government are banked and then more are demanded. No concessions can ever be sufficient, of course, if your ultimate aim is full sovereignty and anything less is portrayed as an insult to Scotland.
Any concessions that are withheld are, on the other hand... portrayed as an insult to Scotland.
The independence supporters, of course, agree with all of this. As far as they are concerned, Scotland is a colony, the UK Government is the oppressor, and everything it has done and ever will do is an insult to Scotland.
There is no way to counter this conviction, especially given that Scotland has begun to elect, and will continue to elect until independence, an endless series of nationalist governments. The SNP is too strong to be beaten, and in any event the Unionist parties are hopelessly divided and show no interest in even trying.
Brexit.0
This discussion has been closed.