Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

We are Getting too excited over Galloway – politicalbetting.com

12346

Comments

  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,146
    MON: Has it undermined message about being "all in it together", PM: "That's right, & that's why when I saw the story on Fri we had a new SoS for health on Sat"

    FRI: PM: Accepts Hancock apology & says "I consider this matter closed"

    https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1409484794111660033
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    My local Tesco store that's just been built is now advertising "free" charging for Volkswagen vehicles with its chargers. That seems like an interesting partnership, though I've no idea how long it would last as "free".

    https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/electric/partnerships/tesco

    As it says the chargers are VW-sponsored PodPoint units. Anyone with the app and a cable can use them for free.

    How long will they remain free? Depends on who is paying the bill - the site or the network? If the site then I can see how free charging is a pull vs no / paid charging at a different supermarket. If the network then not for long!

    Fun problem. So many of these 7kW units are let unmaintained and unloved after install. They get vandalised and broken and then its not owned by the site its located on and its not owned by the network logo on the post who just do the billing and it stays broken.
    The manufacturers really need to get together to sort out the EV infrastructure problem.

    SMMT and DfT need to bang heads together to get it working properly, the infrastructure issues are a major barrier to EV adoption. Only Tesla have done it right.
    We ran a Leaf 2014 - 2017, I'm on my second PHEV and we've now got an Ioniq EV. Once you've had an electric drivetrain you never want to go back to a gearbox.

    But - and its a big but - I am not going to rely on a charge network to get me anywhere, because there's no guarantee they will be delivering at the posted speed, available, or working at all. Add in the multiplicity of networks and batshit crazy "run a Roller for less" pricing and its game over.

    Seriously looked at a Tesla twice now. The lack of an interior and horror show build quality out me off a 3 even before noting how small the thing is. Then a Polestar 2 until the reviews noted the awful inefficiency. Now waiting to see how the Ioniq 5 pans out.
    We are going BMW i4 for Mrs DA's next car. She wouldn't entertain anything but a BEV now she's had one for a few years.
    That’s something of a step down from a Taycan.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,146

    The Leopards Eating Face Party always want their pound of face.


    Brexit was five years ago, PM. You do not need to still be repaying the debt of supporting Brexit.

    ...
  • Options
    maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,391
    maaarsh said:

    Game over for Geraint Thomas - looks like he's managed to break his collarbone. Looked weak yesterday anyway so top 5 was a stretch.

    Correction - up and running again but doesn't look happy and no team mate sent back to help yet. Appears his mistake has caused Robert Gesink to leave the race though which is a real shame.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,321
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    My local Tesco store that's just been built is now advertising "free" charging for Volkswagen vehicles with its chargers. That seems like an interesting partnership, though I've no idea how long it would last as "free".

    https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/electric/partnerships/tesco

    As it says the chargers are VW-sponsored PodPoint units. Anyone with the app and a cable can use them for free.

    How long will they remain free? Depends on who is paying the bill - the site or the network? If the site then I can see how free charging is a pull vs no / paid charging at a different supermarket. If the network then not for long!

    Fun problem. So many of these 7kW units are let unmaintained and unloved after install. They get vandalised and broken and then its not owned by the site its located on and its not owned by the network logo on the post who just do the billing and it stays broken.
    The manufacturers really need to get together to sort out the EV infrastructure problem.

    SMMT and DfT need to bang heads together to get it working properly, the infrastructure issues are a major barrier to EV adoption. Only Tesla have done it right.
    We ran a Leaf 2014 - 2017, I'm on my second PHEV and we've now got an Ioniq EV. Once you've had an electric drivetrain you never want to go back to a gearbox.

    But - and its a big but - I am not going to rely on a charge network to get me anywhere, because there's no guarantee they will be delivering at the posted speed, available, or working at all. Add in the multiplicity of networks and batshit crazy "run a Roller for less" pricing and its game over.

    Seriously looked at a Tesla twice now. The lack of an interior and horror show build quality out me off a 3 even before noting how small the thing is. Then a Polestar 2 until the reviews noted the awful inefficiency. Now waiting to see how the Ioniq 5 pans out.
    We are going BMW i4 for Mrs DA's next car. She wouldn't entertain anything but a BEV now she's had one for a few years.
    Ewww - modern BMWs are gopping. WTF are they doing with those vast nostril grills? I used to laugh at Alfa Romeo putting a vagina on their cars, but BMW have gone one better.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,146
    PM also said on Saturday night he was "very sorry" to receive Hancock's resignation letter https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1409484794111660033
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,988
    edited June 2021

    Pulpstar said:

    ping said:

    Pulpstar said:

    After the horrific faux Labour leaflet in B&S, we now have the horrific real one

    https://twitter.com/RicHolden/status/1409444990019854340

    Looks like the Zac Goldsmith playbook.
    Cynical, certainly
    Effective, definitely
    Journalists needs to ask Leadbetter and Starmer about that leaflet. By producing such a horror leaflet, Labour certainly can't claim any sort of moral high ground over Galloway or the Tories now.
    I think the Hindu vote for Labour is now going to go away. How dumb and just shitty can they be at this?
    How’s this different to Corbyn’s Labour putting a picture of an Israeli politician with a Tory on a leaflet aimed at getting the Muslim vote?

    I think it shows Corbyn at al are more pro Muslim than anti Semitic, and Sir Keir’s lot are no different
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,322
    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ping said:

    Pulpstar said:

    After the horrific faux Labour leaflet in B&S, we now have the horrific real one

    https://twitter.com/RicHolden/status/1409444990019854340

    Looks like the Zac Goldsmith playbook.
    Cynical, certainly
    Effective, definitely
    Journalists needs to ask Leadbetter and Starmer about that leaflet. By producing such a horror leaflet, Labour certainly can't claim any sort of moral high ground over Galloway or the Tories now.
    I think the Hindu vote for Labour is now going to go away. How dumb and just shitty can they be at this?
    There's less Hindus than there are Muslims in the UK. Labour have always played the numbers game when it comes to winning migrant votes.
    There are but deliberately, or stupidly, driving them away actually into the arms of the other party of government is insane. Worse than Thornberry and her flag tweet. It is becoming the kamikaze party.

    Pulpstar said:

    The most efficient electric car is the err..... Renault Twizy.

    ..and the reliability of French cars is....
    Touching wood here, but my 09 reg Peugeot is still going OK
    The most environmentally friendly car is almost always the one you have, running into the ground until the servicing costs get too high.
    Having to ditch my old Merc in October because of the ULEZ extension. 28 years old, never given a moment's trouble. My oldest possession bar my chess set. Choked about it. Mental image of it being squashed into a dense little cube and with its dying breath wondering, "But what did I do wrong?" Considering some therapy for the immediate aftermath of the dreaded day.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,797
    Sean_F said:

    Er, no. If the National Museum of Scotland wants to give back stuff, that's entirely up to them - but it does not remotely mean the British Museum has to too.....

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19402893.pressure-grows-uk-hand-back-elgin-marbles-scottish-decision/

    One might give the Greeks the Elgin marbles as an act of generosity, but there is little question that they were acquired legitimately.
    Best solution I've seen is to make identical facsimiles (which with modern scanning tech ought to be relatively simple), and given them back half the originals and half new copies.
  • Options
    pingping Posts: 3,731
    edited June 2021
    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    After the RA's imbroglio over people "taking offence" Scotrail gets it right:

    https://news.stv.tv/scotland/scotrail-claps-back-after-complaint-over-rainbow-pride-train?top

    Scotrail might do better to concentrate on providing a good rail service instead of showing off their virtue and looking ignorant and discriminatory to boot.
    In what way are ScotRail discriminatory? Do you support the request for a "Straight Pride" train?

    As I said, all this painting is silly. I would no more ask for this than to to go to the moon in a pea green boat. The customer making the request was being silly.

    But they have taken a view without informing themselves and adopted a position which others might think discriminatory towards them eg by tweeting about gay and trans people being attacked without also mentioning that straight people have been attacked or threatened, in some cases by the very people Scotrail is praising.

    Frankly it would be best if they didn't start mouthing off to customers in this way. It is not the job of a service provider to lecture a customer about politics. A polite "Our trains are for everyone all the time" would have made the point far better.
    Yes all our trains are for everyone is a great slogan.

    However, your conflating straight people being attacked with gay and trans people being attacked is straight out of the "what about male victims of female rape/why don't we have men's month/etc" playbook.

    You all of a sudden put yourself in the same (pea green) boat as a bunch of super undesirables.
    No it isn't. Those super-undesirables you refer to are lesbians and women being attacked for wanting equality. It is outrageous and may even be a criminal offence that a there are threats to murder a well know female writer on the streets of London, with no-one apparently battling an eyelid.

    I have written a lot on here - in this thread header, for instance - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/rendering-unto-caesar/ - about the evil of attacks on gay people.

    You misrepresenting what I say and making a vague accusation about undesirables is straight out of the playbook of men trying to shut women up when they don't like what they have to say.
    I can’t be the only one who finds the idea of a gay train a bit, umm, Chris Morris….

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMdPj3HXMgQ
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403
    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    After the RA's imbroglio over people "taking offence" Scotrail gets it right:

    https://news.stv.tv/scotland/scotrail-claps-back-after-complaint-over-rainbow-pride-train?top

    Scotrail might do better to concentrate on providing a good rail service instead of showing off their virtue and looking ignorant and discriminatory to boot.
    In what way are ScotRail discriminatory? Do you support the request for a "Straight Pride" train?

    As I said, all this painting is silly. I would no more ask for this than to to go to the moon in a pea green boat. The customer making the request was being silly.

    But they have taken a view without informing themselves and adopted a position which others might think discriminatory towards them eg by tweeting about gay and trans people being attacked without also mentioning that straight people have been attacked or threatened, in some cases by the very people Scotrail is praising.

    Frankly it would be best if they didn't start mouthing off to customers in this way. It is not the job of a service provider to lecture a customer about politics. A polite "Our trains are for everyone all the time" would have made the point far better.
    Yes all our trains are for everyone is a great slogan.

    However, your conflating straight people being attacked with gay and trans people being attacked is straight out of the "what about male victims of female rape/why don't we have men's month/etc" playbook.

    You all of a sudden put yourself in the same (pea green) boat as a bunch of super undesirables.
    No it isn't. Those super-undesirables you refer to are lesbians and women being attacked for wanting equality. It is outrageous and may even be a criminal offence that a there are threats to murder a well know female writer on the streets of London, with no-one apparently battling an eyelid.

    I have written a lot on here - in this thread header, for instance - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/rendering-unto-caesar/ - about the evil of attacks on gay people.

    You misrepresenting what I say and making a vague accusation about undesirables is straight out of the playbook of men trying to shut women up when they don't like what they have to say.
    Nah not true. Why would I want to shut you up on an internet chat room? Wouldn't be that interesting, would it.

    You said, apropos ScotRail specifically supporting trans and gay rights "...without also mentioning that straight people have been attacked or threatened..."

    That is exactly of the type of comment similar to, usually men, bewailing the lack of white history month or who bemoan the lack of attention given to male victims of rape in response to an outcry or publicity over a woman who has been raped.

    And the super-undesirables I referred to are certainly not lesbians and women being attacked. They are usually blokes and also usually white blokes.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,061

    Labour refusing to say whether @Keir_Starmer is aware of this dog whistle leaflet.. or if he condones it, or even if he was aware of it. Grim stuff.

    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1409470153214070795?s=20

    Of more interest, lower down on that Twitter link:

    "What do we want? (Derby built) Monorails!"
    "Where do we want it?" Egypt!

    https://www.mtdmfg.com/news/first-derby-built-cairo-monorail-trains-exported-to-egypt/
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,988

    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941
    edited June 2021
    kinabalu said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ping said:

    Pulpstar said:

    After the horrific faux Labour leaflet in B&S, we now have the horrific real one

    https://twitter.com/RicHolden/status/1409444990019854340

    Looks like the Zac Goldsmith playbook.
    Cynical, certainly
    Effective, definitely
    Journalists needs to ask Leadbetter and Starmer about that leaflet. By producing such a horror leaflet, Labour certainly can't claim any sort of moral high ground over Galloway or the Tories now.
    I think the Hindu vote for Labour is now going to go away. How dumb and just shitty can they be at this?
    There's less Hindus than there are Muslims in the UK. Labour have always played the numbers game when it comes to winning migrant votes.
    There are but deliberately, or stupidly, driving them away actually into the arms of the other party of government is insane. Worse than Thornberry and her flag tweet. It is becoming the kamikaze party.

    Pulpstar said:

    The most efficient electric car is the err..... Renault Twizy.

    ..and the reliability of French cars is....
    Touching wood here, but my 09 reg Peugeot is still going OK
    The most environmentally friendly car is almost always the one you have, running into the ground until the servicing costs get too high.
    Having to ditch my old Merc in October because of the ULEZ extension. 28 years old, never given a moment's trouble. My oldest possession bar my chess set. Choked about it. Mental image of it being squashed into a dense little cube and with its dying breath wondering, "But what did I do wrong?" Considering some therapy for the immediate aftermath of the dreaded day.
    Someone up north, where no-one has heard an ULEZ, will take it off you.

    List it on Pistonheads, with a suitably sentimental narrative advert, and they might highlight it on their forum.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403
    ping said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    After the RA's imbroglio over people "taking offence" Scotrail gets it right:

    https://news.stv.tv/scotland/scotrail-claps-back-after-complaint-over-rainbow-pride-train?top

    Scotrail might do better to concentrate on providing a good rail service instead of showing off their virtue and looking ignorant and discriminatory to boot.
    In what way are ScotRail discriminatory? Do you support the request for a "Straight Pride" train?

    As I said, all this painting is silly. I would no more ask for this than to to go to the moon in a pea green boat. The customer making the request was being silly.

    But they have taken a view without informing themselves and adopted a position which others might think discriminatory towards them eg by tweeting about gay and trans people being attacked without also mentioning that straight people have been attacked or threatened, in some cases by the very people Scotrail is praising.

    Frankly it would be best if they didn't start mouthing off to customers in this way. It is not the job of a service provider to lecture a customer about politics. A polite "Our trains are for everyone all the time" would have made the point far better.
    Yes all our trains are for everyone is a great slogan.

    However, your conflating straight people being attacked with gay and trans people being attacked is straight out of the "what about male victims of female rape/why don't we have men's month/etc" playbook.

    You all of a sudden put yourself in the same (pea green) boat as a bunch of super undesirables.
    No it isn't. Those super-undesirables you refer to are lesbians and women being attacked for wanting equality. It is outrageous and may even be a criminal offence that a there are threats to murder a well know female writer on the streets of London, with no-one apparently battling an eyelid.

    I have written a lot on here - in this thread header, for instance - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/rendering-unto-caesar/ - about the evil of attacks on gay people.

    You misrepresenting what I say and making a vague accusation about undesirables is straight out of the playbook of men trying to shut women up when they don't like what they have to say.
    I can’t be the only one who finds the idea of a gay train a bit, umm, Chris Morris….

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMdPj3HXMgQ
    "gay train"

    Very funny. It's not a gay train, it's a train decked out to show support for an oft-oppressed minority.

    It is also of course a marketing tool to position ScotRail as occupying a certain market position which they hope will be beneficial to them and their future revenue.
  • Options
    Nunu3Nunu3 Posts: 178
    Excellent news about Sunderland and Nissan.

    Although, I do belive that plant was meant to close by now if we Brexited.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,797
    Dura_Ace said:



    People focus on range, and in doing so miss efficiency. We don't talk about fossil cars that way - its how much fuel do they burn not how big is the fuel talk. Should be the same for EVs, where some of the companies finally adapting to EVs are bringing in chronically poor inefficient supply chains. VW's build quality and efficiency is so poor with the ID3/4 its almost as if they want their EVs to fail.

    Hyundai EVs are right up there with Tesla on efficiency and way better on build quality. If I just wanted transport that's what I'd get.

    In other VW news I recently bought a 20,000km 4.0 WR8 engine from a B5 Passat. WHY?
    Parts ?
    You've always wanted a W8, and it's the only one ever produced commercially ?
    As an art installation ?
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    "Make sure you put white washing as two words, and have them split over a line break, just to muddy the waters even further."
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    edited June 2021
    Isn't this just like the opening scene of the Thick of It:



    Malcolm Tucker : Seriously, the PM likes you personally. I like you personally, and we have absolutely no desire to get rid of you. I just want you to know that. None of this negative stuff is coming from us.

    Cliff Lawton Matt Hancock : Oh, Mal, mate, that... makes a big difference, makes me feel a lot more secure.

    Malcolm Tucker : Does it? Well, that's difficult.

    Matt Hancock : What's difficult?

    Malcolm Tucker : Just endless headlines, just endless, day after day, chipping away at your confidence.

    Matt Hancock : Absolutely.

    Malcolm Tucker : See, the thing is, that we're starting to look weak. Everyone say "When's he gonna go? When's he gonna go?".

    Matt Hancock : Right...

    Malcolm Tucker : And you don't want us to look weak, do you?

    Matt Hancock : No, no...

    Malcolm Tucker : So there you are. That's why you got to go.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,989
    Christ fair play to Thomas, he's dislocated his shoulder and had it popped back in whilst cycling :o !
  • Options
    StockyStocky Posts: 9,736

    Stocky said:


    Yes, same here. But they know even less about the science and ethical concerns than I do. Peer pressure can't trump what is lowest risk approach for them. There will be arguments in households up and down the land over this.

    I posted about this a couple of months ago. I have a 15 year old and a 17 year old, my default position is that I would not encourage them to be vaccinated until they are 18 and can make their own decision. But what if they demand to be vaccinated - do I refuse consent?

    I hesitate to advise on someone else's family decisions, but I think at 15-17 with a potentially very serious illness around, it's reasonable to let them have the vaccination if they want to.
    @NickPalmer Yes - I agree if I was convinced that the risk to them personally of catching Covid exceeds the risk to them from having the vaccine. Especially for the 15 year old. (The 17 year old will be 18 in six months so I agree she may be close enough). The boffins need to do more to convince me, that's all.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,146

    Isn't this just like the opening scene of the Thick of It:



    Malcolm Tucker : Seriously, the PM likes you personally. I like you personally, and we have absolutely no desire to get rid of you. I just want you to know that. None of this negative stuff is coming from us.

    Cliff Lawton Matt Hancock : Oh, Mal, mate, that... makes a big difference, makes me feel a lot more secure.

    Malcolm Tucker : Does it? Well, that's difficult.

    Matt Hancock : What's difficult?

    Malcolm Tucker : Just endless headlines, just endless, day after day, chipping away at your confidence.

    Matt Hancock : Absolutely.

    Malcolm Tucker : See, the thing is, that we're starting to look weak. Everyone say "When's he gonna go? When's he gonna go?".

    Matt Hancock : Right...

    Malcolm Tucker : And you don't want us to look weak, do you?

    Matt Hancock : No, no...

    Malcolm Tucker : So there you are. That's why you got to go.

    Except it's not.

    Hancock: I am not resigning.

    BoZo: Great.

    ...

    Hancock: I have resigned.

    BoZo: That's a shame.

    ...

    BoZo: I sacked him...
  • Options
    maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,391
    Pulpstar said:

    Christ fair play to Thomas, he's dislocated his shoulder and had it popped back in whilst cycling :o !

    Shame Gesink has had to pay for his mistake - probably better all round if he'd been able to keep upright.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,300

    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Charles said:

    kinabalu said:

    Charles said:

    Taz said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Taz said:

    I expect this sort of thing is coming to the UK..

    "A woman confronted the staff at the Wi Spa in Los Angeles after a man walked into the women's section with his genitals hanging out in front of girls. He identified as a "woman." The employees said he had a right to do that. The employees say that it's the law."

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1408997169344909313

    Get with the program gender critical women. This is the future. Bearded men explaining what it is to be a woman and what a woman is.
    As if we haven't had men telling us that for centuries. And exposing themselves to us as well. And behaving like perverts etc.

    Only now we're utterly fed up with it. So we say no to all this bullshit.
    Yes, it is awful and if women dare to dissent against this bullshit they get attacked, no platformed, sacked and reviled by a tiny minority. Men who think they know what being a woman is.

    I was fully on board with the trans lobby until I read of the cotton ceiling and lesbians being guilt shamed for not welcoming ‘girldick’.
    Sorry… have I understood that correctly…

    If a man self-identities as a woman, lesbians are supported to sleep with her?

    Hmmm… 🤔
    People sleep with who they want to if the desire is reciprocal. The biggest single exception is men forcing themselves on women in one way or another. The trans aspect to this is really lost in the margins. It's just that it has a certain prurient fascination.
    Guilt shaming lesbians who don’t want to sleep with women who still have their male parts is not acceptable
    And yet it is the logical consequence of self-id gender ideology.
    No it isn't. Because they never have to sleep with anyone they don't want to. For whatever reason.
    They don't. But they are being accused of transphobia and attacked. It is one reason why some lesbian groups have set up away from Stonewall and in opposition to it, precisely because they are worried about the consequences of self-id for lesbians.

    This is a real issue for lesbians who feel that the demands of men wishing to transition are taking precedence over the rights of women and lesbians in particular.
    I suspect we are largely in agreement here.

    If a man wants to dress as a woman that is no problem.
    If a man want to live as a woman that is no problem.
    If a man wants to take part in women's sporting events that are restricted to women that is a problem. However he/she wishes to self identify, he/she does not qualify. The weight lifting thing in the Olympics is absurd.
    If a man wants to make use of "safe spaces" for women such as toilets, prisons, changing rooms there is a conflict of rights but in my view that conflict should be resolved in favour of those born with the sex of a women if they are at risk. That is why those spaces exist.

    But no one, ever, is obliged to have sex with anyone else. That is all I was saying.
    It is not quite that simple though is it. You meet someone in the bar you are attracted, you wine her and dine her over a couple of weeks then you find out she isn't a women/man depending on your gender.

    At what point does it become incumbent on someone to mention it before it becomes deception? You whether he or she may be spending money on someone that you wouldn't have done if you had known up front. This sort of thing is going to crop up and I fully expect lawsuits about it.
    Isn't the simplest way to simply employ the Croc Dundee greeting whenever you meet someone new?
    Also legally is it even deception?

    If a transwoman (biological man) identifies as and is legally a woman, even if they have a penis, then why would they need to say that they have a penis or are biologically a man?

    Which is kind of messed up, but legally is there any grounds for it to be considered a deception?

    That the girl you've picked up has a penis may be a bit more of a shock than that she has a third nipple or false leg, but is there any law that says it needs to be declared?
    There is this precedent:

    BBC News - Woman who posed as man jailed for sex assaults
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34799692
    How is that precedent?

    That was a woman posing as a man. She was acting fraudulently.

    A transwoman is a biological man who is legally a woman. So if she calls herself a woman, the law agrees that she is a woman, so no deception has occurred.

    If you disagree with that, surely that's an issue in the law, not the individual committing a crime?
    No, the law doesn’t agree. Self ID is not the law yet.
    The question was if they're legally a woman, not self-identifying as one.

    You can in law now be legally a woman with a penis.
    Ludicrous.. and conversely a man without one ?
    Indeed. Men do now give birth.

    How nice for them.
    They might do.in the eyes of the law but most normal people will think.it ludicrous.

    Indeed.

    https://twitter.com/godblesstofu/status/1409228335448793102?s=21
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,489
    edited June 2021
    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:


    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:


    Pulpstar said:

    The most efficient electric car is the err..... Renault Twizy.

    ..and the reliability of French cars is....
    Touching wood here, but my 09 reg Peugeot is still going OK
    The most environmentally friendly car is almost always the one you have, running into the ground until the servicing costs get too high.
    Having to ditch my old Merc in October because of the ULEZ extension. 28 years old, never given a moment's trouble. My oldest possession bar my chess set. Choked about it. Mental image of it being squashed into a dense little cube and with its dying breath wondering, "But what did I do wrong?" Considering some therapy for the immediate aftermath of the dreaded day.
    Someone up north, where no-one has heard an ULEZ, will take it off you.

    List it on Pistonheads, with a suitably sentimental narrative advert, and they might highlight it on their forum.
    Or, indeed, move himself up north, with car. We love a bit of fossil-fuel particulate action up here. Reminds us of when we ate, breathed and slept in coal. Now Drax is cutting out a few million years by burning wood directly, it's just not the same :disappointed:
  • Options
    BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,454
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Wonder how that will work?

    Here are the demands independent Scotland should make of foreign firms

    https://www.thenational.scot/business/19402904.demands-independent-scotland-make-foreign-firms/

    That article is one of the scariest things I have read in a long time. The capital flight from Scotland if this looks close to coming to pass would be irreparable. Our tax base could seriously collapse and the implied threat of stealing pensions to bank this madness will result in not only the money but many people leaving the country.
    Leaving aside all the rest, I can see this one positively driving existing businesses away:


    - A binding commitment on overseas companies under which they are obliged to offer first refusal to a management/worker takeover of a business in the event of the overseas owners deciding to close down production in Scotland. The commitment should also include a transfer or sharing of “intellectual property” (IP) such as product brands and patents.
    These people are a bunch of self appointed nutters but jeez. I remember one of the many excellent scenes in the Big Short
    https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/73c98341-6f2c-48ea-8c02-33b3c7538cb8
    The inevitable outcome if Scotland votes for independence will be slashed public spending in order to deal with the deficit. Tax rises would be suicidal as everyone significantly affected (high value individuals and business-owners) would simply hop over the border into the welcoming arms of rUK. This sort of madness, quoted above, would only accelerate the capital flight which would take place between the vote and actual independence.

    (And, borrowing, of course, would hardly be an option.)

    The Yes folk are really in a bind as IndyRef is impossible to win without persuading folk they will be better off. And its quite clear that the obvious would be the case, certainly for anyone dependent on the state to maintain their standard of living.

    Quite a conundrum.

    From my canvassing for BT, which was pretty extensive, I have no doubt at all that the biggest single issue resulting in the no vote was fear about what would happen to peoples' pensions. When you see the outriders of the Scottish government explaining that it will be the duty of pension fund managers to work constructively with the independent Scottish government to fund this brave new future I think that the independence referendum becomes unwinnable for yes. Its really not hard to sell the idea that these people want to steal your pension to fund their fantasy.

    But this doesn't mean that having a government obsessed with independence, difference and making political points instead of running the country can't do a lot of damage anyway. They did in 2014 and they will again.
    I think you need to bear in mind that the majority of pro-Indy voters believe that Scotland is a net financial contributor to UK.

    I saw correspondence in the local paper in which the Yes guy was arguing that the UK Govt would have a obligation to pay the state pension of people in Scotland after independence. Didn't seem to realise that there was no pension pot.

    Likewise some saying that Indy Scotland can just keep on using the pound (which, kind of, they can) because its our currency just as much as England's. No conception of the significance of a central bank.

    This is how SNP could win an independence referendum. Don't think they will. But they conceivably could if they are dishonest enough and the public credulous enough to believe them.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,988
    Endillion said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    "Make sure you put white washing as two words, and have them split over a line break, just to muddy the waters even further."
    Are you a supporter of this @NickPalmer? You are working hard asking people to vote for Labour so implicitly backing the leaflet
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,146
    Trolley Fri: Argh, accept apology I consider the matter closed
    Media/MP babble, 89 Carrie texts p/hour
    Trolley Sat, SMASH: Arghhh Matt go now you'll be back better stronger shortly matey forward to victory!
    Trolley Mon, CRASH: when I saw the story on Fri we had a new SoS on Sat

    https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1409488850855071748
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,322
    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ping said:

    Pulpstar said:

    After the horrific faux Labour leaflet in B&S, we now have the horrific real one

    https://twitter.com/RicHolden/status/1409444990019854340

    Looks like the Zac Goldsmith playbook.
    Cynical, certainly
    Effective, definitely
    Journalists needs to ask Leadbetter and Starmer about that leaflet. By producing such a horror leaflet, Labour certainly can't claim any sort of moral high ground over Galloway or the Tories now.
    I think the Hindu vote for Labour is now going to go away. How dumb and just shitty can they be at this?
    There's less Hindus than there are Muslims in the UK. Labour have always played the numbers game when it comes to winning migrant votes.
    There are but deliberately, or stupidly, driving them away actually into the arms of the other party of government is insane. Worse than Thornberry and her flag tweet. It is becoming the kamikaze party.

    Pulpstar said:

    The most efficient electric car is the err..... Renault Twizy.

    ..and the reliability of French cars is....
    Touching wood here, but my 09 reg Peugeot is still going OK
    The most environmentally friendly car is almost always the one you have, running into the ground until the servicing costs get too high.
    Having to ditch my old Merc in October because of the ULEZ extension. 28 years old, never given a moment's trouble. My oldest possession bar my chess set. Choked about it. Mental image of it being squashed into a dense little cube and with its dying breath wondering, "But what did I do wrong?" Considering some therapy for the immediate aftermath of the dreaded day.
    Someone up north, where no-one has heard an ULEZ, will take it off you.

    List it on Pistonheads, with a suitably sentimental narrative advert, and they might highlight it on their forum.
    Yes, good idea. Or - even better - maybe I can give it to somebody I know who lives outside ULEZ. With visiting rights.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited June 2021
    Big G down in the Tour de France, Team Former Sky are in a mess. Burning all the matches to try and get him back to the peloton.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited June 2021
    Scott_xP said:

    PM also said on Saturday night he was "very sorry" to receive Hancock's resignation letter https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1409484794111660033

    All PMs say that when a minister resigns. Same as the whole letter writing nonsense, yes well I have to go, oh I am so sorry, you have been really good, I hope you can return soon....in time of Blair / Brown, it was often while doing a little dance about being able to get rid of a total shit (after they themselves placed the dirt in the papers).
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    Scott_xP said:

    Trolley Fri: Argh, accept apology I consider the matter closed
    Media/MP babble, 89 Carrie texts p/hour
    Trolley Sat, SMASH: Arghhh Matt go now you'll be back better stronger shortly matey forward to victory!
    Trolley Mon, CRASH: when I saw the story on Fri we had a new SoS on Sat

    https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1409488850855071748

    On Planet Dom, maybe.

    On Planet Earth, on Friday Boris supported Hancock's decision not to resign and didn't (or couldn't) sack him.

    Then Hancock decided to resign, in the face of overwhelming criticism, and Boris now has to support that.

    The situation is only back because of the substance of it, there is no second story about how it was announced.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,322
    Pulpstar said:

    Christ fair play to Thomas, he's dislocated his shoulder and had it popped back in whilst cycling :o !

    They are hard as nails these road cyclists. I'd say them and boxers are the toughest sportsmen.

    I box, people might be surprised to learn.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,893
    edited June 2021

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Wonder how that will work?

    Here are the demands independent Scotland should make of foreign firms

    https://www.thenational.scot/business/19402904.demands-independent-scotland-make-foreign-firms/

    That article is one of the scariest things I have read in a long time. The capital flight from Scotland if this looks close to coming to pass would be irreparable. Our tax base could seriously collapse and the implied threat of stealing pensions to bank this madness will result in not only the money but many people leaving the country.
    Leaving aside all the rest, I can see this one positively driving existing businesses away:


    - A binding commitment on overseas companies under which they are obliged to offer first refusal to a management/worker takeover of a business in the event of the overseas owners deciding to close down production in Scotland. The commitment should also include a transfer or sharing of “intellectual property” (IP) such as product brands and patents.
    These people are a bunch of self appointed nutters but jeez. I remember one of the many excellent scenes in the Big Short
    https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/73c98341-6f2c-48ea-8c02-33b3c7538cb8
    The inevitable outcome if Scotland votes for independence will be slashed public spending in order to deal with the deficit. Tax rises would be suicidal as everyone significantly affected (high value individuals and business-owners) would simply hop over the border into the welcoming arms of rUK. This sort of madness, quoted above, would only accelerate the capital flight which would take place between the vote and actual independence.

    (And, borrowing, of course, would hardly be an option.)

    The Yes folk are really in a bind as IndyRef is impossible to win without persuading folk they will be better off. And its quite clear that the obvious would be the case, certainly for anyone dependent on the state to maintain their standard of living.

    Quite a conundrum.

    From my canvassing for BT, which was pretty extensive, I have no doubt at all that the biggest single issue resulting in the no vote was fear about what would happen to peoples' pensions. When you see the outriders of the Scottish government explaining that it will be the duty of pension fund managers to work constructively with the independent Scottish government to fund this brave new future I think that the independence referendum becomes unwinnable for yes. Its really not hard to sell the idea that these people want to steal your pension to fund their fantasy.

    But this doesn't mean that having a government obsessed with independence, difference and making political points instead of running the country can't do a lot of damage anyway. They did in 2014 and they will again.
    I think you need to bear in mind that the majority of pro-Indy voters believe that Scotland is a net financial contributor to UK.

    I saw correspondence in the local paper in which the Yes guy was arguing that the UK Govt would have a obligation to pay the state pension of people in Scotland after independence. Didn't seem to realise that there was no pension pot.

    Likewise some saying that Indy Scotland can just keep on using the pound (which, kind of, they can) because its our currency just as much as England's. No conception of the significance of a central bank.

    This is how SNP could win an independence referendum. Don't think they will. But they conceivably could if they are dishonest enough and the public credulous enough to believe them.
    The Whitehall Government was sending letters out to existing state pensioners in 2013-14 confirming that London would payt their state pension. (This is not, of course, relevant to new ones, or to private pensions.)

    Edit: the letters were sent to those who wrote in and asked. Not to all pensioners.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,135
    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,146

    there is no second story about how it was announced.

    The second story is Bozo now tying to claim credit because he looks weak for not having acted
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,999

    Scott_xP said:

    PM also said on Saturday night he was "very sorry" to receive Hancock's resignation letter https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1409484794111660033

    All PMs say that when a minister resigns. Same as the whole letter writing nonsense, yes well I have to go, oh I am so sorry, you have been really good, I hope you can return soon....in time of Blair / Brown, it was often while doing a little dance about being able to get rid of a total shit (after they themselves placed the dirt in the papers).
    There are subtleties though. Often when someone is sacked there's reference to being 'asked' to resign for instance
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited June 2021

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    You can't then really stand on your moral high ground and complain about others doing it though.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403
    kinabalu said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Christ fair play to Thomas, he's dislocated his shoulder and had it popped back in whilst cycling :o !

    They are hard as nails these road cyclists. I'd say them and boxers are the toughest sportsmen.

    I box, people might be surprised to learn.
    You will remember this moment then.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QY1jzjTjIhY

  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941

    Scott_xP said:

    PM also said on Saturday night he was "very sorry" to receive Hancock's resignation letter https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1409484794111660033

    All PMs say that when a minister resigns. Same as the whole letter writing nonsense, yes well I have to go, oh I am so sorry, you have been really good, I hope you can return soon....in time of Blair / Brown, it was often while doing a little dance about being able to get rid of a total shit (after they themselves placed the dirt in the papers).
    It’s always the same, a minister is never formally dismissed, the closest you might get is “In light of our conversation this morning I have decided that it is in the best interests of government that I resign my position”.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    The leader of India is simply a "notorious Islamphobe" to you? 🤔
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,988
    edited June 2021

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    England has become a place where politics is decided by Asian religious factionalism - who would have thought it?! It was completely unpredictable. Why didn’t someone warn us this might happen?

    Sir Keir is Jezza but uses Hindus instead of Jews
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Scott_xP said:

    there is no second story about how it was announced.

    The second story is Bozo now tying to claim credit because he looks weak for not having acted
    Hancock was gone and replaced the day after the story broke.

    That is incredibly quick for how these stories go normally. You're scraping the barrel here.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,358
    edited June 2021
    I have just seen labour's poster for B & S and it is utterly shameful and divisive

    Starmer and Ashworth need to be shown the poster and challenged on whether they condone it

    Galloway has rightly been condemned for his divisive and gutter politics, but labour are now down there with him
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,322

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    You can't then really stand on your moral high ground and complain about others doing it though.
    That's fine. Perfectly happy for others to also point out the Tories' islamophobia problem.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Wonder how that will work?

    Here are the demands independent Scotland should make of foreign firms

    https://www.thenational.scot/business/19402904.demands-independent-scotland-make-foreign-firms/

    That article is one of the scariest things I have read in a long time. The capital flight from Scotland if this looks close to coming to pass would be irreparable. Our tax base could seriously collapse and the implied threat of stealing pensions to bank this madness will result in not only the money but many people leaving the country.
    Leaving aside all the rest, I can see this one positively driving existing businesses away:


    - A binding commitment on overseas companies under which they are obliged to offer first refusal to a management/worker takeover of a business in the event of the overseas owners deciding to close down production in Scotland. The commitment should also include a transfer or sharing of “intellectual property” (IP) such as product brands and patents.
    These people are a bunch of self appointed nutters but jeez. I remember one of the many excellent scenes in the Big Short
    https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/73c98341-6f2c-48ea-8c02-33b3c7538cb8
    The inevitable outcome if Scotland votes for independence will be slashed public spending in order to deal with the deficit. Tax rises would be suicidal as everyone significantly affected (high value individuals and business-owners) would simply hop over the border into the welcoming arms of rUK. This sort of madness, quoted above, would only accelerate the capital flight which would take place between the vote and actual independence.

    (And, borrowing, of course, would hardly be an option.)

    The Yes folk are really in a bind as IndyRef is impossible to win without persuading folk they will be better off. And its quite clear that the obvious would be the case, certainly for anyone dependent on the state to maintain their standard of living.

    Quite a conundrum.

    From my canvassing for BT, which was pretty extensive, I have no doubt at all that the biggest single issue resulting in the no vote was fear about what would happen to peoples' pensions. When you see the outriders of the Scottish government explaining that it will be the duty of pension fund managers to work constructively with the independent Scottish government to fund this brave new future I think that the independence referendum becomes unwinnable for yes. Its really not hard to sell the idea that these people want to steal your pension to fund their fantasy.

    But this doesn't mean that having a government obsessed with independence, difference and making political points instead of running the country can't do a lot of damage anyway. They did in 2014 and they will again.
    I think you need to bear in mind that the majority of pro-Indy voters believe that Scotland is a net financial contributor to UK.

    I saw correspondence in the local paper in which the Yes guy was arguing that the UK Govt would have a obligation to pay the state pension of people in Scotland after independence. Didn't seem to realise that there was no pension pot.

    Likewise some saying that Indy Scotland can just keep on using the pound (which, kind of, they can) because its our currency just as much as England's. No conception of the significance of a central bank.

    This is how SNP could win an independence referendum. Don't think they will. But they conceivably could if they are dishonest enough and the public credulous enough to believe them.
    The Whitehall Government was sending letters out to existing state pensioners in 2013-14 confirming that London would payt their state pension. (This is not, of course, relevant to new ones, or to private pensions.)

    Edit: the letters were sent to those who wrote in and asked. Not to all pensioners.
    In a subsequent statement, a DWP spokesman said: "We will look into this specific letter in case any misleading information was inadvertently given out.

    "However, what is absolutely clear is that it will be the responsibility of an independent Scottish government, not the UK government, to make arrangement for pensions for citizens of an independent Scotland.

    "There can be no guarantee that it will be at the same level as it is now."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-24286056
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,205

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    I'd like someone to ask SKS what his policy is on India and Modi.

    I guess you would also be comfortable with the Tories doing the same with Jews and having a picture of SKS with Jezza?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited June 2021
    FFS.....BBC headline...Double jabbed people can be infected - like Andrew Marr, says scientist

    No shit sherlock. The point is it is a very small number and they won't suffer serious symptoms. Nobody claims even Pfizer is 100% against infection. And two double jabbed people meeting one another, the chances of absolutely tiny and why it is sensible to be cautious out in general populous where the young are mostly single (or not) jabbed at the moment.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,135

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    The leader of India is simply a "notorious Islamphobe" to you? 🤔
    He is a notorious Islamophobe though. Take a look at his history going right back to the Ayodhya dispute right up to the latest laws that have been disenfranchising Muslims in India. He is an utterly loathsome bigot who is taking India down a very worrying path. He's not just another Indian politician.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,061
    TOPPING said:

    ping said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    After the RA's imbroglio over people "taking offence" Scotrail gets it right:

    https://news.stv.tv/scotland/scotrail-claps-back-after-complaint-over-rainbow-pride-train?top

    Scotrail might do better to concentrate on providing a good rail service instead of showing off their virtue and looking ignorant and discriminatory to boot.
    In what way are ScotRail discriminatory? Do you support the request for a "Straight Pride" train?

    As I said, all this painting is silly. I would no more ask for this than to to go to the moon in a pea green boat. The customer making the request was being silly.

    But they have taken a view without informing themselves and adopted a position which others might think discriminatory towards them eg by tweeting about gay and trans people being attacked without also mentioning that straight people have been attacked or threatened, in some cases by the very people Scotrail is praising.

    Frankly it would be best if they didn't start mouthing off to customers in this way. It is not the job of a service provider to lecture a customer about politics. A polite "Our trains are for everyone all the time" would have made the point far better.
    Yes all our trains are for everyone is a great slogan.

    However, your conflating straight people being attacked with gay and trans people being attacked is straight out of the "what about male victims of female rape/why don't we have men's month/etc" playbook.

    You all of a sudden put yourself in the same (pea green) boat as a bunch of super undesirables.
    No it isn't. Those super-undesirables you refer to are lesbians and women being attacked for wanting equality. It is outrageous and may even be a criminal offence that a there are threats to murder a well know female writer on the streets of London, with no-one apparently battling an eyelid.

    I have written a lot on here - in this thread header, for instance - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/rendering-unto-caesar/ - about the evil of attacks on gay people.

    You misrepresenting what I say and making a vague accusation about undesirables is straight out of the playbook of men trying to shut women up when they don't like what they have to say.
    I can’t be the only one who finds the idea of a gay train a bit, umm, Chris Morris….

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMdPj3HXMgQ
    "gay train"

    Very funny. It's not a gay train, it's a train decked out to show support for an oft-oppressed minority.

    It is also of course a marketing tool to position ScotRail as occupying a certain market position which they hope will be beneficial to them and their future revenue.
    The furore over it seems a little ridiculous. Within a year they'll have taken the vinyls off and replaced them with something drab and ordinary.

    Last year LNER renamed the Flying Scotsman the 'Flying Scotswoman' to mark International Women's Day. I see no reason why there should not be similar for another historically-maligned group such as homosexuals. Celebrating differences does not automatically denigrate those who are not 'different'.

    As an aside, Eurostar have produced some (ahem) interesting liveries over the years:
    https://variably.uk/2019/11/17/special-livery-eurostars/
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,358

    Scott_xP said:

    there is no second story about how it was announced.

    The second story is Bozo now tying to claim credit because he looks weak for not having acted
    Hancock was gone and replaced the day after the story broke.

    That is incredibly quick for how these stories go normally. You're scraping the barrel here.
    Hancock went because 80 conservative mps demanded it to the whips office and most of the cabinet
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,989

    FFS.....BBC headline...Double jabbed people can be infected - like Andrew Marr, says scientist

    No shit sherlock. The point is it is a very small number and they won't suffer serious symptoms. Nobody claims even Pfizer is 100% against infection.

    Marr described it as a "summer cold" and "very unpleasent" which says more about his (lack of) general immune system to my mind. He'd 100% be hospitalised without vaccination.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,300

    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Wonder how that will work?

    Here are the demands independent Scotland should make of foreign firms

    https://www.thenational.scot/business/19402904.demands-independent-scotland-make-foreign-firms/

    That article is one of the scariest things I have read in a long time. The capital flight from Scotland if this looks close to coming to pass would be irreparable. Our tax base could seriously collapse and the implied threat of stealing pensions to bank this madness will result in not only the money but many people leaving the country.
    Leaving aside all the rest, I can see this one positively driving existing businesses away:


    - A binding commitment on overseas companies under which they are obliged to offer first refusal to a management/worker takeover of a business in the event of the overseas owners deciding to close down production in Scotland. The commitment should also include a transfer or sharing of “intellectual property” (IP) such as product brands and patents.
    These people are a bunch of self appointed nutters but jeez. I remember one of the many excellent scenes in the Big Short
    https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/73c98341-6f2c-48ea-8c02-33b3c7538cb8
    The inevitable outcome if Scotland votes for independence will be slashed public spending in order to deal with the deficit. Tax rises would be suicidal as everyone significantly affected (high value individuals and business-owners) would simply hop over the border into the welcoming arms of rUK. This sort of madness, quoted above, would only accelerate the capital flight which would take place between the vote and actual independence.

    (And, borrowing, of course, would hardly be an option.)

    The Yes folk are really in a bind as IndyRef is impossible to win without persuading folk they will be better off. And its quite clear that the obvious would be the case, certainly for anyone dependent on the state to maintain their standard of living.

    Quite a conundrum.

    From my canvassing for BT, which was pretty extensive, I have no doubt at all that the biggest single issue resulting in the no vote was fear about what would happen to peoples' pensions. When you see the outriders of the Scottish government explaining that it will be the duty of pension fund managers to work constructively with the independent Scottish government to fund this brave new future I think that the independence referendum becomes unwinnable for yes. Its really not hard to sell the idea that these people want to steal your pension to fund their fantasy.

    But this doesn't mean that having a government obsessed with independence, difference and making political points instead of running the country can't do a lot of damage anyway. They did in 2014 and they will again.
    I think you need to bear in mind that the majority of pro-Indy voters believe that Scotland is a net financial contributor to UK.

    I saw correspondence in the local paper in which the Yes guy was arguing that the UK Govt would have a obligation to pay the state pension of people in Scotland after independence. Didn't seem to realise that there was no pension pot.

    Likewise some saying that Indy Scotland can just keep on using the pound (which, kind of, they can) because its our currency just as much as England's. No conception of the significance of a central bank.

    This is how SNP could win an independence referendum. Don't think they will. But they conceivably could if they are dishonest enough and the public credulous enough to believe them.
    The Whitehall Government was sending letters out to existing state pensioners in 2013-14 confirming that London would payt their state pension. (This is not, of course, relevant to new ones, or to private pensions.)

    Edit: the letters were sent to those who wrote in and asked. Not to all pensioners.
    In a subsequent statement, a DWP spokesman said: "We will look into this specific letter in case any misleading information was inadvertently given out.

    "However, what is absolutely clear is that it will be the responsibility of an independent Scottish government, not the UK government, to make arrangement for pensions for citizens of an independent Scotland.

    "There can be no guarantee that it will be at the same level as it is now."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-24286056

    Crystal clear and they cannot say they weren’t warned.
  • Options
    Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,575

    Scott_xP said:

    PM also said on Saturday night he was "very sorry" to receive Hancock's resignation letter https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1409484794111660033

    All PMs say that when a minister resigns. Same as the whole letter writing nonsense, yes well I have to go, oh I am so sorry, you have been really good, I hope you can return soon....in time of Blair / Brown, it was often while doing a little dance about being able to get rid of a total shit (after they themselves placed the dirt in the papers).
    Quite so. But do they also say "the PM has accepted his apology and the matter is closed" on numerous occasions during a Friday press briefing?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    The leader of India is simply a "notorious Islamphobe" to you? 🤔
    He is a notorious Islamophobe though. Take a look at his history going right back to the Ayodhya dispute right up to the latest laws that have been disenfranchising Muslims in India. He is an utterly loathsome bigot who is taking India down a very worrying path. He's not just another Indian politician.
    So you are saying that a photo of Johnson meeting the Indian PM is evidence of Tory islamophobia?
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,135
    tlg86 said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    I'd like someone to ask SKS what his policy is on India and Modi.

    I guess you would also be comfortable with the Tories doing the same with Jews and having a picture of SKS with Jezza?
    They probably have already!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,999
    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Christ fair play to Thomas, he's dislocated his shoulder and had it popped back in whilst cycling :o !

    They are hard as nails these road cyclists. I'd say them and boxers are the toughest sportsmen.

    I box, people might be surprised to learn.
    You will remember this moment then.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QY1jzjTjIhY

    Jesus! I feel sorry for his opponent - beaten by a man boxing with one fist.
  • Options
    BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,454
    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Wonder how that will work?

    Here are the demands independent Scotland should make of foreign firms

    https://www.thenational.scot/business/19402904.demands-independent-scotland-make-foreign-firms/

    That article is one of the scariest things I have read in a long time. The capital flight from Scotland if this looks close to coming to pass would be irreparable. Our tax base could seriously collapse and the implied threat of stealing pensions to bank this madness will result in not only the money but many people leaving the country.
    Leaving aside all the rest, I can see this one positively driving existing businesses away:


    - A binding commitment on overseas companies under which they are obliged to offer first refusal to a management/worker takeover of a business in the event of the overseas owners deciding to close down production in Scotland. The commitment should also include a transfer or sharing of “intellectual property” (IP) such as product brands and patents.
    These people are a bunch of self appointed nutters but jeez. I remember one of the many excellent scenes in the Big Short
    https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/73c98341-6f2c-48ea-8c02-33b3c7538cb8
    The inevitable outcome if Scotland votes for independence will be slashed public spending in order to deal with the deficit. Tax rises would be suicidal as everyone significantly affected (high value individuals and business-owners) would simply hop over the border into the welcoming arms of rUK. This sort of madness, quoted above, would only accelerate the capital flight which would take place between the vote and actual independence.

    (And, borrowing, of course, would hardly be an option.)

    The Yes folk are really in a bind as IndyRef is impossible to win without persuading folk they will be better off. And its quite clear that the obvious would be the case, certainly for anyone dependent on the state to maintain their standard of living.

    Quite a conundrum.

    From my canvassing for BT, which was pretty extensive, I have no doubt at all that the biggest single issue resulting in the no vote was fear about what would happen to peoples' pensions. When you see the outriders of the Scottish government explaining that it will be the duty of pension fund managers to work constructively with the independent Scottish government to fund this brave new future I think that the independence referendum becomes unwinnable for yes. Its really not hard to sell the idea that these people want to steal your pension to fund their fantasy.

    But this doesn't mean that having a government obsessed with independence, difference and making political points instead of running the country can't do a lot of damage anyway. They did in 2014 and they will again.
    I think you need to bear in mind that the majority of pro-Indy voters believe that Scotland is a net financial contributor to UK.

    I saw correspondence in the local paper in which the Yes guy was arguing that the UK Govt would have a obligation to pay the state pension of people in Scotland after independence. Didn't seem to realise that there was no pension pot.

    Likewise some saying that Indy Scotland can just keep on using the pound (which, kind of, they can) because its our currency just as much as England's. No conception of the significance of a central bank.

    This is how SNP could win an independence referendum. Don't think they will. But they conceivably could if they are dishonest enough and the public credulous enough to believe them.
    The Whitehall Government was sending letters out to existing state pensioners in 2013-14 confirming that London would payt their state pension. (This is not, of course, relevant to new ones, or to private pensions.)

    Edit: the letters were sent to those who wrote in and asked. Not to all pensioners.
    C'mon Carnyx. You really think a rUK Govt is going to subsidise the pensions of people who are citizens of what would be a foreign country? And whose own Govt has just spent years execrating the Govt of said rUK.

    And for how long? And for how much?

  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403

    FFS.....BBC headline...Double jabbed people can be infected - like Andrew Marr, says scientist

    No shit sherlock. The point is it is a very small number and they won't suffer serious symptoms. Nobody claims even Pfizer is 100% against infection.

    My nephew currently has Covid, having had a 1x shot (of Moderna?) and Covid six months ago (or at least tested positive for it then).

    Seems perfectly happy, if feeling a bit rough, in Durham, where it appears that 5/6ths of the university also has it.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    edited June 2021
    Scott_xP said:

    there is no second story about how it was announced.

    The second story is Bozo now tying to claim credit because he looks weak for not having acted
    Prime Minister Boris Johnson faced questions about his government’s “moral compass” following the Matt Hancock row.

    Asked whether it undermined the message about being “all in it together”, Johnson said: “That’s right, and that’s why when I saw the story on Friday we had a new secretary of state for health in on Saturday.”

    During a campaign visit to Johnstone’s Paints Limited in Batley, the prime minister told broadcasters: “I read the story on Friday and we’ve got a new health secretary in post on Saturday and I think that’s about the right pace to proceed in a pandemic.”


    Your responses exemplify a new type of attack line which both parties use, but Labour at the moment more often, which seems to insult the intelligence of the British public.

    Everyone who cares knows that on Friday they thought they could get away with it but by Saturday they knew they couldn't. Having determined Hancock would have to go, they decided to get it done quickly. Hence Boris' second comment.

    Why make it so difficult? Just attack Boris for failing to sack Hancock on Friday. That's on him, having to wait until Saturday to realise the game was up.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    So if England was to leave the UK, would Scotland, Wales and NI continue to pay English pensions?

    https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1399345338343907329?s=20
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,999

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    Can't see what difference it makes. Either sectarian campaigns are ok or they are not.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,300

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    I'd like someone to ask SKS what his policy is on India and Modi.

    I guess you would also be comfortable with the Tories doing the same with Jews and having a picture of SKS with Jezza?
    They probably have already!
    Dear god, a complete non answer.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,374

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Wonder how that will work?

    Here are the demands independent Scotland should make of foreign firms

    https://www.thenational.scot/business/19402904.demands-independent-scotland-make-foreign-firms/

    That article is one of the scariest things I have read in a long time. The capital flight from Scotland if this looks close to coming to pass would be irreparable. Our tax base could seriously collapse and the implied threat of stealing pensions to bank this madness will result in not only the money but many people leaving the country.
    Leaving aside all the rest, I can see this one positively driving existing businesses away:


    - A binding commitment on overseas companies under which they are obliged to offer first refusal to a management/worker takeover of a business in the event of the overseas owners deciding to close down production in Scotland. The commitment should also include a transfer or sharing of “intellectual property” (IP) such as product brands and patents.
    These people are a bunch of self appointed nutters but jeez. I remember one of the many excellent scenes in the Big Short
    https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/73c98341-6f2c-48ea-8c02-33b3c7538cb8
    The inevitable outcome if Scotland votes for independence will be slashed public spending in order to deal with the deficit. Tax rises would be suicidal as everyone significantly affected (high value individuals and business-owners) would simply hop over the border into the welcoming arms of rUK. This sort of madness, quoted above, would only accelerate the capital flight which would take place between the vote and actual independence.

    (And, borrowing, of course, would hardly be an option.)

    The Yes folk are really in a bind as IndyRef is impossible to win without persuading folk they will be better off. And its quite clear that the obvious would be the case, certainly for anyone dependent on the state to maintain their standard of living.

    Quite a conundrum.

    From my canvassing for BT, which was pretty extensive, I have no doubt at all that the biggest single issue resulting in the no vote was fear about what would happen to peoples' pensions. When you see the outriders of the Scottish government explaining that it will be the duty of pension fund managers to work constructively with the independent Scottish government to fund this brave new future I think that the independence referendum becomes unwinnable for yes. Its really not hard to sell the idea that these people want to steal your pension to fund their fantasy.

    But this doesn't mean that having a government obsessed with independence, difference and making political points instead of running the country can't do a lot of damage anyway. They did in 2014 and they will again.
    I think you need to bear in mind that the majority of pro-Indy voters believe that Scotland is a net financial contributor to UK.

    I saw correspondence in the local paper in which the Yes guy was arguing that the UK Govt would have a obligation to pay the state pension of people in Scotland after independence. Didn't seem to realise that there was no pension pot.

    Likewise some saying that Indy Scotland can just keep on using the pound (which, kind of, they can) because its our currency just as much as England's. No conception of the significance of a central bank.

    This is how SNP could win an independence referendum. Don't think they will. But they conceivably could if they are dishonest enough and the public credulous enough to believe them.
    We had an interesting debate on here where @malcolmg was convinced that his pension would be paid by the English state. I think eventually he accepted that in the White Paper in 2014 that even the SNP acknowledged that continuing liability would run with the Scottish state and therefore be subject to their potential default. It doesn't seem to have changed his opinion yet on independence.

    The argument about a central bank is one that has plagued the debate for a decade or more now. Nationalists frequently point out that they own a share of the BoE. Putting aside the technicalities of shareholding there is some merit in this argument since the BoE is there for all of the UK, despite its name.

    The flaw is the failure to appreciate that a central bank is not an asset but a function or series of functions. Its ability to carry out those functions, such as regulation or being a lender of last resort, is contingent upon the legislative and fiscal support it receives from the government of the day. If Scotland goes independent it would no longer be underwriting those functions either legislatively or fiscally so it would have no say whatsoever in how these functions are operated. If, to take an example, a housing boom in the south of England results in higher interest rates and that causes a recession in Scotland that is just tough.

    So we can continue to use Sterling but accept as a consequence that we have no say whatsoever on interest rate or monetary policy. If rUK chooses to debauch its currency with even more QE we simply have to accept the subsequent devaluation and inflation. It also means all our major financial institutions have to be registered in England to get LOLR protection with seriously adverse consequences to our tax base.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited June 2021
    TOPPING said:

    FFS.....BBC headline...Double jabbed people can be infected - like Andrew Marr, says scientist

    No shit sherlock. The point is it is a very small number and they won't suffer serious symptoms. Nobody claims even Pfizer is 100% against infection.

    My nephew currently has Covid, having had a 1x shot (of Moderna?) and Covid six months ago (or at least tested positive for it then).

    Seems perfectly happy, if feeling a bit rough, in Durham, where it appears that 5/6ths of the university also has it.
    I read somewhere that PHE had identified 15k people as possible re-infected, but only 50 odd confirmed.

    Edit - Here....

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-national-surveillance-of-possible-covid-19-reinfection-published-by-phe
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,146
    No 10 appears not to agree with PM on whether he sacked Matt Hancock. 
    PM's official spokesman says: "No, the former Health Sec resigned".
    Adds: "They discussed it further on Saturday and the PM agreed with the former Health Sec that he was right to tender his resignation".

    https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1409492337798037505
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,989
    edited June 2021
    Laid Roglic in the Tour. Pogacar's season looks more targetted toward the race. Quite fancy getting the field cheapish too.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403

    TOPPING said:

    ping said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    After the RA's imbroglio over people "taking offence" Scotrail gets it right:

    https://news.stv.tv/scotland/scotrail-claps-back-after-complaint-over-rainbow-pride-train?top

    Scotrail might do better to concentrate on providing a good rail service instead of showing off their virtue and looking ignorant and discriminatory to boot.
    In what way are ScotRail discriminatory? Do you support the request for a "Straight Pride" train?

    As I said, all this painting is silly. I would no more ask for this than to to go to the moon in a pea green boat. The customer making the request was being silly.

    But they have taken a view without informing themselves and adopted a position which others might think discriminatory towards them eg by tweeting about gay and trans people being attacked without also mentioning that straight people have been attacked or threatened, in some cases by the very people Scotrail is praising.

    Frankly it would be best if they didn't start mouthing off to customers in this way. It is not the job of a service provider to lecture a customer about politics. A polite "Our trains are for everyone all the time" would have made the point far better.
    Yes all our trains are for everyone is a great slogan.

    However, your conflating straight people being attacked with gay and trans people being attacked is straight out of the "what about male victims of female rape/why don't we have men's month/etc" playbook.

    You all of a sudden put yourself in the same (pea green) boat as a bunch of super undesirables.
    No it isn't. Those super-undesirables you refer to are lesbians and women being attacked for wanting equality. It is outrageous and may even be a criminal offence that a there are threats to murder a well know female writer on the streets of London, with no-one apparently battling an eyelid.

    I have written a lot on here - in this thread header, for instance - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/03/21/rendering-unto-caesar/ - about the evil of attacks on gay people.

    You misrepresenting what I say and making a vague accusation about undesirables is straight out of the playbook of men trying to shut women up when they don't like what they have to say.
    I can’t be the only one who finds the idea of a gay train a bit, umm, Chris Morris….

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMdPj3HXMgQ
    "gay train"

    Very funny. It's not a gay train, it's a train decked out to show support for an oft-oppressed minority.

    It is also of course a marketing tool to position ScotRail as occupying a certain market position which they hope will be beneficial to them and their future revenue.
    The furore over it seems a little ridiculous. Within a year they'll have taken the vinyls off and replaced them with something drab and ordinary.

    Last year LNER renamed the Flying Scotsman the 'Flying Scotswoman' to mark International Women's Day. I see no reason why there should not be similar for another historically-maligned group such as homosexuals. Celebrating differences does not automatically denigrate those who are not 'different'.

    As an aside, Eurostar have produced some (ahem) interesting liveries over the years:
    https://variably.uk/2019/11/17/special-livery-eurostars/
    "Celebrating differences does not automatically denigrate those who are not 'different'."

    Seems to be the bit that some people struggle with.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,005
    Mr. Urquhart, if that's accurate then it's reckless reporting.

    One might as well report that seatbelts don't guarantee survival in a car crash. True, but also ignores the critical point that they dramatically increase your chances.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,146
    BREAKING Matt Hancock personally appointed aide Gina Coladangelo to £15k government job
    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-matt-hancock-personally-appointed-24413418?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

    No10 also confirms that Matt Hancock personally appointed lover Gina Coaldangelo as a non-executive director of the Department of Health
    https://twitter.com/DavidTWilcock/status/1409492528479539204
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,322
    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Christ fair play to Thomas, he's dislocated his shoulder and had it popped back in whilst cycling :o !

    They are hard as nails these road cyclists. I'd say them and boxers are the toughest sportsmen.

    I box, people might be surprised to learn.
    You will remember this moment then.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QY1jzjTjIhY
    Amazing. Needless to say, I don't box against other people, I just take on a kind of heavy rocking dummy at my gym. But I'm unbeaten in 75 bouts.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,300
    Pulpstar said:

    FFS.....BBC headline...Double jabbed people can be infected - like Andrew Marr, says scientist

    No shit sherlock. The point is it is a very small number and they won't suffer serious symptoms. Nobody claims even Pfizer is 100% against infection.

    Marr described it as a "summer cold" and "very unpleasent" which says more about his (lack of) general immune system to my mind. He'd 100% be hospitalised without vaccination.

    But given he’s suffered a stroke and a heart condition this surely shows the value of the vaccine. Statistically he’d be in a far worse position without one.
  • Options
    Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,575

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    The leader of India is simply a "notorious Islamphobe" to you? 🤔
    Yes, I think he is. Look at what he's done/is doing re. Muslims in India.
  • Options
    SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,713

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    Worth pointing out that the term should be 'whitewashing' not 'white washing'. Having the 'white' seperate would, I think be another clear racist dog-whistke.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,358
    RobD said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    The leader of India is simply a "notorious Islamphobe" to you? 🤔
    He is a notorious Islamophobe though. Take a look at his history going right back to the Ayodhya dispute right up to the latest laws that have been disenfranchising Muslims in India. He is an utterly loathsome bigot who is taking India down a very worrying path. He's not just another Indian politician.
    So you are saying that a photo of Johnson meeting the Indian PM is evidence of Tory islamophobia?
    And if Starmer were PM he would he refuse to meet the Indian PM

    Labour have put themselves into a divisive and self inflicted furore
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403
    kle4 said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Christ fair play to Thomas, he's dislocated his shoulder and had it popped back in whilst cycling :o !

    They are hard as nails these road cyclists. I'd say them and boxers are the toughest sportsmen.

    I box, people might be surprised to learn.
    You will remember this moment then.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QY1jzjTjIhY

    Jesus! I feel sorry for his opponent - beaten by a man boxing with one fist.
    Yep but what a fist. Danny could bang!
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,028
    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    My local Tesco store that's just been built is now advertising "free" charging for Volkswagen vehicles with its chargers. That seems like an interesting partnership, though I've no idea how long it would last as "free".

    https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/electric/partnerships/tesco

    As it says the chargers are VW-sponsored PodPoint units. Anyone with the app and a cable can use them for free.

    How long will they remain free? Depends on who is paying the bill - the site or the network? If the site then I can see how free charging is a pull vs no / paid charging at a different supermarket. If the network then not for long!

    Fun problem. So many of these 7kW units are let unmaintained and unloved after install. They get vandalised and broken and then its not owned by the site its located on and its not owned by the network logo on the post who just do the billing and it stays broken.
    The manufacturers really need to get together to sort out the EV infrastructure problem.

    SMMT and DfT need to bang heads together to get it working properly, the infrastructure issues are a major barrier to EV adoption. Only Tesla have done it right.
    We ran a Leaf 2014 - 2017, I'm on my second PHEV and we've now got an Ioniq EV. Once you've had an electric drivetrain you never want to go back to a gearbox.

    But - and its a big but - I am not going to rely on a charge network to get me anywhere, because there's no guarantee they will be delivering at the posted speed, available, or working at all. Add in the multiplicity of networks and batshit crazy "run a Roller for less" pricing and its game over.

    Seriously looked at a Tesla twice now. The lack of an interior and horror show build quality out me off a 3 even before noting how small the thing is. Then a Polestar 2 until the reviews noted the awful inefficiency. Now waiting to see how the Ioniq 5 pans out.
    We are going BMW i4 for Mrs DA's next car. She wouldn't entertain anything but a BEV now she's had one for a few years.
    That’s something of a step down from a Taycan.
    The Taycan is a great EV but not a great Porsche and she doesn't need anything so ludicrously fast. She also finds it too low. I'm going to buy the Taycan off the leasing company because it's a really good spec (White Turbo S with Mission E wheels and the 'vegan' interior with only 9,000 miles on it.)
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Scott_xP said:

    PM also said on Saturday night he was "very sorry" to receive Hancock's resignation letter https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1409484794111660033

    All PMs say that when a minister resigns. Same as the whole letter writing nonsense, yes well I have to go, oh I am so sorry, you have been really good, I hope you can return soon....in time of Blair / Brown, it was often while doing a little dance about being able to get rid of a total shit (after they themselves placed the dirt in the papers).
    Quite so. But do they also say "the PM has accepted his apology and the matter is closed" on numerous occasions during a Friday press briefing?
    Yes.

    Its the same as the Board of a Football Club giving the Manager a Vote of Confidence.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,999

    FFS.....BBC headline...Double jabbed people can be infected - like Andrew Marr, says scientist

    No shit sherlock. The point is it is a very small number and they won't suffer serious symptoms. Nobody claims even Pfizer is 100% against infection. And two double jabbed people meeting one another, the chances of absolutely tiny and why it is sensible to be cautious out in general populous where the young are mostly single (or not) jabbed at the moment.

    Is that really a headline? Downright irresponsible. I'm not sure how I would define a media responsibility, but 15 months into a pandemic given the impression it is a surprise people might still be infected despite a jab deels like something they should be more cautious about, since if it is a headline it makes it seem newsworthy, rather than, say, an answer to a question.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787

    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Wonder how that will work?

    Here are the demands independent Scotland should make of foreign firms

    https://www.thenational.scot/business/19402904.demands-independent-scotland-make-foreign-firms/

    That article is one of the scariest things I have read in a long time. The capital flight from Scotland if this looks close to coming to pass would be irreparable. Our tax base could seriously collapse and the implied threat of stealing pensions to bank this madness will result in not only the money but many people leaving the country.
    Leaving aside all the rest, I can see this one positively driving existing businesses away:


    - A binding commitment on overseas companies under which they are obliged to offer first refusal to a management/worker takeover of a business in the event of the overseas owners deciding to close down production in Scotland. The commitment should also include a transfer or sharing of “intellectual property” (IP) such as product brands and patents.
    These people are a bunch of self appointed nutters but jeez. I remember one of the many excellent scenes in the Big Short
    https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/73c98341-6f2c-48ea-8c02-33b3c7538cb8
    The inevitable outcome if Scotland votes for independence will be slashed public spending in order to deal with the deficit. Tax rises would be suicidal as everyone significantly affected (high value individuals and business-owners) would simply hop over the border into the welcoming arms of rUK. This sort of madness, quoted above, would only accelerate the capital flight which would take place between the vote and actual independence.

    (And, borrowing, of course, would hardly be an option.)

    The Yes folk are really in a bind as IndyRef is impossible to win without persuading folk they will be better off. And its quite clear that the obvious would be the case, certainly for anyone dependent on the state to maintain their standard of living.

    Quite a conundrum.

    From my canvassing for BT, which was pretty extensive, I have no doubt at all that the biggest single issue resulting in the no vote was fear about what would happen to peoples' pensions. When you see the outriders of the Scottish government explaining that it will be the duty of pension fund managers to work constructively with the independent Scottish government to fund this brave new future I think that the independence referendum becomes unwinnable for yes. Its really not hard to sell the idea that these people want to steal your pension to fund their fantasy.

    But this doesn't mean that having a government obsessed with independence, difference and making political points instead of running the country can't do a lot of damage anyway. They did in 2014 and they will again.
    I think you need to bear in mind that the majority of pro-Indy voters believe that Scotland is a net financial contributor to UK.

    I saw correspondence in the local paper in which the Yes guy was arguing that the UK Govt would have a obligation to pay the state pension of people in Scotland after independence. Didn't seem to realise that there was no pension pot.

    Likewise some saying that Indy Scotland can just keep on using the pound (which, kind of, they can) because its our currency just as much as England's. No conception of the significance of a central bank.

    This is how SNP could win an independence referendum. Don't think they will. But they conceivably could if they are dishonest enough and the public credulous enough to believe them.
    The Whitehall Government was sending letters out to existing state pensioners in 2013-14 confirming that London would payt their state pension. (This is not, of course, relevant to new ones, or to private pensions.)

    Edit: the letters were sent to those who wrote in and asked. Not to all pensioners.
    C'mon Carnyx. You really think a rUK Govt is going to subsidise the pensions of people who are citizens of what would be a foreign country? And whose own Govt has just spent years execrating the Govt of said rUK.

    And for how long? And for how much?

    And how long would rUK voters leave them in government if they tried?

    It's nonsense on stilts.....
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,135
    RobD said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    The leader of India is simply a "notorious Islamphobe" to you? 🤔
    He is a notorious Islamophobe though. Take a look at his history going right back to the Ayodhya dispute right up to the latest laws that have been disenfranchising Muslims in India. He is an utterly loathsome bigot who is taking India down a very worrying path. He's not just another Indian politician.
    So you are saying that a photo of Johnson meeting the Indian PM is evidence of Tory islamophobia?
    Circumstantial evidence.
    Of course the UK PM is going to meet the Indian PM, and I'm not saying he shouldn't. But if you want to illustrate how the point the leaflet is making, showing the PM meeting a guy with Modi's history of discrimination and chauvinism against Muslims is probably as good a photo as any.
  • Options
    Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,575
    tlg86 said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    I'd like someone to ask SKS what his policy is on India and Modi.

    I guess you would also be comfortable with the Tories doing the same with Jews and having a picture of SKS with Jezza?
    Well, there's many on here and elsewhere who say "how can you vote for SKS when he served in a notorious anti-semite's shadow cabinet"?
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    isam said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    England has become a place where politics is decided by Asian religious factionalism - who would have thought it?! It was completely unpredictable. Why didn’t someone warn us this might happen?

    Sir Keir is Jezza but uses Hindus instead of Jews
    Come on, let's be fair. There's no way Starmer saw this leaflet before it was printed (and no reason why he should have) and he's probably livid about it. The issue is within the party - exposed and exacerbated by Galloway - not with the leader.

    On a separate note, it is vitally important to Labour strategy that they reclassify Hindus as non-minorities ASAP. Sunak becoming PM gives them an almighty problem otherwise, as it makes many of their favourite attack lines look ridiculous. Javid becoming PM would have been much worse, strategically speaking, and I'm sure they aren't happy to see him back in frontline politics.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,146
    No 10 'completely refutes' the claim PM has behaved like a wonky shopping trolley. He was right not to sack Hancock on Friday and also right to accept his resignation the next day, etc https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1409492054900629509
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    AstraZeneca and Oxford University begin trials of a modified vaccine to act against the Beta variant, first identified in South Africa

    Get a shift on....
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,322
    tlg86 said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    I'd like someone to ask SKS what his policy is on India and Modi.

    I guess you would also be comfortable with the Tories doing the same with Jews and having a picture of SKS with Jezza?
    I'd be thrilled if the Tories did that. They'd look ridiculous.
  • Options
    Nunu3Nunu3 Posts: 178
    isam said:

    Endillion said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    "Make sure you put white washing as two words, and have them split over a line break, just to muddy the waters even further."
    Are you a supporter of this @NickPalmer? You are working hard asking people to vote for Labour so implicitly backing the leaflet
    Modi really is vile tho.

    And no British PM should be shaking hands with him.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,999
    Nunu3 said:

    isam said:

    Endillion said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    "Make sure you put white washing as two words, and have them split over a line break, just to muddy the waters even further."
    Are you a supporter of this @NickPalmer? You are working hard asking people to vote for Labour so implicitly backing the leaflet
    Modi really is vile tho.

    And no British PM should be shaking hands with him.
    Not shake hands with the PM of India? He could be five times worse and I doubt any PM would hesitate to shake his hand.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989

    RobD said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    The leader of India is simply a "notorious Islamphobe" to you? 🤔
    He is a notorious Islamophobe though. Take a look at his history going right back to the Ayodhya dispute right up to the latest laws that have been disenfranchising Muslims in India. He is an utterly loathsome bigot who is taking India down a very worrying path. He's not just another Indian politician.
    So you are saying that a photo of Johnson meeting the Indian PM is evidence of Tory islamophobia?
    Circumstantial evidence.
    Of course the UK PM is going to meet the Indian PM, and I'm not saying he shouldn't. But if you want to illustrate how the point the leaflet is making, showing the PM meeting a guy with Modi's history of discrimination and chauvinism against Muslims is probably as good a photo as any.
    "Of course the UK PM is going to meet the Indian PM". So it has nothing to do with it whatsoever?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,566
    Nunu3 said:

    isam said:

    Endillion said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    "Make sure you put white washing as two words, and have them split over a line break, just to muddy the waters even further."
    Are you a supporter of this @NickPalmer? You are working hard asking people to vote for Labour so implicitly backing the leaflet
    Modi really is vile tho.

    And no British PM should be shaking hands with him.
    As a matter of interest, should the UK PM shake hands with

    - The leader of Russia
    - The leader of China
    - The leader of Pakistan
    - The leader of Saudi Arabia

    ?
  • Options
    ridaligoridaligo Posts: 174
    DavidL said:

    Wonder how that will work?

    Here are the demands independent Scotland should make of foreign firms

    https://www.thenational.scot/business/19402904.demands-independent-scotland-make-foreign-firms/

    That article is one of the scariest things I have read in a long time. The capital flight from Scotland if this looks close to coming to pass would be irreparable. Our tax base could seriously collapse and the implied threat of stealing pensions to bank this madness will result in not only the money but many people leaving the country.
    To be honest I thought that article was a spoof ... they can't be serious, surely? Was it written as a GCSE-level thought experiment? Turning Scotland into Cuba sounds like a plan, eh? As you say David, scary ...
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,917
    Australia's strict policy has failed to prevent the Delta variant from arriving and spreading.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9732481/Australias-Covid-success-crumbles-Cities-lockdown-borders-closed-hardly-vaccinations.html
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Scott_xP said:

    No 10 'completely refutes' the claim PM has behaved like a wonky shopping trolley. He was right not to sack Hancock on Friday and also right to accept his resignation the next day, etc https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1409492054900629509

    You really are silly and petty. It would be interesting to see the timeline of prior ministerial scandals and resignations down the years.

    The scandal getting the scalp the next day seems to be remarkably fast to me, not the other way around. Under Blair these things tended to last about a week to ten days with the case being closed before the embroiled Minister would be out.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,135
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    The leader of India is simply a "notorious Islamphobe" to you? 🤔
    He is a notorious Islamophobe though. Take a look at his history going right back to the Ayodhya dispute right up to the latest laws that have been disenfranchising Muslims in India. He is an utterly loathsome bigot who is taking India down a very worrying path. He's not just another Indian politician.
    So you are saying that a photo of Johnson meeting the Indian PM is evidence of Tory islamophobia?
    Circumstantial evidence.
    Of course the UK PM is going to meet the Indian PM, and I'm not saying he shouldn't. But if you want to illustrate how the point the leaflet is making, showing the PM meeting a guy with Modi's history of discrimination and chauvinism against Muslims is probably as good a photo as any.
    "Of course the UK PM is going to meet the Indian PM". So it has nothing to do with it whatsoever?
    It's fine for the British PM to meet with scumbags like Modi and Trump, that's part of the job. It's also fine for people to use photos of these meetings against them in election leaflets. It's all part of the rough and tumble of campaigning.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    The leader of India is simply a "notorious Islamphobe" to you? 🤔
    He is a notorious Islamophobe though. Take a look at his history going right back to the Ayodhya dispute right up to the latest laws that have been disenfranchising Muslims in India. He is an utterly loathsome bigot who is taking India down a very worrying path. He's not just another Indian politician.
    So you are saying that a photo of Johnson meeting the Indian PM is evidence of Tory islamophobia?
    Circumstantial evidence.
    Of course the UK PM is going to meet the Indian PM, and I'm not saying he shouldn't. But if you want to illustrate how the point the leaflet is making, showing the PM meeting a guy with Modi's history of discrimination and chauvinism against Muslims is probably as good a photo as any.
    "Of course the UK PM is going to meet the Indian PM". So it has nothing to do with it whatsoever?
    It's fine for the British PM to meet with scumbags like Modi and Trump, that's part of the job. It's also fine for people to use photos of these meetings against them in election leaflets. It's all part of the rough and tumble of campaigning.
    "rough and tumble", is that what it is called?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited June 2021
    Andy_JS said:

    Australia's strict policy has failed to prevent the Delta variant from arriving and spreading.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9732481/Australias-Covid-success-crumbles-Cities-lockdown-borders-closed-hardly-vaccinations.html

    John Campbell was talking about transmission the other day before this kicked off. He was suggesting that previously nearly impossible to catch it outside and thought that normally you needed a certain amount of time in presence of the infected person to stand a chance of catching it.

    Now, he was hypothesizing that Indian variant more than likely results in infected individuals exhausting a lot more virus and that you need to be exposed to less of it to become infected. Thus outside carries some risk and you might well not need to be in the presence of individuals for very long at all.

    I read somewhere that in Australia so far with this outbreak (law of small numbers and all that) 100% of household transmission. Original variant, it was actually surprisingly low how much was transmitted even among those that lived with one another.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403
    kinabalu said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Christ fair play to Thomas, he's dislocated his shoulder and had it popped back in whilst cycling :o !

    They are hard as nails these road cyclists. I'd say them and boxers are the toughest sportsmen.

    I box, people might be surprised to learn.
    You will remember this moment then.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QY1jzjTjIhY
    Amazing. Needless to say, I don't box against other people, I just take on a kind of heavy rocking dummy at my gym. But I'm unbeaten in 75 bouts.
    Well they do say you can only beat what's in front of you...

    And I have mentioned it on here before VR does a great boxing game - The Thrill of the Fight which is well worth giving a go (quite spenny headset - not for you, obvs) and really does work up a sweat.

    They even have a virtual dummy of the type you are working out with.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    isam said:


    Sir Keir’s fan club are trying to defend the leaflet by saying the photo was doctored… here’s the original. How is it any better?


    No wonder they blacked out the text. The leaflet is about Islamophobia, and shows Boris Johnson meeting a notorious Islamophobe while pointing out the Tories' long history of Islaphobia, including Johnson's own comments. I think the leaflet is completely fine.
    The leader of India is simply a "notorious Islamphobe" to you? 🤔
    He is a notorious Islamophobe though. Take a look at his history going right back to the Ayodhya dispute right up to the latest laws that have been disenfranchising Muslims in India. He is an utterly loathsome bigot who is taking India down a very worrying path. He's not just another Indian politician.
    So you are saying that a photo of Johnson meeting the Indian PM is evidence of Tory islamophobia?
    Circumstantial evidence.
    Of course the UK PM is going to meet the Indian PM, and I'm not saying he shouldn't. But if you want to illustrate how the point the leaflet is making, showing the PM meeting a guy with Modi's history of discrimination and chauvinism against Muslims is probably as good a photo as any.
    "Of course the UK PM is going to meet the Indian PM". So it has nothing to do with it whatsoever?
    It's fine for the British PM to meet with scumbags like Modi and Trump, that's part of the job. It's also fine for people to use photos of these meetings against them in election leaflets. It's all part of the rough and tumble of campaigning.
    "rough and tumble", is that what it is called?
    I thought it was called racism.

    Shame to see racists here supporting anti-Hindu xenophobia.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,146
    The official line from No.10 on Friday was that Boris was backing Matt Hancock, and he believed the matter “was closed”. https://twitter.com/dailymailuk/status/1409486832677572609
    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1409495636928512002
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,893

    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Wonder how that will work?

    Here are the demands independent Scotland should make of foreign firms

    https://www.thenational.scot/business/19402904.demands-independent-scotland-make-foreign-firms/

    That article is one of the scariest things I have read in a long time. The capital flight from Scotland if this looks close to coming to pass would be irreparable. Our tax base could seriously collapse and the implied threat of stealing pensions to bank this madness will result in not only the money but many people leaving the country.
    Leaving aside all the rest, I can see this one positively driving existing businesses away:


    - A binding commitment on overseas companies under which they are obliged to offer first refusal to a management/worker takeover of a business in the event of the overseas owners deciding to close down production in Scotland. The commitment should also include a transfer or sharing of “intellectual property” (IP) such as product brands and patents.
    These people are a bunch of self appointed nutters but jeez. I remember one of the many excellent scenes in the Big Short
    https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/73c98341-6f2c-48ea-8c02-33b3c7538cb8
    The inevitable outcome if Scotland votes for independence will be slashed public spending in order to deal with the deficit. Tax rises would be suicidal as everyone significantly affected (high value individuals and business-owners) would simply hop over the border into the welcoming arms of rUK. This sort of madness, quoted above, would only accelerate the capital flight which would take place between the vote and actual independence.

    (And, borrowing, of course, would hardly be an option.)

    The Yes folk are really in a bind as IndyRef is impossible to win without persuading folk they will be better off. And its quite clear that the obvious would be the case, certainly for anyone dependent on the state to maintain their standard of living.

    Quite a conundrum.

    From my canvassing for BT, which was pretty extensive, I have no doubt at all that the biggest single issue resulting in the no vote was fear about what would happen to peoples' pensions. When you see the outriders of the Scottish government explaining that it will be the duty of pension fund managers to work constructively with the independent Scottish government to fund this brave new future I think that the independence referendum becomes unwinnable for yes. Its really not hard to sell the idea that these people want to steal your pension to fund their fantasy.

    But this doesn't mean that having a government obsessed with independence, difference and making political points instead of running the country can't do a lot of damage anyway. They did in 2014 and they will again.
    I think you need to bear in mind that the majority of pro-Indy voters believe that Scotland is a net financial contributor to UK.

    I saw correspondence in the local paper in which the Yes guy was arguing that the UK Govt would have a obligation to pay the state pension of people in Scotland after independence. Didn't seem to realise that there was no pension pot.

    Likewise some saying that Indy Scotland can just keep on using the pound (which, kind of, they can) because its our currency just as much as England's. No conception of the significance of a central bank.

    This is how SNP could win an independence referendum. Don't think they will. But they conceivably could if they are dishonest enough and the public credulous enough to believe them.
    The Whitehall Government was sending letters out to existing state pensioners in 2013-14 confirming that London would payt their state pension. (This is not, of course, relevant to new ones, or to private pensions.)

    Edit: the letters were sent to those who wrote in and asked. Not to all pensioners.
    C'mon Carnyx. You really think a rUK Govt is going to subsidise the pensions of people who are citizens of what would be a foreign country? And whose own Govt has just spent years execrating the Govt of said rUK.

    And for how long? And for how much?

    I didn't say that. The Whitehall government did, at least for a while. (Which surprised me at the time, it must be said.)
This discussion has been closed.