BoJo’s “vaccine bounce” seems to be over but Starmer remains in negative territory – politicalbettin
Options
Comments
-
Increasing the Yes vote from 28% to 45% is hardly nemesis.Sunil_Prasannan said:
No 55%StuartDickson said:
It is a leitmotif when discussing BritNat affairs.felix said:
Second time today for that line from you.....StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May
Yes 45%
Is there an echo in here?0 -
Perhaps independence would just be the beginning of a British risorgimento. After hubris comes nemesis.StuartDickson said:
It is a leitmotif when discussing BritNat affairs.felix said:
Second time today for that line from you.....StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May0 -
55% of Scottish voters.Nigel_Foremain said:
Oh! What is the SNP nemesis? Will it ultimately be the man who was once the hero of all Nats, you know the one...he that was described as a "bully and sex pest" by his own QC? Whatsisname, the little fat arsehole who looks like a toad?StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May0 -
Clearly, masochism is very strong with the Scots.MaxPB said:
Nation of bottlers. You voted to live under our jackboot. Time to deal with it.StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May0 -
Unfortunately such sensible talk as this post does not apply anymore. It is now the Governments responsibilty to feed all children , not the parents.felix said:
The idea is for them to raise a family with all the easy and not so easy stuff included. There is no compulsion to rear children if you lack the means to do so. You seem to forget that all this money has to be provided by someone. Taxpayers would generally like to keep some of thier earnings for themselves. Paying for other people's kids to be fed is not part of the deal in my book. Sorry if you find that aggressive. 33 years in the classroom taught me that most parents expect to provide for their children's needs even when sacrifices are needed to do so. Mine certainly were.state_go_away said:
wow - a bit aggressive ! i am sure parents are invented for kids to do more than prepare a packed lunchfelix said:
WTF is the point of having parents and families at all?state_go_away said:
is it that expensive ? If the government can fund everything else to do with a kids educuation it seems odd this is left outeek said:
Way too expensive and when it was trialled it didn't provide many benefits.Malmesbury said:
I think what state_go_away meant was - why not simply provide meals for free, for all pupils, in all state schools?eek said:
I've already answered that - some families are so dysfunctional that the children need to be fed, but not so dysfunctional that the children need to be taken into care (for that costs real money)..state_go_away said:i have never understood how this country gets into such a mess with school meals.
The taxpayer rightly funds a free education until 18 including the huge expense of teachers, facilities , equipment, books ,IT etc yet for some reason stops short of funding a universal free meal during the school day . I mean why ? It cannot be but a very small fraction of the overall education cost so it is on the face of it extremely petty but also would solve the bullying some kids get fro having free meals and also give all kids a better diet.
Really odd the position on school meals to me that we have had for years1 -
We’ll be on ‘il sorpasso’ next.williamglenn said:
Perhaps independence would just be the beginning of a British risorgimento. After hubris comes nemesis.StuartDickson said:
It is a leitmotif when discussing BritNat affairs.felix said:
Second time today for that line from you.....StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May
(Too soon?)0 -
Firstly, awkward for whom?contrarian said:
On the upside, the US is once again acting as a control experiment, as Florida, South Dakota and Texas did with lockdown.TimT said:Meanwhile, depressing news on the vaccination front from the US, where partisan politics are now the biggest part of the problem:
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/12/biden-boosting-vaccination-rates-499047
Imagine, for example, that infection rates and hospitalisations do not explode in US states with low vaccination rates.
That would be awkward
Secondly, vaccination rates are not the only thing that matters.
For example, schools across the US are on summer vacation, and have been for at least a month. That closes down the biggest vector of transmission.
There are a dozen other factors that relate to how well CV19 spreads, above and beyond vaccination rates. If you live on a farm in Wyoming, and you see your family and the guy at the feed shop once a week, then you know what? The fact that you haven't gotten vaccinated probably doesn't affect your likelihood of infection that much.
But if you live in Chicago in a house shared with a dozen others, work in a busy store, and have to take the L to work during rush hour, then yeah, I'd think whether you're vaccinated is going to make a big fucking difference.
Come September, we're going to see what happens when schools return, *and* Delta is well seeded in the US. My gut is that there are going to be some small town areas that get quite badly hit. Not Northern Italy or Manhattan in March 2020 badly hit - but perhaps UK Jan/Feb 2021.0 -
The biggest difference between private and state schools, IMHO, is that virtually no-one in private schools has a packaged lunch because the quality of school meals is so much better.Philip_Thompson said:
The problem is that packed lunches tend to be unhealthy shit food. A sandwich, crisps etc. Maybe a piece of fruit. Not necessarily what you'd have at home if having lunch at home fresh from a kitchen, but the kids aren't ay home.FrancisUrquhart said:
You offer something for free, more people will want it. Why give your kid a packed lunch, when school are going to feed them.Malmesbury said:
Not sure about requiring expanded facilities - the idea is simply to stop parents paying for the school meals that they get already.FrancisUrquhart said:
There is also the one off cost of new / expanded kitchen facilities that will be required.Stuartinromford said:
School meals are about £2.50 per child per day, which is £500 or so over a school year. You could get some more economy of scale by feeding everyone (... eventually, there'd be hefty costs in scaling up kitchen capacity to start with).eek said:
Way too expensive and when it was trialled it didn't provide many benefits.Malmesbury said:
I think what state_go_away meant was - why not simply provide meals for free, for all pupils, in all state schools?eek said:
I've already answered that - some families are so dysfunctional that the children need to be fed, but not so dysfunctional that the children need to be taken into care (for that costs real money)..state_go_away said:i have never understood how this country gets into such a mess with school meals.
The taxpayer rightly funds a free education until 18 including the huge expense of teachers, facilities , equipment, books ,IT etc yet for some reason stops short of funding a universal free meal during the school day . I mean why ? It cannot be but a very small fraction of the overall education cost so it is on the face of it extremely petty but also would solve the bullying some kids get fro having free meals and also give all kids a better diet.
Really odd the position on school meals to me that we have had for years
The minimum funding per primary pupil in England is only £4000 (though it's higher in needier and/or more expensive areas).
If I remember correctly when Labour proposed this for the 2017 GE, I think the cost was estimated at about ~£1bn extra a year for just primary school kids to have lunch. This isn't for everybody to have breakfast club or after school food.
Now, if you are talking about adding breakfast (which some have suggested).....
If you start to do any googling, the likes of the IFS consistently say you will need to expand facilities and it will cost several £100 million.
If the child is at home preparing a healthy lunch is different to a packed lunch.
The schools have facilities and offer fresh meals already. The only difference is whether it's paid for as an extra or not. But since the school is acting in loco parentis it isn't unreasonable for a healthy meal to be part of the responsibilities at the time.1 -
The very first opinion poll after the 2011 referendum was 37% Yes, 45% No - which strip out Don't Knows becomes 45% Yes, 55% No.StuartDickson said:
Increasing the Yes vote from 28% to 45% is hardly nemesis.Sunil_Prasannan said:
No 55%StuartDickson said:
It is a leitmotif when discussing BritNat affairs.felix said:
Second time today for that line from you.....StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May
Yes 45%
Is there an echo in here?
3 years and all that campaigning later and it swung from 45/55 to . . . 45/55.1 -
Any evidence to back that upStuartDickson said:
The Scots invented football, not the English.Leon said:
No. We are an alpha nation. We conquered the world FFS. We should be winning these things as regularly as Italy. Ffs we invented the sportFF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
We win everything else. This is our hoodoo
https://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/Association-Football-or-Soccer/ says it was a Yorkshireman in London
Penalties are a County Armagh invention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McCrum0 -
Big dancing outside PC World with (very) wee man exposed to the world energy.MaxPB said:
Nation of bottlers. You voted to live under our jackboot. Time to deal with it.StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May1 -
Enjoying the English jackboot? That's what Scotland's destiny is for the rest of it's sad existence. You had your chance and you bottled it. 55% of your fellow countrymen decided that the English jackboot was better than being an independent nation under Salmond and Sturgeon. Scotland is a conquered nation, you sold yourselves to the English 300 years ago and when offered the chance to be free you rejected it like pathetic, scared children.StuartDickson said:
We’ll be on ‘il sorpasso’ next.williamglenn said:
Perhaps independence would just be the beginning of a British risorgimento. After hubris comes nemesis.StuartDickson said:
It is a leitmotif when discussing BritNat affairs.felix said:
Second time today for that line from you.....StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May
(Too soon?)0 -
Please, sir, I want some more.MaxPB said:
Nation of bottlers. You voted to live under our jackboot. Time to deal with it.StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May0 -
Good for him. The biggest problem with the NHS is that , like other types of nationalised industry, its main purpose is to serve not patients but those that work within it. Its priorities are senior doctors, less senior doctors, hospital managers, nurses, other hospital staff, and right at the bottom of the list waits the very patient patient, aka The Supplicant.MaxPB said:The latest NHS neurosis is that Javid doesn't talk about it as some revered organisation or in terms of "our" NHS I'm told. He's being called in by senior NHS bods for reeducation on this subject. Oddly the new health secretary believes that the NHS is there to serve the people, not the other way around.
1 -
You looking in a mirror then? Your whole country is small dick energy. You voted to live under English oppression. Bottlers and cowards.Theuniondivvie said:
Big dancing outside PC World with (very) wee man exposed to the world energy.MaxPB said:
Nation of bottlers. You voted to live under our jackboot. Time to deal with it.StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May1 -
Feel the love.Nigel_Foremain said:
No amount of carping from Scottish Nationalists will change the fact that Scotland scraped the qualifiers, got knocked out in the group stage and are currently 44th in the world rankings. You should probably stay off the subject of football.StuartDickson said:
Any silver medalist disgracing themselves, their team and their country the way those brats did last night should have the award removed from the record. Give the bronze medalists silver medals and the fourth placed athletes bronze. That’ll soon stop the churlishness.DecrepiterJohnL said:
It is the same at the Olympics. Silver means loser, whereas bronze often means you've outperformed yourself.StuartDickson said:
I think they should be immensely proud of their silver medals. Shocking that the spoilt brats immediately removed them from their necks within seconds of being awarded them. Very rude.FF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
0 -
There's a reason why free school meals exist. Some parents aren't as attentive as others. They'd rather spend what little money they have on themselves rather than on their children.NerysHughes said:
Unfortunately such sensible talk as this post does not apply anymore. It is now the Governments responsibilty to feed all children , not the parents.felix said:
The idea is for them to raise a family with all the easy and not so easy stuff included. There is no compulsion to rear children if you lack the means to do so. You seem to forget that all this money has to be provided by someone. Taxpayers would generally like to keep some of thier earnings for themselves. Paying for other people's kids to be fed is not part of the deal in my book. Sorry if you find that aggressive. 33 years in the classroom taught me that most parents expect to provide for their children's needs even when sacrifices are needed to do so. Mine certainly were.state_go_away said:
wow - a bit aggressive ! i am sure parents are invented for kids to do more than prepare a packed lunchfelix said:
WTF is the point of having parents and families at all?state_go_away said:
is it that expensive ? If the government can fund everything else to do with a kids educuation it seems odd this is left outeek said:
Way too expensive and when it was trialled it didn't provide many benefits.Malmesbury said:
I think what state_go_away meant was - why not simply provide meals for free, for all pupils, in all state schools?eek said:
I've already answered that - some families are so dysfunctional that the children need to be fed, but not so dysfunctional that the children need to be taken into care (for that costs real money)..state_go_away said:i have never understood how this country gets into such a mess with school meals.
The taxpayer rightly funds a free education until 18 including the huge expense of teachers, facilities , equipment, books ,IT etc yet for some reason stops short of funding a universal free meal during the school day . I mean why ? It cannot be but a very small fraction of the overall education cost so it is on the face of it extremely petty but also would solve the bullying some kids get fro having free meals and also give all kids a better diet.
Really odd the position on school meals to me that we have had for years
There is quite a lot of research out of the US that free school meals programs result in better health and academic outcomes for poorer kids.
The only question, really, is how important to you is improving the life chances of the disadvantaged?0 -
There are lots of claims, though that has to be the silliest. The game was codified on Parker's Piece, Cambridge. I am not aware of any historical account of bagpipes or tartan skirts in evidence.StuartDickson said:
The Scots invented football, not the English.Leon said:
No. We are an alpha nation. We conquered the world FFS. We should be winning these things as regularly as Italy. Ffs we invented the sportFF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
We win everything else. This is our hoodoo0 -
Lol, someone liked it!
2 -
Heading back to racism - I see someone has started given other racists advice
The bit that he won't get is that twitter sends an email everytime someone logs into your account and I bet the person being investigated doesn't have any of those emails.0 -
Ragin'!MaxPB said:
You looking in a mirror then? Your whole country is small dick energy. You voted to live under English oppression. Bottlers and cowards.Theuniondivvie said:
Big dancing outside PC World with (very) wee man exposed to the world energy.MaxPB said:
Nation of bottlers. You voted to live under our jackboot. Time to deal with it.StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May0 -
If you believe this book, it was Trinity College, Cambridge what dunnit.Nigel_Foremain said:
There are lots of claims, though that has to be the silliest. The game was codified on Parker's Piece, Cambridge. I am not aware of any historical account of bagpipes or tartan skirts in evidence.StuartDickson said:
The Scots invented football, not the English.Leon said:
No. We are an alpha nation. We conquered the world FFS. We should be winning these things as regularly as Italy. Ffs we invented the sportFF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
We win everything else. This is our hoodoo0 -
I'm sorry, but if you are part of the UK's now extremely powerful and and largely unaccountable public health lobby, vaccination rates are indeed the only thing that matters.rcs1000 said:
Firstly, awkward for whom?contrarian said:
On the upside, the US is once again acting as a control experiment, as Florida, South Dakota and Texas did with lockdown.TimT said:Meanwhile, depressing news on the vaccination front from the US, where partisan politics are now the biggest part of the problem:
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/12/biden-boosting-vaccination-rates-499047
Imagine, for example, that infection rates and hospitalisations do not explode in US states with low vaccination rates.
That would be awkward
Secondly, vaccination rates are not the only thing that matters.
For example, schools across the US are on summer vacation, and have been for at least a month. That closes down the biggest vector of transmission.
There are a dozen other factors that relate to how well CV19 spreads, above and beyond vaccination rates. If you live on a farm in Wyoming, and you see your family and the guy at the feed shop once a week, then you know what? The fact that you haven't gotten vaccinated probably doesn't affect your likelihood of infection that much.
But if you live in Chicago in a house shared with a dozen others, work in a busy store, and have to take the L to work during rush hour, then yeah, I'd think whether you're vaccinated is going to make a big fucking difference.
Come September, we're going to see what happens when schools return, *and* Delta is well seeded in the US. My gut is that there are going to be some small town areas that get quite badly hit. Not Northern Italy or Manhattan in March 2020 badly hit - but perhaps UK Jan/Feb 2021.
Vaccination rates are the main reason we delayed our freedom day by a month.
Vaccination rates are the main reason I and others like me are going to be turned into second class citizens in our own country when passports are introduced in the autumn.
And please do not trot out all the 'geography' bullsh*t at me again. Florida, Texas and many other republican states have big crowded cities.
Like I say, America is a control experiment. Just as Florida destroyed the lockdown works arguments, so it may destroy the vaccinate or else argument.
It may not of course. Let's see.0 -
Try to remember, guys, that there are plenty of people up here who are happy with, and loyal to, the UK. We can live with, indeed delight in, being both British and Scottish.MaxPB said:
Enjoying the English jackboot? That's what Scotland's destiny is for the rest of it's sad existence. You had your chance and you bottled it. 55% of your fellow countrymen decided that the English jackboot was better than being an independent nation under Salmond and Sturgeon. Scotland is a conquered nation, you sold yourselves to the English 300 years ago and when offered the chance to be free you rejected it like pathetic, scared children.StuartDickson said:
We’ll be on ‘il sorpasso’ next.williamglenn said:
Perhaps independence would just be the beginning of a British risorgimento. After hubris comes nemesis.StuartDickson said:
It is a leitmotif when discussing BritNat affairs.felix said:
Second time today for that line from you.....StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May
(Too soon?)
And we don't appreciate this kind of stuff, even if meant humorously, as it just raises the ante.5 -
After getting myself thoroughly depressed about the state of the nation poring through first this website and then Twitter earlier, I had a bit of an epiphany. Not a very original epiphany I'll admit.
Twitter is at the root of most of the apparent national unease we all feel on here, particularly the culture war. We all know, and chant, that Twitter isn't real life, but I'm not sure we have really taken that fact to heart. It brings out the worst in all political points of view; it amplifies the puritans and the rabble rousers; it's a safe space for intellectual intolerance, a kind of online fight club only one that has forgotten the first rule of fight club. And the trouble is politicians and the political media spend a lot of time there. So their world view is now profoundly influenced by what they see there. So they then broadcast this into the traditional media.
The difference between Twitter and Facebook is that the latter is more private - people stay within their bubbles, so they only see what their friends and family think. The views on there may be every bit as bigoted and the echo chamber as tightly insulated if not more so, but the division is not there in plain sight. On Twitter each echo chamber publicly faces off against its rival echo chambers. The effect is one of permanent verbal warfare.
The Twitter reality risks becoming the reality if the media and politicians channel it into the rest of life. Even worse, Anglo Saxon Twitter seems to be the worst and it's there for all to see. So we have 2 malign forces to contend with: 1. the mass importation, untranslated, of American partisanship and division at its absolute worst, and 2. the projection to the rest of the online world of a Britain that - as of today - still does not really exist outside that dark space.
The annoying thing is it's also a very good source of news, insight and analysis that doesn't exist elsewhere. But I really think most of us need a break from it.6 -
https://www.bbc.com/sport/av/football/48831909eek said:
Any evidence to back that upStuartDickson said:
The Scots invented football, not the English.Leon said:
No. We are an alpha nation. We conquered the world FFS. We should be winning these things as regularly as Italy. Ffs we invented the sportFF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
We win everything else. This is our hoodoo
https://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/Association-Football-or-Soccer/ says it was a Yorkshireman in London
Penalties are a County Armagh invention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McCrum0 -
Nothing you say will change the fact that you voted to a sad and pathetic existence under English rule. You were born in a conquered nation and you'll die in one. That's the life of a Scotsman, to serve the English.Theuniondivvie said:
Ragin'!MaxPB said:
You looking in a mirror then? Your whole country is small dick energy. You voted to live under English oppression. Bottlers and cowards.Theuniondivvie said:
Big dancing outside PC World with (very) wee man exposed to the world energy.MaxPB said:
Nation of bottlers. You voted to live under our jackboot. Time to deal with it.StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May0 -
The overwhelming majority of British workers would not want to see the introduction of a four-day working week if it meant taking a cut to their pay.
Eight out of 10 British employees would not favour accepting a reduction in working hours if it resulted in lower wages, according to research by cross-party thinktank, the Social Market Foundation (SMF), with only one in 10 employees willing to work less and earn less.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jul/12/four-day-week-not-if-it-means-a-pay-cut-say-british-workers1 -
It's like the "Football's Coming Home" nonsense that gets wheeled out every tournament as soon as England wins a game.Roger said:
Yes. It's as though they believe themselves too good to accept a medal lesser than a winners. Whatever they intended it read as arrogant which to a lot of watchers made them bad losers. Not attractive at allStuartDickson said:
I think they should be immensely proud of their silver medals. Shocking that the spoilt brats immediately removed them from their necks within seconds of being awarded them. Very rude.FF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
It needs to be binned. It's arrogant. it's embarrassing and the rest of Europe is just laughing and not in a good way.2 -
A classic!Theuniondivvie said:Lol, someone liked it!
0 -
Very amusing. Now, where is that great footballing nation, Scotland in the world rankings? Not looked it up? 44th I believe last time I looked. I wonder what Scots would give to get to be second in anything other than curling and they can't even win at that! Oh I did forget tossing. You are pretty world class in that.Theuniondivvie said:Lol, someone liked it!
0 -
A mere 500 years when even my link says a variation was played in London in 1349...StuartDickson said:
https://www.bbc.com/sport/av/football/48831909eek said:
Any evidence to back that upStuartDickson said:
The Scots invented football, not the English.Leon said:
No. We are an alpha nation. We conquered the world FFS. We should be winning these things as regularly as Italy. Ffs we invented the sportFF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
We win everything else. This is our hoodoo
https://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/Association-Football-or-Soccer/ says it was a Yorkshireman in London
Penalties are a County Armagh invention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McCrum0 -
Really interesting to read the PB football discussion, which unlike politics at times, seems to fairly accurately reflect the views I'm reading and hearing outside the PB bubble.
I think that if the FA do have the b***ocks to sack Gareth Southgate - after all, having by far the best tournament record of any manager in the last half century despite having a very young team a good 5 years off its peak is clearly not good enough - they will be very encouraged by the wealth of options they will have to replace him. Dave off Facebook, Dean who writes into Football365, Steve off PoliticalBetting.com and many many journalists out there are self-evidently much better tacticians and man-managers than that idiot Southgate, and with any of them in charge England would without doubt have hammered the unbeaten-in-33-game Italian team at its absolute peak 4 or 5-0.
Clearly we wouldn't ever have needed penalties under these footballing genii, but in that unlikely event, it's quite clear that Southgate is negligently culpable (as is another depressingly ordinary, pleasant and therefore useless-despite-getting-really-quite-impressive-results manager in Ole Gunnar Solskjaer) of allowing Marcus Rashford to put something back into society, when he should have been using all of that time practising penalties.
So despite the evident disappointment of last night, look on the bright side, the future is golden. We'll be unbeatable under Dave from Facebook!7 -
Nigel_Foremain said:
Oh! What is the SNP nemesis? Will it ultimately be the man who was once the hero of all Nats, you know the one...he that was described as a "bully and sex pest" by his own QC? Whatsisname, the little fat arsehole who looks like a toad?StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in MayNigel_Foremain said:
Oh! What is the SNP nemesis? Will it ultimately be the man who was once the hero of all Nats, you know the one...he that was described as a "bully and sex pest" by his own QC? Whatsisname, the little fat arsehole who looks like a toad?StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May
Salmond is clearly a very unpleasant person but, in his day, was an extremely formidable politician who really ruled the roost up here. Much of the momentum that has led to the current 50/50 split on Indy is down to the difference he, personally, made. It's no wonder he thought he deserved a certain amount of slack from his successor.Nigel_Foremain said:
Oh! What is the SNP nemesis? Will it ultimately be the man who was once the hero of all Nats, you know the one...he that was described as a "bully and sex pest" by his own QC? Whatsisname, the little fat arsehole who looks like a toad?StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May0 -
Still ragin'!MaxPB said:
Nothing you say will change the fact that you voted to a sad and pathetic existence under English rule. You were born in a conquered nation and you'll die in one. That's the life of a Scotsman, to serve the English.Theuniondivvie said:
Ragin'!MaxPB said:
You looking in a mirror then? Your whole country is small dick energy. You voted to live under English oppression. Bottlers and cowards.Theuniondivvie said:
Big dancing outside PC World with (very) wee man exposed to the world energy.MaxPB said:
Nation of bottlers. You voted to live under our jackboot. Time to deal with it.StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May0 -
As a British, black Londoner, son of Windrush generation, working-class parents, I – like so many others with different stories – find it has never been easier to support an England team. It’s southern, it’s northern, it’s black, it’s white, it is of mixed heritage, it’s young, it’s experienced, I’m guessing it’s multi-denominational.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/12/england-lost-southgate-diversity-team
I find this a slightly weird take....the way he is going on, it is like England have never had black and mix raced players in the team or a mix of players from around the country.
Seems a bit insulting to the genius of John Barnes, the tenacious tiger like midfield play of Ince, the world class left back that was Ashley Cole at his prime, Rio Ferdinard at his best was probably the best centre back in the world. All the great geordie players, Gerard and all the great scousers, even Graham Le Saux from them funny islands that sound a bit foreign...1 -
Take a big breath, cuddle a baby, smell a flower, snog your wife, give somebody a compliment, tickle a dog behind the ears, do a selfless deed. The world really is a wonderful place, enjoy your time here.MaxPB said:
Enjoying the English jackboot? That's what Scotland's destiny is for the rest of it's sad existence. You had your chance and you bottled it. 55% of your fellow countrymen decided that the English jackboot was better than being an independent nation under Salmond and Sturgeon. Scotland is a conquered nation, you sold yourselves to the English 300 years ago and when offered the chance to be free you rejected it like pathetic, scared children.StuartDickson said:
We’ll be on ‘il sorpasso’ next.williamglenn said:
Perhaps independence would just be the beginning of a British risorgimento. After hubris comes nemesis.StuartDickson said:
It is a leitmotif when discussing BritNat affairs.felix said:
Second time today for that line from you.....StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May
(Too soon?)1 -
For the record, Matt Singh of Number Cruncher points out that Southgate himself in his press conference said that most (but not all) of the racist online abuse of England's players came from overseas trolls. This was ascertained by the FA's social media experts.eek said:Heading back to racism - I see someone has started given other racists advice
The bit that he won't get is that twitter sends an email everytime someone logs into your account and I bet the person being investigated doesn't have any of those emails.
This point was entirely glossed over by the British media, the twitterati, the Labour Party and the race industry.
Not to mention a few posters on here earlier today.
Fake news, as somebody once said.
3 -
Scots were very, very happy last night. Being in 44th place is a wonderful feeling.Nigel_Foremain said:
Very amusing. Now, where is that great footballing nation, Scotland in the world rankings? Not looked it up? 44th I believe last time I looked. I wonder what Scots would give to get to be second in anything other than curling and they can't even win at that! Oh I did forget tossing. You are pretty world class in that.Theuniondivvie said:Lol, someone liked it!
0 -
I'm a very big headed individual, so can identify with Maguire tbhFrancisUrquhart said:As a British, black Londoner, son of Windrush generation, working-class parents, I – like so many others with different stories – find it has never been easier to support an England team. It’s southern, it’s northern, it’s black, it’s white, it is of mixed heritage, it’s young, it’s experienced, I’m guessing it’s multi-denominational.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/12/england-lost-southgate-diversity-team
I find this a slightly weird take....the way he is going on, it is like England have never had black and mix raced players in the team. Seems a bit insulting to the genius of John Barnes, the tenacious tiger like midfield play of Ince, the world class left back that was Ashley Cole at his prime, Rio Ferdinard at his best was probably the best centre back in the world, etc etc etc.1 -
Come off it - in their heart of hearts, most Tory MPs want to privatize the NHS.DavidL said:
I've been thinking about how you might rationalise this. I think the reasoning must be that not only are the Tories evil and wicked and self destructive (in wanting to kill off their core vote) but they are also staggeringly incompetent and it is only that incompetence that has stopped the NHS being destroyed by them until now.MattW said:Memories from one of these Twatter threads.
Whether this is a back handed compliment to Boris (who is surely not in the same league of competence as Maggie was, even on his best day) is probably best left for the advanced class to wrestle with.
They might not feel like they can get away with it, but they obviously want it to happen.
And there's nothing morally wrong with taking that position (there's quite a lot wrong with it on a technical level).
Some of them wish that the NHS would charge patients (Boris Johnson), others would prefer that rather than being funded by taxation, it was all funded through private insurance/personal health accounts (John Redwood, Jeremy Hunt)...
Others focus on the provider side -> many would much prefer that more health services/whole hospitals were delivered by for-profit organizations (Jeremy Hunt, Dominic Raab, Priti Patel, Liz Truss...) and probably a few in the Labour camp as well.0 -
Your mum is very proud of you.MaxPB said:
You looking in a mirror then? Your whole country is small dick energy. You voted to live under English oppression. Bottlers and cowards.Theuniondivvie said:
Big dancing outside PC World with (very) wee man exposed to the world energy.MaxPB said:
Nation of bottlers. You voted to live under our jackboot. Time to deal with it.StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May1 -
Sad fact is that both England and Scotland seem to underperform at fitba. Maybe they have something in common?StuartDickson said:
Scots were very, very happy last night. Being in 44th place is a wonderful feeling.Nigel_Foremain said:
Very amusing. Now, where is that great footballing nation, Scotland in the world rankings? Not looked it up? 44th I believe last time I looked. I wonder what Scots would give to get to be second in anything other than curling and they can't even win at that! Oh I did forget tossing. You are pretty world class in that.Theuniondivvie said:Lol, someone liked it!
0 -
As you say most but not all. And this person is definitely in the UK (and seemingly not bright enough to understand thatcontrarian said:
For the record, Matt Singh of Number Cruncher points out that Southgate himself in his press conference said that most (but not all) of the racist online abuse of England's players came from overseas trolls. This was ascertained by the FA's social media experts.eek said:Heading back to racism - I see someone has started given other racists advice
The bit that he won't get is that twitter sends an email everytime someone logs into your account and I bet the person being investigated doesn't have any of those emails.
This point was entirely glossed over by the British media, the twitterati, the Labour Party and the race industry.
Not to mention a few posters on here earlier today.
Fake news, as somebody once said.
1) it's very unlikely his account was hacked and
2) twitter has a lot of log information regarding account access and even sends emails when a new device logs into a twitter account.0 -
It would be helpful if the hate filled crypto-racists that believe in Scottish exceptionalism did so. Be less angry. The woes of your world were not created by "the English" any more than football was invented in Scotland.StuartDickson said:
Feel the love.Nigel_Foremain said:
No amount of carping from Scottish Nationalists will change the fact that Scotland scraped the qualifiers, got knocked out in the group stage and are currently 44th in the world rankings. You should probably stay off the subject of football.StuartDickson said:
Any silver medalist disgracing themselves, their team and their country the way those brats did last night should have the award removed from the record. Give the bronze medalists silver medals and the fourth placed athletes bronze. That’ll soon stop the churlishness.DecrepiterJohnL said:
It is the same at the Olympics. Silver means loser, whereas bronze often means you've outperformed yourself.StuartDickson said:
I think they should be immensely proud of their silver medals. Shocking that the spoilt brats immediately removed them from their necks within seconds of being awarded them. Very rude.FF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
1 -
Glad someone noticed.OllyT said:
It's like the "Football's Coming Home" nonsense that gets wheeled out every tournament as soon as England wins a game.Roger said:
Yes. It's as though they believe themselves too good to accept a medal lesser than a winners. Whatever they intended it read as arrogant which to a lot of watchers made them bad losers. Not attractive at allStuartDickson said:
I think they should be immensely proud of their silver medals. Shocking that the spoilt brats immediately removed them from their necks within seconds of being awarded them. Very rude.FF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
It needs to be binned. It's arrogant. it's embarrassing and the rest of Europe is just laughing and not in a good way.
Football’s Coming to Rome.0 -
I think he is just taking the piss. You, on the other hand, as a nationalist ( a disgusting creed built on hatred), might try and take your own advice.StuartDickson said:
Take a big breath, cuddle a baby, smell a flower, snog your wife, give somebody a compliment, tickle a dog behind the ears, do a selfless deed. The world really is a wonderful place, enjoy your time here.MaxPB said:
Enjoying the English jackboot? That's what Scotland's destiny is for the rest of it's sad existence. You had your chance and you bottled it. 55% of your fellow countrymen decided that the English jackboot was better than being an independent nation under Salmond and Sturgeon. Scotland is a conquered nation, you sold yourselves to the English 300 years ago and when offered the chance to be free you rejected it like pathetic, scared children.StuartDickson said:
We’ll be on ‘il sorpasso’ next.williamglenn said:
Perhaps independence would just be the beginning of a British risorgimento. After hubris comes nemesis.StuartDickson said:
It is a leitmotif when discussing BritNat affairs.felix said:
Second time today for that line from you.....StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May
(Too soon?)1 -
… at the Scottish embassy.eek said:
A mere 500 years when even my link says a variation was played in London in 1349...StuartDickson said:
https://www.bbc.com/sport/av/football/48831909eek said:
Any evidence to back that upStuartDickson said:
The Scots invented football, not the English.Leon said:
No. We are an alpha nation. We conquered the world FFS. We should be winning these things as regularly as Italy. Ffs we invented the sportFF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
We win everything else. This is our hoodoo
https://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/Association-Football-or-Soccer/ says it was a Yorkshireman in London
Penalties are a County Armagh invention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McCrum0 -
I guess so, it is probably as high as Scotland will ever get.StuartDickson said:
Scots were very, very happy last night. Being in 44th place is a wonderful feeling.Nigel_Foremain said:
Very amusing. Now, where is that great footballing nation, Scotland in the world rankings? Not looked it up? 44th I believe last time I looked. I wonder what Scots would give to get to be second in anything other than curling and they can't even win at that! Oh I did forget tossing. You are pretty world class in that.Theuniondivvie said:Lol, someone liked it!
0 -
4
-
He is the personification of Scottish nationalism. Enough said really.Burgessian said:Nigel_Foremain said:
Oh! What is the SNP nemesis? Will it ultimately be the man who was once the hero of all Nats, you know the one...he that was described as a "bully and sex pest" by his own QC? Whatsisname, the little fat arsehole who looks like a toad?StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in MayNigel_Foremain said:
Oh! What is the SNP nemesis? Will it ultimately be the man who was once the hero of all Nats, you know the one...he that was described as a "bully and sex pest" by his own QC? Whatsisname, the little fat arsehole who looks like a toad?StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May
Salmond is clearly a very unpleasant person but, in his day, was an extremely formidable politician who really ruled the roost up here. Much of the momentum that has led to the current 50/50 split on Indy is down to the difference he, personally, made. It's no wonder he thought he deserved a certain amount of slack from his successor.Nigel_Foremain said:
Oh! What is the SNP nemesis? Will it ultimately be the man who was once the hero of all Nats, you know the one...he that was described as a "bully and sex pest" by his own QC? Whatsisname, the little fat arsehole who looks like a toad?StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May0 -
You missed the argument - he wanted free school meals for everyone, not just the poor. Then you add in breakfast, tea and supper and we're in Aldous Huxley territory.rcs1000 said:
There's a reason why free school meals exist. Some parents aren't as attentive as others. They'd rather spend what little money they have on themselves rather than on their children.NerysHughes said:
Unfortunately such sensible talk as this post does not apply anymore. It is now the Governments responsibilty to feed all children , not the parents.felix said:
The idea is for them to raise a family with all the easy and not so easy stuff included. There is no compulsion to rear children if you lack the means to do so. You seem to forget that all this money has to be provided by someone. Taxpayers would generally like to keep some of thier earnings for themselves. Paying for other people's kids to be fed is not part of the deal in my book. Sorry if you find that aggressive. 33 years in the classroom taught me that most parents expect to provide for their children's needs even when sacrifices are needed to do so. Mine certainly were.state_go_away said:
wow - a bit aggressive ! i am sure parents are invented for kids to do more than prepare a packed lunchfelix said:
WTF is the point of having parents and families at all?state_go_away said:
is it that expensive ? If the government can fund everything else to do with a kids educuation it seems odd this is left outeek said:
Way too expensive and when it was trialled it didn't provide many benefits.Malmesbury said:
I think what state_go_away meant was - why not simply provide meals for free, for all pupils, in all state schools?eek said:
I've already answered that - some families are so dysfunctional that the children need to be fed, but not so dysfunctional that the children need to be taken into care (for that costs real money)..state_go_away said:i have never understood how this country gets into such a mess with school meals.
The taxpayer rightly funds a free education until 18 including the huge expense of teachers, facilities , equipment, books ,IT etc yet for some reason stops short of funding a universal free meal during the school day . I mean why ? It cannot be but a very small fraction of the overall education cost so it is on the face of it extremely petty but also would solve the bullying some kids get fro having free meals and also give all kids a better diet.
Really odd the position on school meals to me that we have had for years
There is quite a lot of research out of the US that free school meals programs result in better health and academic outcomes for poorer kids.
The only question, really, is how important to you is improving the life chances of the disadvantaged?0 -
The issue is not the parents -some are responsible and far-sighted (though we can all have bad luck), others not so much. If it was about helping the parents, then your argument could apply. But the kids don't choose whether to be born into responsible homes, do they? And it's arguably in the national interest, not just their own, that they grow up fit and healthy.NerysHughes said:
Unfortunately such sensible talk as this post does not apply anymore. It is now the Governments responsibilty to feed all children , not the parents.felix said:
The idea is for them to raise a family with all the easy and not so easy stuff included. There is no compulsion to rear children if you lack the means to do so. You seem to forget that all this money has to be provided by someone. Taxpayers would generally like to keep some of thier earnings for themselves. Paying for other people's kids to be fed is not part of the deal in my book. Sorry if you find that aggressive. 33 years in the classroom taught me that most parents expect to provide for their children's needs even when sacrifices are needed to do so. Mine certainly were.state_go_away said:
wow - a bit aggressive ! i am sure parents are invented for kids to do more than prepare a packed lunchfelix said:
WTF is the point of having parents and families at all?state_go_away said:
is it that expensive ? If the government can fund everything else to do with a kids educuation it seems odd this is left outeek said:
Way too expensive and when it was trialled it didn't provide many benefits.Malmesbury said:
I think what state_go_away meant was - why not simply provide meals for free, for all pupils, in all state schools?eek said:
I've already answered that - some families are so dysfunctional that the children need to be fed, but not so dysfunctional that the children need to be taken into care (for that costs real money)..state_go_away said:i have never understood how this country gets into such a mess with school meals.
The taxpayer rightly funds a free education until 18 including the huge expense of teachers, facilities , equipment, books ,IT etc yet for some reason stops short of funding a universal free meal during the school day . I mean why ? It cannot be but a very small fraction of the overall education cost so it is on the face of it extremely petty but also would solve the bullying some kids get fro having free meals and also give all kids a better diet.
Really odd the position on school meals to me that we have had for years
2 -
Nicholas de Farndone banned football in London in 1314, IIRC. Which rather suggests it must have been played there from an earlier time.eek said:
A mere 500 years when even my link says a variation was played in London in 1349...StuartDickson said:
https://www.bbc.com/sport/av/football/48831909eek said:
Any evidence to back that upStuartDickson said:
The Scots invented football, not the English.Leon said:
No. We are an alpha nation. We conquered the world FFS. We should be winning these things as regularly as Italy. Ffs we invented the sportFF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
We win everything else. This is our hoodoo
https://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/Association-Football-or-Soccer/ says it was a Yorkshireman in London
Penalties are a County Armagh invention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McCrum0 -
I spent the day watching Loki on D+ with my wife. Really enjoyable, can't wait for the final episode on Wednesday. Good use of our day off.1
-
A reminded to our friends north of the border. Croatia has a smaller population than Scotland. They've played in a World Cup Final.
England have underachieved over the years. But it's nothing compared with Scotland. You were only in this tournament because UEFA gerrymandered the qualification process.1 -
Outside hospitals NHS care is delivered by for-profit organisations, and always has been ; GP practices, pharmacy companies, dental practices etc.rkrkrk said:
Come off it - in their heart of hearts, most Tory MPs want to privatize the NHS.DavidL said:
I've been thinking about how you might rationalise this. I think the reasoning must be that not only are the Tories evil and wicked and self destructive (in wanting to kill off their core vote) but they are also staggeringly incompetent and it is only that incompetence that has stopped the NHS being destroyed by them until now.MattW said:Memories from one of these Twatter threads.
Whether this is a back handed compliment to Boris (who is surely not in the same league of competence as Maggie was, even on his best day) is probably best left for the advanced class to wrestle with.
They might not feel like they can get away with it, but they obviously want it to happen.
And there's nothing morally wrong with taking that position (there's quite a lot wrong with it on a technical level).
Some of them wish that the NHS would charge patients (Boris Johnson), others would prefer that rather than being funded by taxation, it was all funded through private insurance/personal health accounts (John Redwood, Jeremy Hunt)...
Others focus on the provider side -> many would much prefer that more health services/whole hospitals were delivered by for-profit organizations (Jeremy Hunt, Dominic Raab, Priti Patel, Liz Truss...) and probably a few in the Labour camp as well.1 -
Norway is in 42nd place, and Ireland 47th. Maybe we have something in common?Burgessian said:
Sad fact is that both England and Scotland seem to underperform at fitba. Maybe they have something in common?StuartDickson said:
Scots were very, very happy last night. Being in 44th place is a wonderful feeling.Nigel_Foremain said:
Very amusing. Now, where is that great footballing nation, Scotland in the world rankings? Not looked it up? 44th I believe last time I looked. I wonder what Scots would give to get to be second in anything other than curling and they can't even win at that! Oh I did forget tossing. You are pretty world class in that.Theuniondivvie said:Lol, someone liked it!
0 -
Nightclubs, pubs and sports events and restaurants will be encouraged by the government to use Covid passports as a condition of entry from July 19th Javid tells the Commons
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1414597603191308295?s=200 -
He had a practical near monopoly in some places.Malmesbury said:
To be fair, God *has* had multiple best sellers - topping the chats over millennia.Nigel_Foremain said:
I have met a few novelists. I think being a moron is a requirement. They live in a sad fantasy world where they can play God (particularly in Pullman's case) with their creation. If they manage to get a publisher and a modicum of success they begin to feel they are god, even though everyone else knows they are a moron.glw said:
It shows that no matter how eminent you may be, you can also be a total moron.williamglenn said:@HugoGye
This is surely true, the Tories know the best path to re-election would be destroying the NHS and killing elderly voters.
https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1414545579196231684
The difference between novelists and God is that God doesn't think he is a novelist.0 -
Yes, you’re right, I’m really ragin.Nigel_Foremain said:
It would be helpful if the hate filled crypto-racists that believe in Scottish exceptionalism did so. Be less angry. The woes of your world were not created by "the English" any more than football was invented in Scotland.StuartDickson said:
Feel the love.Nigel_Foremain said:
No amount of carping from Scottish Nationalists will change the fact that Scotland scraped the qualifiers, got knocked out in the group stage and are currently 44th in the world rankings. You should probably stay off the subject of football.StuartDickson said:
Any silver medalist disgracing themselves, their team and their country the way those brats did last night should have the award removed from the record. Give the bronze medalists silver medals and the fourth placed athletes bronze. That’ll soon stop the churlishness.DecrepiterJohnL said:
It is the same at the Olympics. Silver means loser, whereas bronze often means you've outperformed yourself.StuartDickson said:
I think they should be immensely proud of their silver medals. Shocking that the spoilt brats immediately removed them from their necks within seconds of being awarded them. Very rude.FF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
Always a pleasure to read your insightful, constructive posts. I wish I could be calm and clever like you.0 -
Most/virtually all of these venues won't touch this with a bargepole!HYUFD said:Nightclubs, pubs and sports events and restaurants will be encouraged by the government to use Covid passports as a condition of entry from July 19th Javid tells the Commons
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1414597603191308295?s=200 -
You’re right one again. British nationalism, like yours, is honourable and upstanding. I’m just an inferior Untermenschen and I will henceforth cower in the mud where I belong.Nigel_Foremain said:
I think he is just taking the piss. You, on the other hand, as a nationalist ( a disgusting creed built on hatred), might try and take your own advice.StuartDickson said:
Take a big breath, cuddle a baby, smell a flower, snog your wife, give somebody a compliment, tickle a dog behind the ears, do a selfless deed. The world really is a wonderful place, enjoy your time here.MaxPB said:
Enjoying the English jackboot? That's what Scotland's destiny is for the rest of it's sad existence. You had your chance and you bottled it. 55% of your fellow countrymen decided that the English jackboot was better than being an independent nation under Salmond and Sturgeon. Scotland is a conquered nation, you sold yourselves to the English 300 years ago and when offered the chance to be free you rejected it like pathetic, scared children.StuartDickson said:
We’ll be on ‘il sorpasso’ next.williamglenn said:
Perhaps independence would just be the beginning of a British risorgimento. After hubris comes nemesis.StuartDickson said:
It is a leitmotif when discussing BritNat affairs.felix said:
Second time today for that line from you.....StuartDickson said:
After hubris comes nemesis.Leon said:
No, we’re really not, for at least another decade. And what will you do about it?StuartDickson said:
Why do you care if the SNP got a majority or not? You’re never going to allow the Untermenschen a referendum irrespective of the parliamentary arithmetic.HYUFD said:
In most of Scotland the Tories are the main Unionist party and opponent of the SNP that is why, however Unionists are also canny enough to vote tactically to beat the Nationalists.StuartDickson said:
And the Lib-Lab pact, which once had unchallenged hegemony, now commands about 10% of the vote. That’s the thanks they get for all their decades of hard work leading to the Claim of Right for Scotland, the Scottish Constitutional Convention and the Scotland Act. And they thought they were being so clever…Fishing said:
Thinking back a couple of decades, if you had ever told me that the Conservatives would thrice outpoll Labour in Scotland, even in a small subsample ...StuartDickson said:Opinium Scottish sub-sample:
SNP 57%
Con 28%
Lab 9%
Grn 3%
LD 2%
BJ approval - 38
Hence Unionist tactical voting for Labour in Edinburgh Southern and Dumbarton and for the LDs in Edinburgh Western as well as tactical voting for the Tories in Aberdeenshire West, Eastwood and Dumfriesshire proved pivotal in preventing the SNP getting a majority at Holyrood in May
(Too soon?)0 -
The whinging about that song as though anyone else cares about our songs is one of the most hilariously implausible and petty things I've ever read. They actually care? Come on.OllyT said:
It's like the "Football's Coming Home" nonsense that gets wheeled out every tournament as soon as England wins a game.Roger said:
Yes. It's as though they believe themselves too good to accept a medal lesser than a winners. Whatever they intended it read as arrogant which to a lot of watchers made them bad losers. Not attractive at allStuartDickson said:
I think they should be immensely proud of their silver medals. Shocking that the spoilt brats immediately removed them from their necks within seconds of being awarded them. Very rude.FF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
It needs to be binned. It's arrogant. it's embarrassing and the rest of Europe is just laughing and not in a good way.
The only thing sillier than silly football culture is getting upset at that silly culture in a really serious way.2 -
Its only arrogant if you are a pathetic self-hating twunt or xenophobe from overseas who has no sense of humour.OllyT said:
It's like the "Football's Coming Home" nonsense that gets wheeled out every tournament as soon as England wins a game.Roger said:
Yes. It's as though they believe themselves too good to accept a medal lesser than a winners. Whatever they intended it read as arrogant which to a lot of watchers made them bad losers. Not attractive at allStuartDickson said:
I think they should be immensely proud of their silver medals. Shocking that the spoilt brats immediately removed them from their necks within seconds of being awarded them. Very rude.FF43 said:Is no-one in England happy with their team's success ?
It needs to be binned. It's arrogant. it's embarrassing and the rest of Europe is just laughing and not in a good way.
With lyrics like "England's gonna throw it away" its the complete opposite of arrogance.3 -
I don't think the Tories want to privatise the NHS. I think they - and all governments in fact - do scratch their heads asking why countries that spend a lot less per head in Europe get better health outcomes than we do. Normally the market does result in more efficient delivery, but the NHS is too dominant and complex to transition to something else within an electoral cycle - so NOBODY wants to touch it. What is definitely clear is that we need a more resilient NHS - more Doctors and Nurses are required, but vested interests may not like that because more qualified people normally means that pay rates drop. It's bloody complex.rkrkrk said:
Come off it - in their heart of hearts, most Tory MPs want to privatize the NHS.DavidL said:
I've been thinking about how you might rationalise this. I think the reasoning must be that not only are the Tories evil and wicked and self destructive (in wanting to kill off their core vote) but they are also staggeringly incompetent and it is only that incompetence that has stopped the NHS being destroyed by them until now.MattW said:Memories from one of these Twatter threads.
Whether this is a back handed compliment to Boris (who is surely not in the same league of competence as Maggie was, even on his best day) is probably best left for the advanced class to wrestle with.
They might not feel like they can get away with it, but they obviously want it to happen.
And there's nothing morally wrong with taking that position (there's quite a lot wrong with it on a technical level).
Some of them wish that the NHS would charge patients (Boris Johnson), others would prefer that rather than being funded by taxation, it was all funded through private insurance/personal health accounts (John Redwood, Jeremy Hunt)...
Others focus on the provider side -> many would much prefer that more health services/whole hospitals were delivered by for-profit organizations (Jeremy Hunt, Dominic Raab, Priti Patel, Liz Truss...) and probably a few in the Labour camp as well.2 -
One in 60 people tested positive for Covid in South Tyneside last week
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9779727/One-60-people-tested-positive-Covid-South-Tyneside-week-official-data-shows.html0 -
Silly boy.felix said:
You missed the argument - he wanted free school meals for everyone, not just the poor. Then you add in breakfast, tea and supper and we're in Aldous Huxley territory.rcs1000 said:
There's a reason why free school meals exist. Some parents aren't as attentive as others. They'd rather spend what little money they have on themselves rather than on their children.NerysHughes said:
Unfortunately such sensible talk as this post does not apply anymore. It is now the Governments responsibilty to feed all children , not the parents.felix said:
The idea is for them to raise a family with all the easy and not so easy stuff included. There is no compulsion to rear children if you lack the means to do so. You seem to forget that all this money has to be provided by someone. Taxpayers would generally like to keep some of thier earnings for themselves. Paying for other people's kids to be fed is not part of the deal in my book. Sorry if you find that aggressive. 33 years in the classroom taught me that most parents expect to provide for their children's needs even when sacrifices are needed to do so. Mine certainly were.state_go_away said:
wow - a bit aggressive ! i am sure parents are invented for kids to do more than prepare a packed lunchfelix said:
WTF is the point of having parents and families at all?state_go_away said:
is it that expensive ? If the government can fund everything else to do with a kids educuation it seems odd this is left outeek said:
Way too expensive and when it was trialled it didn't provide many benefits.Malmesbury said:
I think what state_go_away meant was - why not simply provide meals for free, for all pupils, in all state schools?eek said:
I've already answered that - some families are so dysfunctional that the children need to be fed, but not so dysfunctional that the children need to be taken into care (for that costs real money)..state_go_away said:i have never understood how this country gets into such a mess with school meals.
The taxpayer rightly funds a free education until 18 including the huge expense of teachers, facilities , equipment, books ,IT etc yet for some reason stops short of funding a universal free meal during the school day . I mean why ? It cannot be but a very small fraction of the overall education cost so it is on the face of it extremely petty but also would solve the bullying some kids get fro having free meals and also give all kids a better diet.
Really odd the position on school meals to me that we have had for years
There is quite a lot of research out of the US that free school meals programs result in better health and academic outcomes for poorer kids.
The only question, really, is how important to you is improving the life chances of the disadvantaged?0 -
34471 cases, 6 deaths, no update for hospital admissions...0
-
I think there's a good argument for that too - both breakfast and for all.felix said:
You missed the argument - he wanted free school meals for everyone, not just the poor. Then you add in breakfast, tea and supper and we're in Aldous Huxley territory.rcs1000 said:
There's a reason why free school meals exist. Some parents aren't as attentive as others. They'd rather spend what little money they have on themselves rather than on their children.NerysHughes said:
Unfortunately such sensible talk as this post does not apply anymore. It is now the Governments responsibilty to feed all children , not the parents.felix said:
The idea is for them to raise a family with all the easy and not so easy stuff included. There is no compulsion to rear children if you lack the means to do so. You seem to forget that all this money has to be provided by someone. Taxpayers would generally like to keep some of thier earnings for themselves. Paying for other people's kids to be fed is not part of the deal in my book. Sorry if you find that aggressive. 33 years in the classroom taught me that most parents expect to provide for their children's needs even when sacrifices are needed to do so. Mine certainly were.state_go_away said:
wow - a bit aggressive ! i am sure parents are invented for kids to do more than prepare a packed lunchfelix said:
WTF is the point of having parents and families at all?state_go_away said:
is it that expensive ? If the government can fund everything else to do with a kids educuation it seems odd this is left outeek said:
Way too expensive and when it was trialled it didn't provide many benefits.Malmesbury said:
I think what state_go_away meant was - why not simply provide meals for free, for all pupils, in all state schools?eek said:
I've already answered that - some families are so dysfunctional that the children need to be fed, but not so dysfunctional that the children need to be taken into care (for that costs real money)..state_go_away said:i have never understood how this country gets into such a mess with school meals.
The taxpayer rightly funds a free education until 18 including the huge expense of teachers, facilities , equipment, books ,IT etc yet for some reason stops short of funding a universal free meal during the school day . I mean why ? It cannot be but a very small fraction of the overall education cost so it is on the face of it extremely petty but also would solve the bullying some kids get fro having free meals and also give all kids a better diet.
Really odd the position on school meals to me that we have had for years
There is quite a lot of research out of the US that free school meals programs result in better health and academic outcomes for poorer kids.
The only question, really, is how important to you is improving the life chances of the disadvantaged?
Firstly, free school meals come with a stigma attached. Do you not remember being at school? Getting a free school meal marked you out for derision as it marked your parents as poor. Kids would beg their (poor) parents to get shitty packed lunches rather than suffer from the stigma of being a free school means kid.
Secondly, you know what... all the evidence is that free breakfasts boost academic and health outcomes more than lunch.
Here's a simple solution. Let's pick two council areas with roughly similar demographics and academic outcomes. In one, let's take money away from teachers and sports facilities, and instead use that money to give food to kids at breakfast and lunch.
And then let's compare the academic and health outcomes of the two council areas. Will the free school meals have been better at improving results than spending the money on teachers.
I really don't know that answer to that question, by the way. But I do think the right way to answer it is with data, not with bringing up the spectre of Aldous Huxley.4 -
Which countries spend less and get better results?ExiledInScotland said:
I don't think the Tories want to privatise the NHS. I think they - and all governments in fact - do scratch their heads asking why countries that spend a lot less per head in Europe get better health outcomes than we do. Normally the market does result in more efficient delivery, but the NHS is too dominant and complex to transition to something else within an electoral cycle - so NOBODY wants to touch it. What is definitely clear is that we need a more resilient NHS - more Doctors and Nurses are required, but vested interests may not like that because more qualified people normally means that pay rates drop. It's bloody complex.rkrkrk said:
Come off it - in their heart of hearts, most Tory MPs want to privatize the NHS.DavidL said:
I've been thinking about how you might rationalise this. I think the reasoning must be that not only are the Tories evil and wicked and self destructive (in wanting to kill off their core vote) but they are also staggeringly incompetent and it is only that incompetence that has stopped the NHS being destroyed by them until now.MattW said:Memories from one of these Twatter threads.
Whether this is a back handed compliment to Boris (who is surely not in the same league of competence as Maggie was, even on his best day) is probably best left for the advanced class to wrestle with.
They might not feel like they can get away with it, but they obviously want it to happen.
And there's nothing morally wrong with taking that position (there's quite a lot wrong with it on a technical level).
Some of them wish that the NHS would charge patients (Boris Johnson), others would prefer that rather than being funded by taxation, it was all funded through private insurance/personal health accounts (John Redwood, Jeremy Hunt)...
Others focus on the provider side -> many would much prefer that more health services/whole hospitals were delivered by for-profit organizations (Jeremy Hunt, Dominic Raab, Priti Patel, Liz Truss...) and probably a few in the Labour camp as well.0 -
I normally agree with most of what you write but this is ridiculous.felix said:
You missed the argument - he wanted free school meals for everyone, not just the poor. Then you add in breakfast, tea and supper and we're in Aldous Huxley territory.rcs1000 said:
There's a reason why free school meals exist. Some parents aren't as attentive as others. They'd rather spend what little money they have on themselves rather than on their children.NerysHughes said:
Unfortunately such sensible talk as this post does not apply anymore. It is now the Governments responsibilty to feed all children , not the parents.felix said:
The idea is for them to raise a family with all the easy and not so easy stuff included. There is no compulsion to rear children if you lack the means to do so. You seem to forget that all this money has to be provided by someone. Taxpayers would generally like to keep some of thier earnings for themselves. Paying for other people's kids to be fed is not part of the deal in my book. Sorry if you find that aggressive. 33 years in the classroom taught me that most parents expect to provide for their children's needs even when sacrifices are needed to do so. Mine certainly were.state_go_away said:
wow - a bit aggressive ! i am sure parents are invented for kids to do more than prepare a packed lunchfelix said:
WTF is the point of having parents and families at all?state_go_away said:
is it that expensive ? If the government can fund everything else to do with a kids educuation it seems odd this is left outeek said:
Way too expensive and when it was trialled it didn't provide many benefits.Malmesbury said:
I think what state_go_away meant was - why not simply provide meals for free, for all pupils, in all state schools?eek said:
I've already answered that - some families are so dysfunctional that the children need to be fed, but not so dysfunctional that the children need to be taken into care (for that costs real money)..state_go_away said:i have never understood how this country gets into such a mess with school meals.
The taxpayer rightly funds a free education until 18 including the huge expense of teachers, facilities , equipment, books ,IT etc yet for some reason stops short of funding a universal free meal during the school day . I mean why ? It cannot be but a very small fraction of the overall education cost so it is on the face of it extremely petty but also would solve the bullying some kids get fro having free meals and also give all kids a better diet.
Really odd the position on school meals to me that we have had for years
There is quite a lot of research out of the US that free school meals programs result in better health and academic outcomes for poorer kids.
The only question, really, is how important to you is improving the life chances of the disadvantaged?
Firstly absolutely I agree that meals should apply to everyone, not just the poor. I am of the belief that nothing should be reserved for the poor, we should have welfare at whatever level we have it and then that's that. Anything else should either be universal or not given.
Secondly why the heck would you "add in breakfast, tea and supper"?
At lunchtime the school is acting in loco parentis, it isn't at breakfast or in the evening.0 -
27,000 -> 34,000 week-over-week, I think. And today's total is only just above the seven day average. Rather encouraging, I think.FrancisUrquhart said:34471 cases, 6 deaths, no update for hospital admissions...
1 -
If I was a neutral I think I'd have supported Italy for yesterday's match, due to the positive first impression they made at the start of the tournament.StuartDickson said:
Scots were very, very happy last night. Being in 44th place is a wonderful feeling.Nigel_Foremain said:
Very amusing. Now, where is that great footballing nation, Scotland in the world rankings? Not looked it up? 44th I believe last time I looked. I wonder what Scots would give to get to be second in anything other than curling and they can't even win at that! Oh I did forget tossing. You are pretty world class in that.Theuniondivvie said:Lol, someone liked it!
I do think there is something a little bit psychologically unhealthy about deriving enjoyment from other people's failure though. A bit neurotic.
A bit of a cul-de-sac for national identity too.0 -
"Social media experts?" Must be right. Gotta trust them experts. It's odd that the stands are verifiably packed with flesh and blood racists though, or are they bots from abroad too? Like Blade Runner?contrarian said:
For the record, Matt Singh of Number Cruncher points out that Southgate himself in his press conference said that most (but not all) of the racist online abuse of England's players came from overseas trolls. Thrris was ascertained by the FA's social media This point was entirely glossed over by the British media, the twitterati, the Labour Party and the race industry.eek said:Heading back to racism - I see someone has started given other racists advice
The bit that he won't get is that twitter sends an email everytime someone logs into your account and I bet the person being investigated doesn't have any of those emails.
Not to mention a few posters on here earlier today.
Fake news, as somebody once said.
ETA and the Rashford mural defacers, also from overseas? And BTW what the fuck does "Take pride in knowing that your struggle will play the biggest role in your purpose" mean anyway?0 -
Its NW and NE that again in the purple...you don't win anything from Bully's prize board for this....you want to stay out of the purple and in the green, you get nothing in this game for two in a bed, other resigning from your government position if they aren't your husband / wife....rcs1000 said:
27,000 -> 34,000 week-over-week, I think. And today's total is only just above the seven day average. Rather encouraging, I think.FrancisUrquhart said:34471 cases, 6 deaths, no update for hospital admissions...
0 -
How would you conduct that experiment? No council is willingly going to redirect money from teachers to other school expenditure - the uproar would be immediate and massive.rcs1000 said:
I think there's a good argument for that too - both breakfast and for all.felix said:
You missed the argument - he wanted free school meals for everyone, not just the poor. Then you add in breakfast, tea and supper and we're in Aldous Huxley territory.rcs1000 said:
There's a reason why free school meals exist. Some parents aren't as attentive as others. They'd rather spend what little money they have on themselves rather than on their children.NerysHughes said:
Unfortunately such sensible talk as this post does not apply anymore. It is now the Governments responsibilty to feed all children , not the parents.felix said:
The idea is for them to raise a family with all the easy and not so easy stuff included. There is no compulsion to rear children if you lack the means to do so. You seem to forget that all this money has to be provided by someone. Taxpayers would generally like to keep some of thier earnings for themselves. Paying for other people's kids to be fed is not part of the deal in my book. Sorry if you find that aggressive. 33 years in the classroom taught me that most parents expect to provide for their children's needs even when sacrifices are needed to do so. Mine certainly were.state_go_away said:
wow - a bit aggressive ! i am sure parents are invented for kids to do more than prepare a packed lunchfelix said:
WTF is the point of having parents and families at all?state_go_away said:
is it that expensive ? If the government can fund everything else to do with a kids educuation it seems odd this is left outeek said:
Way too expensive and when it was trialled it didn't provide many benefits.Malmesbury said:
I think what state_go_away meant was - why not simply provide meals for free, for all pupils, in all state schools?eek said:
I've already answered that - some families are so dysfunctional that the children need to be fed, but not so dysfunctional that the children need to be taken into care (for that costs real money)..state_go_away said:i have never understood how this country gets into such a mess with school meals.
The taxpayer rightly funds a free education until 18 including the huge expense of teachers, facilities , equipment, books ,IT etc yet for some reason stops short of funding a universal free meal during the school day . I mean why ? It cannot be but a very small fraction of the overall education cost so it is on the face of it extremely petty but also would solve the bullying some kids get fro having free meals and also give all kids a better diet.
Really odd the position on school meals to me that we have had for years
There is quite a lot of research out of the US that free school meals programs result in better health and academic outcomes for poorer kids.
The only question, really, is how important to you is improving the life chances of the disadvantaged?
Firstly, free school meals come with a stigma attached. Do you not remember being at school? Getting a free school meal marked you out for derision as it marked your parents as poor. Kids would beg their (poor) parents to get shitty packed lunches rather than suffer from the stigma of being a free school means kid.
Secondly, you know what... all the evidence is that free breakfasts boost academic and health outcomes more than lunch.
Here's a simple solution. Let's pick two council areas with roughly similar demographics and academic outcomes. In one, let's take money away from teachers and sports facilities, and instead use that money to give food to kids at breakfast and lunch.
And then let's compare the academic and health outcomes of the two council areas. Will the free school meals have been better at improving results than spending the money on teachers.
I really don't know that answer to that question, by the way. But I do think the right way to answer it is with data, not with bringing up the spectre of Aldous Huxley.0 -
Covid – is no-one watching The Saj in the Commons?0
-
What flesh and blood racists in the stands?IshmaelZ said:
"Social media experts?" Must be right. Gotta trust them experts. It's odd that the stands are verifiably packed with flesh and blood racists though, or are they bots from abroad too? Like Blade Runner?contrarian said:
For the record, Matt Singh of Number Cruncher points out that Southgate himself in his press conference said that most (but not all) of the racist online abuse of England's players came from overseas trolls. Thrris was ascertained by the FA's social media experts.eek said:Heading back to racism - I see someone has started given other racists advice
The bit that he won't get is that twitter sends an email everytime someone logs into your account and I bet the person being investigated doesn't have any of those emails.
This point was entirely glossed over by the British media, the twitterati, the Labour Party and the race industry.
Not to mention a few posters on here earlier today.
Fake news, as somebody once said.
Stupid partisan idiots booing the opposing teams anthem isn't racism, its just unsporting, rude and stupid.
Were people making monkey gestures at black players, or something similar from the stands? That's absolutely unacceptable if so, but I've not seen anything like that.0 -
BIblical floodings in London, it looks like.0
-
Sorry are you criticising me or Gareth Southgate here....??IshmaelZ said:
"Social media experts?" Must be right. Gotta trust them experts. It's odd that the stands are verifiably packed with flesh and blood racists though, or are they bots from abroad too? Like Blade Runner?contrarian said:
For the record, Matt Singh of Number Cruncher points out that Southgate himself in his press conference said that most (but not all) of the racist online abuse of England's players came from overseas trolls. Thrris was ascertained by the FA's social media experts.eek said:Heading back to racism - I see someone has started given other racists advice
The bit that he won't get is that twitter sends an email everytime someone logs into your account and I bet the person being investigated doesn't have any of those emails.
This point was entirely glossed over by the British media, the twitterati, the Labour Party and the race industry.
Not to mention a few posters on here earlier today.
Fake news, as somebody once said.
Why would Southgate himself state most of the abuse is coming from outside the UK, if he did not trust the people who were telling him that..........?
Not that you actually read half of what is actually written, here, or what is said by the people concerned, of course.
0 -
And in the Northwest too.WhisperingOracle said:BIblical floodings in London, it looks like.
1 -
Hospital admissions for England which are updated more frequently look to be falling back now.rcs1000 said:
27,000 -> 34,000 week-over-week, I think. And today's total is only just above the seven day average. Rather encouraging, I think.FrancisUrquhart said:34471 cases, 6 deaths, no update for hospital admissions...
0 -
I think that the idea that we are going to have a further 2 doublings from here as was being suggested by some scientists at the end of last week looks seriously pessimistic. If this is not the peak its damn near it, days away at the most.rcs1000 said:
27,000 -> 34,000 week-over-week, I think. And today's total is only just above the seven day average. Rather encouraging, I think.FrancisUrquhart said:34471 cases, 6 deaths, no update for hospital admissions...
1 -
Next week we've got the end of the tournament to figure in for England and the following week it's the end of schools. The infection rate could actually drop pretty fast in the next 10-12 days.rcs1000 said:
27,000 -> 34,000 week-over-week, I think. And today's total is only just above the seven day average. Rather encouraging, I think.FrancisUrquhart said:34471 cases, 6 deaths, no update for hospital admissions...
1 -
Germany's vaccination rate has noticeably slowed down and it looks like it will plateau in the 60-65% range.0
-
All on foreign holidays?williamglenn said:Germany's vaccination rate has noticeably slowed down and it looks like it will plateau in the 60-65% range.
0 -
From my personal experience, I'm surprised it is so low.FrancisUrquhart said:One in 60 people tested positive for Covid in South Tyneside last week
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9779727/One-60-people-tested-positive-Covid-South-Tyneside-week-official-data-shows.html
Absolutely everybody* I know is succumbing to it.
* Not literally.0 -
In Florida, as we've previously discussed, the Governor devolved to local municipalities most Covid controls. We both agreed this was the right approach.contrarian said:
I'm sorry, but if you are part of the UK's now extremely powerful and and largely unaccountable public health lobby, vaccination rates are indeed the only thing that matters.rcs1000 said:
Firstly, awkward for whom?contrarian said:
On the upside, the US is once again acting as a control experiment, as Florida, South Dakota and Texas did with lockdown.TimT said:Meanwhile, depressing news on the vaccination front from the US, where partisan politics are now the biggest part of the problem:
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/12/biden-boosting-vaccination-rates-499047
Imagine, for example, that infection rates and hospitalisations do not explode in US states with low vaccination rates.
That would be awkward
Secondly, vaccination rates are not the only thing that matters.
For example, schools across the US are on summer vacation, and have been for at least a month. That closes down the biggest vector of transmission.
There are a dozen other factors that relate to how well CV19 spreads, above and beyond vaccination rates. If you live on a farm in Wyoming, and you see your family and the guy at the feed shop once a week, then you know what? The fact that you haven't gotten vaccinated probably doesn't affect your likelihood of infection that much.
But if you live in Chicago in a house shared with a dozen others, work in a busy store, and have to take the L to work during rush hour, then yeah, I'd think whether you're vaccinated is going to make a big fucking difference.
Come September, we're going to see what happens when schools return, *and* Delta is well seeded in the US. My gut is that there are going to be some small town areas that get quite badly hit. Not Northern Italy or Manhattan in March 2020 badly hit - but perhaps UK Jan/Feb 2021.
Vaccination rates are the main reason we delayed our freedom day by a month.
Vaccination rates are the main reason I and others like me are going to be turned into second class citizens in our own country when passports are introduced in the autumn.
And please do not trot out all the 'geography' bullsh*t at me again. Florida, Texas and many other republican states have big crowded cities.
Like I say, America is a control experiment. Just as Florida destroyed the lockdown works arguments, so it may destroy the vaccinate or else argument.
It may not of course. Let's see.
And now you're claiming that Florida didn't have controls in big cities?
Not only that, but you're being either deliberating misleading or wilfully ignorant. Do you really think that the situation in Houston and New York are the same. Do you know how many people take the Houston subway system each day? It's around 55,000 (pre-pandemic). Do you know what the number was for New York? 6 million. That's ooohhhh... a bit of a difference. Do you know how many people in Dallas or Houston live in low income high rise apartments? Virtually none. Do you really think that population density and habits have no impact on the spread of a viral infection of the upper respiratory tract? I mean, really?4 -
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-gcse-and-a-level-students-could-be-told-what-is-on-their-exam-papers-in-advance-12354383
Why not just tell them the answers too?
Kids have a world of information at their fingertips which was not available a generation ago. Honestly I don't think I would have lost much by having a teacher teach using Zoom than face to face. The Covid exam generation are going to have people massively questioning the value of their grades.
0 -
Because like you he doesn't want to concede that English football supporters, Ther salt of the earth Lads who pay his wages via sky sports subs, are in the main a bunch of ape grunting banana emoji posting racist pigs. Just a very few bad apples, mostly overseas. Hilarious that his response to a charge of racism is "foreigners must be to blame, comme d'habitude."contrarian said:
Sorry are you criticising me or Gareth Southgate here....??IshmaelZ said:
"Social media experts?" Must be right. Gotta trust them experts. It's odd that the stands are verifiably packed with flesh and blood racists though, or are they bots from abroad too? Like Blade Runner?contrarian said:
For the record, Matt Singh of Number Cruncher points out that Southgate himself in his press conference said that most (but not all) of the racist online abuse of England's players came from overseas trolls. Thrris was ascertained by the FA's social media experts.eek said:Heading back to racism - I see someone has started given other racists advice
The bit that he won't get is that twitter sends an email everytime someone logs into your account and I bet the person being investigated doesn't have any of those emails.
This point was entirely glossed over by the British media, the twitterati, the Labour Party and the race industry.
Not to mention a few posters on here earlier today.
Fake news, as somebody once said.
Why would Southgate himself state most of the abuse is coming from outside the UK, if he did not trust the people who were telling him that..........?
Not that you actually read half of what is actually written, here, or what is said by the people concerned, of course.0 -
Absolutely. It's not just a question of putting a barcode by the door. If they are going to do it they will have to police it properly which will mean a significant cost the likes of which I'm guessing those establishments aren't in a position to incur right now.londonpubman said:
Most/virtually all of these venues won't touch this with a bargepole!HYUFD said:Nightclubs, pubs and sports events and restaurants will be encouraged by the government to use Covid passports as a condition of entry from July 19th Javid tells the Commons
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1414597603191308295?s=20
Edit: although I'm guessing this will settle back into being a barcode by the door.0 -
Would repetitively squeaking about a nation of bottlers born to serve the English and being 44th in the world rankings qualify to live in this neurotic cul-de-sac of national identity?LostPassword said:
If I was a neutral I think I'd have supported Italy for yesterday's match, due to the positive first impression they made at the start of the tournament.StuartDickson said:
Scots were very, very happy last night. Being in 44th place is a wonderful feeling.Nigel_Foremain said:
Very amusing. Now, where is that great footballing nation, Scotland in the world rankings? Not looked it up? 44th I believe last time I looked. I wonder what Scots would give to get to be second in anything other than curling and they can't even win at that! Oh I did forget tossing. You are pretty world class in that.Theuniondivvie said:Lol, someone liked it!
I do think there is something a little bit psychologically unhealthy about deriving enjoyment from other people's failure though. A bit neurotic.
A bit of a cul-de-sac for national identity too.0 -
Not in this part of London - the radar story is fascinating:WhisperingOracle said:BIblical floodings in London, it looks like.
https://www.netweather.tv/live-weather/radar
The storm developed over Sutton and Epsom and a new storm has developed over central and NW London. Here to the east, still dry.0 -
Most of the children at the school I teach at bring in packed lunches (as do almost all the staff).Malmesbury said:
Not sure about requiring expanded facilities - the idea is simply to stop parents paying for the school meals that they get already.FrancisUrquhart said:
There is also the one off cost of new / expanded kitchen facilities that will be required.Stuartinromford said:
School meals are about £2.50 per child per day, which is £500 or so over a school year. You could get some more economy of scale by feeding everyone (... eventually, there'd be hefty costs in scaling up kitchen capacity to start with).eek said:
Way too expensive and when it was trialled it didn't provide many benefits.Malmesbury said:
I think what state_go_away meant was - why not simply provide meals for free, for all pupils, in all state schools?eek said:
I've already answered that - some families are so dysfunctional that the children need to be fed, but not so dysfunctional that the children need to be taken into care (for that costs real money)..state_go_away said:i have never understood how this country gets into such a mess with school meals.
The taxpayer rightly funds a free education until 18 including the huge expense of teachers, facilities , equipment, books ,IT etc yet for some reason stops short of funding a universal free meal during the school day . I mean why ? It cannot be but a very small fraction of the overall education cost so it is on the face of it extremely petty but also would solve the bullying some kids get fro having free meals and also give all kids a better diet.
Really odd the position on school meals to me that we have had for years
The minimum funding per primary pupil in England is only £4000 (though it's higher in needier and/or more expensive areas).
If I remember correctly when Labour proposed this for the 2017 GE, I think the cost was estimated at about ~£1bn extra a year for just primary school kids to have lunch. This isn't for everybody to have breakfast club or after school food.
Now, if you are talking about adding breakfast (which some have suggested).....
Each year we have a school Christmas lunch which about half of the pupils take part in: that normally takes about an hour and a half to serve with the current set up (and only works because they get very little choice as to what they eat).
If we had to feed all of them (and if the food were free 90%+ would want it) then we would need a much bigger canteen and kitchen (easily £1 million just for that, based on a similar but smaller project a decade ago), plus a possible reorganisation of the school day to allow for staggered lunch times.
There are better uses for the £500 a year per pupil it would cost, and that's assuming the cost didn't come out of the pre-existing budget.
1 -
Is that population or adults. If it's the latter then that's seriously worrying. We'll top out at 90% by the end of August for adults which is 70% of the population. If we do start with 12-17 year olds we could get to 75% of the population by the end of September. We'd be extremely close to herd immunity, even with delta at that point.williamglenn said:Germany's vaccination rate has noticeably slowed down and it looks like it will plateau in the 60-65% range.
0 -
It's odd. It's rare for there to be little wind meaning that the thunderstorm develops and then doesn't move. Thinking of going for a walk this evening. Might give it a miss just in case we get a storm here.stodge said:
Not in this part of London - the radar story is fascinating:WhisperingOracle said:BIblical floodings in London, it looks like.
https://www.netweather.tv/live-weather/radar
The storm developed over Sutton and Epsom and a new storm has developed over central and NW London. Here to the east, still dry.0 -
No no no. Parents choose to have children. In doing so they must accept the responsibility to rear them. The great majority can afford to do so. Happy to help where there is genuine need - not happy to give breakfast to kids with affluent parents. Take some responsibility.rcs1000 said:
I think there's a good argument for that too - both breakfast and for all.felix said:
You missed the argument - he wanted free school meals for everyone, not just the poor. Then you add in breakfast, tea and supper and we're in Aldous Huxley territory.rcs1000 said:
There's a reason why free school meals exist. Some parents aren't as attentive as others. They'd rather spend what little money they have on themselves rather than on their children.NerysHughes said:
Unfortunately such sensible talk as this post does not apply anymore. It is now the Governments responsibilty to feed all children , not the parents.felix said:
The idea is for them to raise a family with all the easy and not so easy stuff included. There is no compulsion to rear children if you lack the means to do so. You seem to forget that all this money has to be provided by someone. Taxpayers would generally like to keep some of thier earnings for themselves. Paying for other people's kids to be fed is not part of the deal in my book. Sorry if you find that aggressive. 33 years in the classroom taught me that most parents expect to provide for their children's needs even when sacrifices are needed to do so. Mine certainly were.state_go_away said:
wow - a bit aggressive ! i am sure parents are invented for kids to do more than prepare a packed lunchfelix said:
WTF is the point of having parents and families at all?state_go_away said:
is it that expensive ? If the government can fund everything else to do with a kids educuation it seems odd this is left outeek said:
Way too expensive and when it was trialled it didn't provide many benefits.Malmesbury said:
I think what state_go_away meant was - why not simply provide meals for free, for all pupils, in all state schools?eek said:
I've already answered that - some families are so dysfunctional that the children need to be fed, but not so dysfunctional that the children need to be taken into care (for that costs real money)..state_go_away said:i have never understood how this country gets into such a mess with school meals.
The taxpayer rightly funds a free education until 18 including the huge expense of teachers, facilities , equipment, books ,IT etc yet for some reason stops short of funding a universal free meal during the school day . I mean why ? It cannot be but a very small fraction of the overall education cost so it is on the face of it extremely petty but also would solve the bullying some kids get fro having free meals and also give all kids a better diet.
Really odd the position on school meals to me that we have had for years
There is quite a lot of research out of the US that free school meals programs result in better health and academic outcomes for poorer kids.
The only question, really, is how important to you is improving the life chances of the disadvantaged?
Firstly, free school meals come with a stigma attached. Do you not remember being at school? Getting a free school meal marked you out for derision as it marked your parents as poor. Kids would beg their (poor) parents to get shitty packed lunches rather than suffer from the stigma of being a free school means kid.
Secondly, you know what... all the evidence is that free breakfasts boost academic and health outcomes more than lunch.
Here's a simple solution. Let's pick two council areas with roughly similar demographics and academic outcomes. In one, let's take money away from teachers and sports facilities, and instead use that money to give food to kids at breakfast and lunch.
And then let's compare the academic and health outcomes of the two council areas. Will the free school meals have been better at improving results than spending the money on teachers.
I really don't know that answer to that question, by the way. But I do think the right way to answer it is with data, not with bringing up the spectre of Aldous Huxley.1 -
Yes well there are demographic arguments and demographic arguments of course.rcs1000 said:
In Florida, as we've previously discussed, the Governor devolved to local municipalities most Covid controls. We both agreed this was the right approach.contrarian said:
I'm sorry, but if you are part of the UK's now extremely powerful and and largely unaccountable public health lobby, vaccination rates are indeed the only thing that matters.rcs1000 said:
Firstly, awkward for whom?contrarian said:
On the upside, the US is once again acting as a control experiment, as Florida, South Dakota and Texas did with lockdown.TimT said:Meanwhile, depressing news on the vaccination front from the US, where partisan politics are now the biggest part of the problem:
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/12/biden-boosting-vaccination-rates-499047
Imagine, for example, that infection rates and hospitalisations do not explode in US states with low vaccination rates.
That would be awkward
Secondly, vaccination rates are not the only thing that matters.
For example, schools across the US are on summer vacation, and have been for at least a month. That closes down the biggest vector of transmission.
There are a dozen other factors that relate to how well CV19 spreads, above and beyond vaccination rates. If you live on a farm in Wyoming, and you see your family and the guy at the feed shop once a week, then you know what? The fact that you haven't gotten vaccinated probably doesn't affect your likelihood of infection that much.
But if you live in Chicago in a house shared with a dozen others, work in a busy store, and have to take the L to work during rush hour, then yeah, I'd think whether you're vaccinated is going to make a big fucking difference.
Come September, we're going to see what happens when schools return, *and* Delta is well seeded in the US. My gut is that there are going to be some small town areas that get quite badly hit. Not Northern Italy or Manhattan in March 2020 badly hit - but perhaps UK Jan/Feb 2021.
Vaccination rates are the main reason we delayed our freedom day by a month.
Vaccination rates are the main reason I and others like me are going to be turned into second class citizens in our own country when passports are introduced in the autumn.
And please do not trot out all the 'geography' bullsh*t at me again. Florida, Texas and many other republican states have big crowded cities.
Like I say, America is a control experiment. Just as Florida destroyed the lockdown works arguments, so it may destroy the vaccinate or else argument.
It may not of course. Let's see.
And now you're claiming that Florida didn't have controls in big cities?
Not only that, but you're being either deliberating misleading or wilfully ignorant. Do you really think that the situation in Houston and New York are the same. Do you know how many people take the Houston subway system each day? It's around 55,000 (pre-pandemic). Do you know what the number was for New York? 6 million. That's ooohhhh... a bit of a difference. Do you know how many people in Dallas or Houston live in low income high rise apartments? Virtually none. Do you really think that population density and habits have no impact on the spread of a viral infection of the upper respiratory tract? I mean, really?
One of the reasons 'experts' were so incensed by De Santis's policy over the winter was Florida's position as one of America's favorite retirement states. A lot of dry tinder there.
But it didn't work out that way.
So whilst you are of course correct about New York's subway system and Houston's that's not the entire equation, is it? Not by a long chalk.
Notice I make no predictions about how low vaccination rates in certain states will work out. All I am saying is we may again learn things that contradict conventional wisdom.
Conventional wisdom that was in my opinion very wrong about lockdowns.0 -
I can only critique one set of misguided nationalist beliefs at a time, but any help you're willing to offer to the cause will be gratefully received.Theuniondivvie said:
Would repetitively squeaking about a nation of bottlers born to serve the English and being 44th in the world rankings qualify to live in this neurotic cul-de-sac of national identity?LostPassword said:
If I was a neutral I think I'd have supported Italy for yesterday's match, due to the positive first impression they made at the start of the tournament.StuartDickson said:
Scots were very, very happy last night. Being in 44th place is a wonderful feeling.Nigel_Foremain said:
Very amusing. Now, where is that great footballing nation, Scotland in the world rankings? Not looked it up? 44th I believe last time I looked. I wonder what Scots would give to get to be second in anything other than curling and they can't even win at that! Oh I did forget tossing. You are pretty world class in that.Theuniondivvie said:Lol, someone liked it!
I do think there is something a little bit psychologically unhealthy about deriving enjoyment from other people's failure though. A bit neurotic.
A bit of a cul-de-sac for national identity too.0
This discussion has been closed.