If this polling doesn’t change then hello PM Starmer – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
Funny thing about this is that the arguments put forward by PBTories to try and defend Mr Johnson - that it was simply a beer drunk at an otherwise completely work meeting - work much better for Mr Starmer than Mr J.BlancheLivermore said:
That would explain why Sir Keir Karma Starmer so calmly dismissed it. Not rattled at all.Foxy said:
No, because it legitimately was a work event 🙄BlancheLivermore said:Starmer boozing was legal.
Because the police said it was legal.
Because the local PCC was boozing with him?
https://twitter.com/gtmac786/status/15179845146430423060 -
Interest rates on Student Loans too. Very well targeted, like the NI, to make the happy recipients feel all loved and supported by their parentally minded government.Foxy said:
It isn't the national GDP figures that matter to people, it is the economic pressures on themselves and their communities that impacts on voting.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
Putting up NI on workers to allow the elderly to keep more of their assets is an example of this.
And fast growing economies in 2021 are hardly a reliable measure given the crash beforehand.2 -
Not this far out.DavidL said:
Absolutely true. They are struggling, they have no clear and obvious policies to deal with issues that are out of their control and their attempt to do so in the Spring statement was a fiasco focusing on the wrong targets and depleting the limited amunition available to little or no benefit. But an alternative would be nice. Blair and Brown seemed to manage one.Jonathan said:You know a government is struggling when their attack on the opposition is that they haven’t fleshed out their policies 2 1/12 years from an election.
Why wouldn't Opposition parties want to keep their powder dry until closer to the election. Take Osborne's foolish (but popular with HYUFD and other million pound heirs to fortunes) inheritance tax proposals taken up in part by Brown/ Darling.0 -
Boris fancies JRM?? Surely not.Mexicanpete said:
My fear is Melanchon's Corbynista morons will stay at home or vote Le Pen because they hate Centrists more than they do Fascists. Meanwhile talking of Corbynista morons.TimS said:My optimistic prediction for today is that Le Pen will slightly underperform and it’ll be 57:43. I hope I’m right.
There is something of a repellent double standard here, in that Rayner was pilloried for calling Conservatives "scum" (fair enough) yet it is acceptable for the Mail to allude to the misogynistic notion that she exposes her minge to Boris Johnson every Wednesday at noon.northern_monkey said:Classy!
Anyway working girl Angie is wasting her time. Johnson prefers posh *****... like Jacob Rees Mogg.0 -
Yes, I followed the late John Challis on Twitter and he said how,popular he was in Serbia and even had a road named after him there.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Only Fools and Horses is very popular in parts of Eastern Europe IIRC.Taz said:
Taking with him some broken lawn mower engines.Dura_Ace said:
Mickey Pearce has borrowed 200 sovs off Rodney to go and join the Azov Battalion.Jonathan said:
Just imagine Delboy with a lock up garage filled with dusty boxes of hundreds of Ukrainian flags he’s had since 1998, realising his lottery numbers came in.
Lovely bloke, interacted with fans on Twitter. Never unpleasant. RIP
You rang my Lord is very popular in Hungary.1 -
Does anyone have outre mer results for France ?0
-
You clearly didn't get my "Wordle" right. And there were two (in)appropriate answers.DavidL said:
Boris fancies JRM?? Surely not.Mexicanpete said:
My fear is Melanchon's Corbynista morons will stay at home or vote Le Pen because they hate Centrists more than they do Fascists. Meanwhile talking of Corbynista morons.TimS said:My optimistic prediction for today is that Le Pen will slightly underperform and it’ll be 57:43. I hope I’m right.
There is something of a repellent double standard here, in that Rayner was pilloried for calling Conservatives "scum" (fair enough) yet it is acceptable for the Mail to allude to the misogynistic notion that she exposes her minge to Boris Johnson every Wednesday at noon.northern_monkey said:Classy!
Anyway working girl Angie is wasting her time. Johnson prefers posh *****... like Jacob Rees Mogg.0 -
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy billsDavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth1 -
Agree, and I think Labour have the credibility on the NHS to get away with reversing the "Health Levy".DavidL said:
That was a serious mistake. Yet more taxes on earned income as opposed to unearned income. Not only stupid but also, frankly, immoral when those in work are feeling the squeeze more than anyone.Foxy said:
It isn't the national GDP figures that matter to people, it is the economic pressures on themselves and their communities that impacts on voting.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
Putting up NI on workers to allow the elderly to keep more of their assets is an example of this.
On a broader labour market level it's stupid too - as you note, unemployment is low but I think under-employment is quite high, part of the reason we have such problems with in-work poverty.
Need to sort incentives out.0 -
Oh sure. But it’s politics, and I expect the Tories will be doing everything they can to make Sir Keir (what’s this Mr Starmer stuff?!?) look like a hypocrite. If the Lab PCC was there and that might have had an influence on the police investigation of the incident, they’ll probably try to paint it as corruption too.Carnyx said:
Funny thing about this is that the arguments put forward by PBTories to try and defend Mr Johnson - that it was simply a beer drunk at an otherwise completely work meeting - work much better for Mr Starmer than Mr J.BlancheLivermore said:
That would explain why Sir Keir Karma Starmer so calmly dismissed it. Not rattled at all.Foxy said:
No, because it legitimately was a work event 🙄BlancheLivermore said:Starmer boozing was legal.
Because the police said it was legal.
Because the local PCC was boozing with him?
https://twitter.com/gtmac786/status/15179845146430423060 -
That was very successful, it scared Brown into not calling an election he might just have won, 1992 style. It also left no doubt about who owned the end of the end of boom and bust. Oppositions do have the ability to change the weather and succesful oppositions use that power effectively. I am not saying waiting for the government to self destruct won't work, it looks on target at the moment, but opportunities are being squandered to exaccerbate the Tories problems.Mexicanpete said:
Not this far out.DavidL said:
Absolutely true. They are struggling, they have no clear and obvious policies to deal with issues that are out of their control and their attempt to do so in the Spring statement was a fiasco focusing on the wrong targets and depleting the limited amunition available to little or no benefit. But an alternative would be nice. Blair and Brown seemed to manage one.Jonathan said:You know a government is struggling when their attack on the opposition is that they haven’t fleshed out their policies 2 1/12 years from an election.
Why wouldn't Opposition parties want to keep their powder dry until closer to the election. Take Osborne's foolish (but popular with HYUFD and other million pound heirs to fortunes) inheritance tax proposals taken up in part by Brown/ Darling.2 -
For once the Mail seems to have united the whole of politics and the country in contempt for them. I think there's even been a couple of Tory MPs calling them absolute arseholes.Foxy said:
Ms Rayner today shows why she really gets under the skin of the Tory front bench:northern_monkey said:Classy!
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1518126842934448129?t=R5mVCX6m7ndibBIUPa96xw&s=19
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/95 -
Chill. Even voting for an MP isn't voting for a pm, never mind voting for a young fresh councillor who for all we know thinks Johnson is a POS.RochdalePioneers said:
Surely there must have been other candidates. It doesn't matter if he is "young and fresh" he stands for lies and criminality and impropriety. And you voted for those things. I know you don't support that so why do it?darkage said:I just voted Conservative in the Council elections. Its a marginal seat, the candidate is young and fresh, and the longstanding labour incumbent has nothing to say on his leaflets other than he is a socialist.
Even though Starmer is impressive and would be a far better PM than Johnson, the Corbyn legacy runs very deep in the labour party, and puts people off, and this may still be a factor in the next general election.
I think the tories will try and blame the cost of living crisis on Putin, and it may just work. The support for the war in Ukraine seems to be quite popular, I walked across a council estate on Friday, lots of Ukrainian flags everywhere.0 -
Sorry: SKS. Slip not intentional.BlancheLivermore said:
Oh sure. But it’s politics, and I expect the Tories will be doing everything they can to make Sir Keir (what’s this Mr Starmer stuff?!?) look like a hypocrite. If the Lab PCC was there and that might have had an influence on the police investigation of the incident, they’ll probably try to paint it as corruption too.Carnyx said:
Funny thing about this is that the arguments put forward by PBTories to try and defend Mr Johnson - that it was simply a beer drunk at an otherwise completely work meeting - work much better for Mr Starmer than Mr J.BlancheLivermore said:
That would explain why Sir Keir Karma Starmer so calmly dismissed it. Not rattled at all.Foxy said:
No, because it legitimately was a work event 🙄BlancheLivermore said:Starmer boozing was legal.
Because the police said it was legal.
Because the local PCC was boozing with him?
https://twitter.com/gtmac786/status/15179845146430423060 -
A sensible story for sensible times. The MoS rightly calls out the scandal that Angela Rayner has a Vagina. You know, that unmentionable thing with all kinds of noxious oozings. Distracts the chaps, unseemly. Shouldn't be allowed in politics.northern_monkey said:Classy!
So a very serious story. There are too many women with vaginas distracting the chaps and they really should Know Their Limits and not be there at all. We could start by ignoring all these vagina fiends involved in politics especially Cressida Dick and Sue Grey. So, no FPNs and critical reports for the PM. Back to business, vote Conservative, huzzah.
Its the people who *buy* the Hate Mail we should be worried about.9 -
Although... A really dire result for the Tories on 5th May is more likely to see Johnson ousted; every Tory vote helps keep the POS in No 10.IshmaelZ said:
Chill. Even voting for an MP isn't voting for a pm, never mind voting for a young fresh councillor who for all we know thinks Johnson is a POS.RochdalePioneers said:
Surely there must have been other candidates. It doesn't matter if he is "young and fresh" he stands for lies and criminality and impropriety. And you voted for those things. I know you don't support that so why do it?darkage said:I just voted Conservative in the Council elections. Its a marginal seat, the candidate is young and fresh, and the longstanding labour incumbent has nothing to say on his leaflets other than he is a socialist.
Even though Starmer is impressive and would be a far better PM than Johnson, the Corbyn legacy runs very deep in the labour party, and puts people off, and this may still be a factor in the next general election.
I think the tories will try and blame the cost of living crisis on Putin, and it may just work. The support for the war in Ukraine seems to be quite popular, I walked across a council estate on Friday, lots of Ukrainian flags everywhere.2 -
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
1 -
It's a tricky one.Mexicanpete said:
Not this far out.DavidL said:
Absolutely true. They are struggling, they have no clear and obvious policies to deal with issues that are out of their control and their attempt to do so in the Spring statement was a fiasco focusing on the wrong targets and depleting the limited amunition available to little or no benefit. But an alternative would be nice. Blair and Brown seemed to manage one.Jonathan said:You know a government is struggling when their attack on the opposition is that they haven’t fleshed out their policies 2 1/12 years from an election.
Why wouldn't Opposition parties want to keep their powder dry until closer to the election. Take Osborne's foolish (but popular with HYUFD and other million pound heirs to fortunes) inheritance tax proposals taken up in part by Brown/ Darling.
On one hand it makes sense that policies only really begin to crystallise (or be made clear) in the run-up to an election. On the other hand getting a general sense of a party's policies and aims well in advance seems to be important, and that requires something more than just a few years of them going "god, these guys in government are absolute spanners, aren't they?"0 -
The SNP’s position on nukes is utterly deluded.0
-
Just going for our 4th vaccine and very pleased to receive it
8 -
Isn't it a majority female readership?RochdalePioneers said:
A sensible story for sensible times. The MoS rightly calls out the scandal that Angela Rayner has a Vagina. You know, that unmentionable thing with all kinds of noxious oozings. Distracts the chaps, unseemly. Shouldn't be allowed in politics.northern_monkey said:Classy!
So a very serious story. There are too many women with vaginas distracting the chaps and they really should Know Their Limits and not be there at all. We could start by ignoring all these vagina fiends involved in politics especially Cressida Dick and Sue Grey. So, no FPNs and critical reports for the PM. Back to business, vote Conservative, huzzah.
Its the people who *buy* the Hate Mail we should be worried about.
It's such a bonkers thing to publish I wonder if it stems from the idea that women are more likely to comment on clothing etc0 -
I am chilled! Why do people run under a party banner? Its because they identify with its values, its policies and its leadership. Which means he identifies with lies, criminality and impropriety.IshmaelZ said:
Chill. Even voting for an MP isn't voting for a pm, never mind voting for a young fresh councillor who for all we know thinks Johnson is a POS.RochdalePioneers said:
Surely there must have been other candidates. It doesn't matter if he is "young and fresh" he stands for lies and criminality and impropriety. And you voted for those things. I know you don't support that so why do it?darkage said:I just voted Conservative in the Council elections. Its a marginal seat, the candidate is young and fresh, and the longstanding labour incumbent has nothing to say on his leaflets other than he is a socialist.
Even though Starmer is impressive and would be a far better PM than Johnson, the Corbyn legacy runs very deep in the labour party, and puts people off, and this may still be a factor in the next general election.
I think the tories will try and blame the cost of living crisis on Putin, and it may just work. The support for the war in Ukraine seems to be quite popular, I walked across a council estate on Friday, lots of Ukrainian flags everywhere.
Sorry but thats the harsh light of day that is spooking increasing numbers of Tory MPs. They can't work out how they are supposed to justify themselves in front of the electorate hence the rapid collapse of the entire "just bluster through" strategy on Thursday.
If you stand for the Tories, you stand for lies.1 -
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?Foxy said:
Ms Rayner today shows why she really gets under the skin of the Tory front bench:northern_monkey said:Classy!
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1518126842934448129?t=R5mVCX6m7ndibBIUPa96xw&s=19
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/92 -
Fixed that for youtlg86 said:The SNP’s position
on nukesis utterly deluded.1 -
And a lot of the recent GDP growth was reflating the nation after Covid. Good it happened and all that, but it doesn't generate feel good.Foxy said:
It isn't the national GDP figures that matter to people, it is the economic pressures on themselves and their communities that impacts on voting.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
Putting up NI on workers to allow the elderly to keep more of their assets is an example of this.
The reality might be that there aren't new ideas to solve this problem. We've had the party, the hangover is coming whether we like it or not. All we can choose is who leads us through the wilderness with decency and a modicum of fairness.
Which ain't Boris, but it also isn't an easy sell on the doorstep.0 -
"Last year we had the most impressive dead cat bounce of all the economies in the G7, as we partially recovered from the biggest decline in GDP in 2020, in part reflecting how early vintages of GDP are measured from an output point of view in this country" would be a more accurate way of putting it. Looking at recent economic performance in the round we are clearly near the bottom of the pack, but doing better than tourist dependent economies like Spain for obvious reasons.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
As for Labour's cupboard being bare, we are only halfway through the parliament. Your point would have more relevance if it still holds after they publish their manifesto at the next general election, but right now it makes perfect sense to keep schtum. The Tories will nick anything that proves popular, for one thing. Plus, never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.2 -
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.RochdalePioneers said:
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
1 -
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.Roger said:
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?Foxy said:
Ms Rayner today shows why she really gets under the skin of the Tory front bench:northern_monkey said:Classy!
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1518126842934448129?t=R5mVCX6m7ndibBIUPa96xw&s=19
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.1 -
Your last sentence suggests an almost permanent vow of silence!OnlyLivingBoy said:
"Last year we had the most impressive dead cat bounce of all the economies in the G7, as we partially recovered from the biggest decline in GDP in 2020, in part reflecting how early vintages of GDP are measured from an output point of view in this country" would be a more accurate way of putting it. Looking at recent economic performance in the round we are clearly near the bottom of the pack, but doing better than tourist dependent economies like Spain for obvious reasons.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
As for Labour's cupboard being bare, we are only halfway through the parliament. Your point would have more relevance if it still holds after they publish their manifesto at the next general election, but right now it makes perfect sense to keep schtum. The Tories will nick anything that proves popular, for one thing. Plus, never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.3 -
Ha ha that's true!DavidL said:
Your last sentence suggests an almost permanent vow of silence!OnlyLivingBoy said:
"Last year we had the most impressive dead cat bounce of all the economies in the G7, as we partially recovered from the biggest decline in GDP in 2020, in part reflecting how early vintages of GDP are measured from an output point of view in this country" would be a more accurate way of putting it. Looking at recent economic performance in the round we are clearly near the bottom of the pack, but doing better than tourist dependent economies like Spain for obvious reasons.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
As for Labour's cupboard being bare, we are only halfway through the parliament. Your point would have more relevance if it still holds after they publish their manifesto at the next general election, but right now it makes perfect sense to keep schtum. The Tories will nick anything that proves popular, for one thing. Plus, never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.0 -
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy billsDavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth2 -
Whilst I take your point about anyone's economic predictions, when the Treasury Bench keep lying on a scale that has the ONS writing to ask them to stop misleading people, we know that we can ignore what they are saying. And as others have responded a bigger bounce back from a bigger fall is hardly us outperforming the countries whose economic output is higher than our own.DavidL said:
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.RochdalePioneers said:
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
People think the economy has made them poorer because it has and will keep making them poorer because all the markers are sliding into the red. Saying "you've never had it so good" doesn't work when people can see and feel how bad it is.1 -
That's the government's problem. People's experience of the economy is set to get worse from here, and the government are going to have to work very hard to generate feel good by 2024.DavidL said:
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.RochdalePioneers said:
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
It's why appeals to 2010-5, or 1983-7, aren't watertight. Previous winning PMs have aligned the economic and electoral cycles. BoJo has had the bad luck to have them horribly out of synch.0 -
Powerful articulate and attractive is how they have painted her. I've just looked at her tweet underneath the photo of her and she clearly knows what she's doing .....10/10!RochdalePioneers said:
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.Roger said:
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?Foxy said:
Ms Rayner today shows why she really gets under the skin of the Tory front bench:northern_monkey said:Classy!
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1518126842934448129?t=R5mVCX6m7ndibBIUPa96xw&s=19
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
https://twitter.com/ThatTimWalker/status/1517890615438192641/photo/11 -
Seems Tullip was misleading everyone listeningSandpit said:
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy billsDavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth1 -
Of course, 20m x 600 is £12bn, not £18bn…Big_G_NorthWales said:
Seems Tullip was misleading everyone listeningSandpit said:
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy billsDavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth
1 -
I still don't like her, but her personal back story is definitely one for desperate economic times. The single mums of Bolsover and Sedgefield might feel Rayner has more to tell them as they hunt around for fifty pence for the meter than Rishi Sunak.RochdalePioneers said:
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.Roger said:
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?Foxy said:
Ms Rayner today shows why she really gets under the skin of the Tory front bench:northern_monkey said:Classy!
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1518126842934448129?t=R5mVCX6m7ndibBIUPa96xw&s=19
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.2 -
Yes. I've remarked as have others what a lucky boy the PM is.Stuartinromford said:
That's the government's problem. People's experience of the economy is set to get worse from here, and the government are going to have to work very hard to generate feel good by 2024.DavidL said:
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.RochdalePioneers said:
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
It's why appeals to 2010-5, or 1983-7, aren't watertight. Previous winning PMs have aligned the economic and electoral cycles. BoJo has had the bad luck to have them horribly out of synch.
Tactically, yes. Summat big always seems to come up to distract from a blunder.
But strategically he has to be the unluckiest ever.
Shame.1 -
1. Saw The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent yesterday. Was excellent thoroughly recommend (no one else at all in the cinema at the 6pm viewing).
2. Whyte didn't turn up to the fight last night. Perhaps he really was overawed by the occasion/opponent I'm not sure he landed a single shot before getting sparked out. People expected a tear up and tear up came there none.
3. Spoke to someone v close to govt last week and they were super worried about govt finances. Forget about lower spending they were seeing a likelihood of cuts. The debt servicing bill is eye watering and unsustainable. That puts the Cons in a difficult place in the run up to any election.0 -
Isn't the Mail's female readership 'of an age' and perhaps background, which tut about a 'hussy'?Eabhal said:
Isn't it a majority female readership?RochdalePioneers said:
A sensible story for sensible times. The MoS rightly calls out the scandal that Angela Rayner has a Vagina. You know, that unmentionable thing with all kinds of noxious oozings. Distracts the chaps, unseemly. Shouldn't be allowed in politics.northern_monkey said:Classy!
So a very serious story. There are too many women with vaginas distracting the chaps and they really should Know Their Limits and not be there at all. We could start by ignoring all these vagina fiends involved in politics especially Cressida Dick and Sue Grey. So, no FPNs and critical reports for the PM. Back to business, vote Conservative, huzzah.
Its the people who *buy* the Hate Mail we should be worried about.
It's such a bonkers thing to publish I wonder if it stems from the idea that women are more likely to comment on clothing etc0 -
"genuinely apologised."RochdalePioneers said:
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.Roger said:
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?Foxy said:
Ms Rayner today shows why she really gets under the skin of the Tory front bench:northern_monkey said:Classy!
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1518126842934448129?t=R5mVCX6m7ndibBIUPa96xw&s=19
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
She eventually apologised, after being forced. I don't see her apology as being particularly genuine.
26th September: "Labour conference: Angela Rayner stands by calling Boris Johnson 'scum'"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/26/angela-rayner-stands-by-remarks-calling-tories-scum
29th October: "Angela Rayner 'unreservedly' apologises for Conservative 'scum' comments"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59081482
Her first attempts were to excuse her comments as they were down to her 'northern roots; it it was only after a month that she 'apologised'.2 -
Heart of stone not to laugh.dixiedean said:
Yes. I've remarked as have others what a lucky boy the PM is.Stuartinromford said:
That's the government's problem. People's experience of the economy is set to get worse from here, and the government are going to have to work very hard to generate feel good by 2024.DavidL said:
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.RochdalePioneers said:
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
It's why appeals to 2010-5, or 1983-7, aren't watertight. Previous winning PMs have aligned the economic and electoral cycles. BoJo has had the bad luck to have them horribly out of synch.
Tactically, yes. Summat big always seems to come up to distract from a blunder.
But strategically he has to be the unluckiest ever.
Shame.
Except it's happening to the country I live in.2 -
OT, but I see the MP for Wakefield hasn't yet applied for the Chiltern Hundreds, despite his Party wanting to get it over with.
It simply drags the issue out locally.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/24/mp-convicted-of-sexually-molesting-boy-15-fails-to-keep-his-promise-to-resign0 -
There’s dodgy Labour maths…. and then there’s dodgy Tory maths.Sandpit said:
Of course, 20m x 600 is £12bn, not £18bn…Big_G_NorthWales said:
Seems Tullip was misleading everyone listeningSandpit said:
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy billsDavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth
2 -
So what are we measuring here? Pessimism or current performace? If the government are lucky peoples' expectations are so low that it might be possible to exceed them. If they are not and this is the assessment of current performance things are going to get a whole lot worse!RochdalePioneers said:
Whilst I take your point about anyone's economic predictions, when the Treasury Bench keep lying on a scale that has the ONS writing to ask them to stop misleading people, we know that we can ignore what they are saying. And as others have responded a bigger bounce back from a bigger fall is hardly us outperforming the countries whose economic output is higher than our own.DavidL said:
No, the year when they are forecasting we will have the slowest economy is 2023. This year we are joint top. Of course IMF predictions are there to make Mystic Meg look reliable for both the good and the bad.RochdalePioneers said:
With apologies for the snip, but this simply isn't true. The IMF forecast the UK to have the *slowest* growing economy in the G7. Perhaps people think they are worse off and are getting even worse off because the IMF are right and the liars on the Treasury bench who keep being instructed by the ONS to stop lying about our "fastest-growing economy" are wrong.DavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best.
People think the economy has made them poorer because it has and will keep making them poorer because all the markers are sliding into the red. Saying "you've never had it so good" doesn't work when people can see and feel how bad it is.0 -
Yes they were wrong. They were probably listening to people like you who were so cocksure that Russia would not invade the rest of Ukraine.Heathener said:And another prick in the balloon of Boris' bluster over Ukraine
"Ukraine spent seven years begging three PMs for weapons — and no one listened
Cameron, May and Johnson all thought they could contain Putin. How wrong they were"
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ukraine-spent-seven-years-begging-three-pms-for-weapons-and-no-one-listened-58t5m9kkq2 -
Interest rates and gilt rates are on the up, no question. But a fair bit of the interest bill at the moment is a paper transfer with the BoE and doesn't cost the government anything. Of course, this is one of the reasons that inflation is out of control... There is no such thing as a free lunch.TOPPING said:1. Saw The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent yesterday. Was excellent thoroughly recommend (no one else at all in the cinema at the 6pm viewing).
2. Whyte didn't turn up to the fight last night. Perhaps he really was overawed by the occasion/opponent I'm not sure he landed a single shot before getting sparked out. People expected a tear up and tear up came there none.
3. Spoke to someone v close to govt last week and they were super worried about govt finances. Forget about lower spending they were seeing a likelihood of cuts. The debt servicing bill is eye watering and unsustainable. That puts the Cons in a difficult place in the run up to any election.1 -
Nothing will ever beat Diane Abbott, and the £300,000 for 10,000 new police officers.Nigelb said:
There’s dodgy Labour maths…. and then there’s dodgy Tory maths.Sandpit said:
Of course, 20m x 600 is £12bn, not £18bn…Big_G_NorthWales said:
Seems Tullip was misleading everyone listeningSandpit said:
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy billsDavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth4 -
LibDem bar charts?Sandpit said:
Nothing will ever beat Diane Abbott, and the £300,000 for 10,000 new police officers.Nigelb said:
There’s dodgy Labour maths…. and then there’s dodgy Tory maths.Sandpit said:
Of course, 20m x 600 is £12bn, not £18bn…Big_G_NorthWales said:
Seems Tullip was misleading everyone listeningSandpit said:
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy billsDavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth2 -
British troops have been in Ukraine training and supplying them with equipment since 2015. We can claim considerable vicarious credit for how much better their armed forces have performed than they did in 2014 and the Ukrainians have acknowledged this repeatedly.glw said:
Yes they were wrong. They were probably listening to people like you who were so cocksure that Russia would not invade the rest of Ukraine.Heathener said:And another prick in the balloon of Boris' bluster over Ukraine
"Ukraine spent seven years begging three PMs for weapons — and no one listened
Cameron, May and Johnson all thought they could contain Putin. How wrong they were"
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ukraine-spent-seven-years-begging-three-pms-for-weapons-and-no-one-listened-58t5m9kkq
We could, of course, have done even more but would Russia then have invaded even earlier?1 -
Unless he's been told "don't, we'll sort the timing" and it gets subsumed by a GEdixiedean said:OT, but I see the MP for Wakefield hasn't yet applied for the Chiltern Hundreds, despite his Party wanting to get it over with.
It simply drags the issue out locally.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/24/mp-convicted-of-sexually-molesting-boy-15-fails-to-keep-his-promise-to-resign
0 -
Who knows? But it's a good rule of thumb to ignore anyone who says "Putin wouldn't".DavidL said:
British troops have been in Ukraine training and supplying them with equipment since 2015. We can claim considerable vicarious credit for how much better their armed forces have performed than they did in 2014 and the Ukrainians have acknowledged this repeatedly.glw said:
Yes they were wrong. They were probably listening to people like you who were so cocksure that Russia would not invade the rest of Ukraine.Heathener said:And another prick in the balloon of Boris' bluster over Ukraine
"Ukraine spent seven years begging three PMs for weapons — and no one listened
Cameron, May and Johnson all thought they could contain Putin. How wrong they were"
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ukraine-spent-seven-years-begging-three-pms-for-weapons-and-no-one-listened-58t5m9kkq
We could, of course, have done even more but would Russia then have invaded even earlier?1 -
Anyone who believes a short period of high inflation is bad for the exchequer has drunk the cool aid, or not read the OBR or ONS.TOPPING said:3. Spoke to someone v close to govt last week and they were super worried about govt finances. Forget about lower spending they were seeing a likelihood of cuts. The debt servicing bill is eye watering and unsustainable. That puts the Cons in a difficult place in the run up to any election.
The government's debt stock retreats at a much quicker level than debt interest goes up, Since the nominal level of debt (£2,326.8 billion) is deflated by nominal GDP. If inflation is 8%, the debt pile reduced, in real terms, by £186bn, compared to £100bn in debt interest (at Feb 2022 levels).
In addition to the BoE effect, that's because of the £2,032.9 billion gilts in circulation at the end of February 2022:
£1,530.8 billion are conventional gilts that pay a fixed interest rate (i.e. about 75%)
£502.1 billion are index-linked gilts that pay an interest rate pegged to the Retail Prices Index (RPI) (25%)1 -
Priti Patel came pretty close at a Covid press conference when she proclaimed that there had been "three hundred thousand, and thirty four, nine hundred and seventy four thousand" Covid tests carried out.Sandpit said:
Nothing will ever beat Diane Abbott, and the £300,000 for 10,000 new police officers.Nigelb said:
There’s dodgy Labour maths…. and then there’s dodgy Tory maths.Sandpit said:
Of course, 20m x 600 is £12bn, not £18bn…Big_G_NorthWales said:
Seems Tullip was misleading everyone listeningSandpit said:
Roughly 20m households, so £18bn just for domestic users at £600 each.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Tulip Siddiq has just said on Sophie Ridge that the windfall tax would give everyone £600 off their energy billsDavidL said:Last year we had the fastest growing economy in the G7, this year we are expected to match the best. Unemployment is no more than frictional in most of the country, the government's deficit is coming in lower than expected (if still very high, reflecting high public spending), I must confess that I am at loss as to how so many think it would be better under Labour.
Of course, there is the cost of living crisis brought about by inflation like we haven't seen in 20 years, led by politically sensitive rises in fuel and gas with food in danger of falling on behind. What people think Labour can do about these things I am really not sure. Most come from international pressures, not least because of sanctions on Russia and the disruption of food harvests in Ukraine itself.
Labour's policies seem to me to be a windfall tax on north sea producers at a time that we want them to significantly increase investment and, ehm, I am not really sure. They seem to want to increase public spending in a variety of ways, notably health, further increasing demand in an economy running pretty near capacity giving an extra spin to inflation.
What I think we are actually seeing is that people are pretty unhappy. Wages are rising strongly but are being significantly outpaced by prices and most are seeing a difficult squeeze in their budgets. Those on fixed incomes or benefits are doing even worse. So they blame the government and hope something different would be better. When you add general dissatisfaction that the PM is a lying b****** it is hardly surprising that they do not give the government the benefit of the doubt. But Labour's cupboard looks pretty bare to me.
I have no idea how much the windfall tax is supposed to raise but I am sure someone on here can calculate the cost of giving everyone £600 off their energy bill and compare it to the windfall gain
I would just add this may well be an example of misleading the public when I understood it would provide £200 off energy bills with upto £600 for the poorest in the community
If as I suspect I am correct on this it just adds to the general opinion they are all the same when it comes to the truth0 -
I watched three hours of live HoC on Tuesday and Dehenna Davison was the only one to impress me with how clearly and strongly she spoke. She is an excellent politician with big future. Labour will struggle to wrestle the constituency from her is my betting tip.Dura_Ace said:
I see she no longer identifies as ginger. I'd be surprised but not shocked if the Labour party would have her as has been fash-curious in the past.Taz said:Dehenna Davison replies on labour defection rumours
https://twitter.com/dehennadavison/status/1517939116675145729?s=21&t=uYt7XsAj8w0XxWuljVmNog0 -
To be fair, the whole Russia/Belarus/Ukraine......and indeed Chechnya & Caucasus 'thing' has been going on since the Soviet Union collapsed twenty-five or so years ago.DavidL said:
British troops have been in Ukraine training and supplying them with equipment since 2015. We can claim considerable vicarious credit for how much better their armed forces have performed than they did in 2014 and the Ukrainians have acknowledged this repeatedly.glw said:
Yes they were wrong. They were probably listening to people like you who were so cocksure that Russia would not invade the rest of Ukraine.Heathener said:And another prick in the balloon of Boris' bluster over Ukraine
"Ukraine spent seven years begging three PMs for weapons — and no one listened
Cameron, May and Johnson all thought they could contain Putin. How wrong they were"
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ukraine-spent-seven-years-begging-three-pms-for-weapons-and-no-one-listened-58t5m9kkq
We could, of course, have done even more but would Russia then have invaded even earlier?
It's got worse as Putin has consolidated his hold on power, of course.
And one cannot say that all the Ukrainian leaders, either before or since independence, have been uncanonised as yet saints!
This shouldn't be read as any sort of justification for Russia's current policy, of course. Just suggesting that Western leaders could be forgiven for being unsure as to who were the good guys.1 -
In normal times, un-printing a lot of money might help to get inflation back under control. The problem here though, is that the inflation is global and driven by war and pandemic. There’s very little domestically that can be done about it in the short term.DavidL said:
Interest rates and gilt rates are on the up, no question. But a fair bit of the interest bill at the moment is a paper transfer with the BoE and doesn't cost the government anything. Of course, this is one of the reasons that inflation is out of control... There is no such thing as a free lunch.TOPPING said:1. Saw The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent yesterday. Was excellent thoroughly recommend (no one else at all in the cinema at the 6pm viewing).
2. Whyte didn't turn up to the fight last night. Perhaps he really was overawed by the occasion/opponent I'm not sure he landed a single shot before getting sparked out. People expected a tear up and tear up came there none.
3. Spoke to someone v close to govt last week and they were super worried about govt finances. Forget about lower spending they were seeing a likelihood of cuts. The debt servicing bill is eye watering and unsustainable. That puts the Cons in a difficult place in the run up to any election.
Ironically, this might actually work out positively for the government, with the inflation receding before the election as fuel prices fall and supply chains sort themselves out, the massive debt pile deflated by 15% or so, and a fair bit of fiscal drag helping government revenues.1 -
Labour seem to lack definition at the moment. Blair and Brown were perfect in that despite their different backgrounds they were reasonably classless. The image of the Tories are now a party of Colonel Blimps and under Corbyn Labour were a party of Len McCluskies.Mexicanpete said:
I still don't like her, but her personal back story is definitely one for desperate economic times. The single mums of Bolsover and Sedgefield might feel Rayner has more to tell them as they hunt around for fifty pence for the meter than Rishi Sunak.RochdalePioneers said:
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.Roger said:
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?Foxy said:
Ms Rayner today shows why she really gets under the skin of the Tory front bench:northern_monkey said:Classy!
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1518126842934448129?t=R5mVCX6m7ndibBIUPa96xw&s=19
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
Starmer hasn't got the 'everyman' quality of Brown and Blair but with a revamped Rayner she and Starmer could be onto something.1 -
Same here. Especially looking at the demographic changes going on and the house building going on as well. These owner occupiers will not be natural labour voters. The seat has drifted away from labour for many years. Rightly so. Durham labour took the whole area for granted.MoonRabbit said:
I watched three hours of live HoC on Tuesday and Dehenna Davison was the only one to impress me with how clearly and strongly she spoke. She is an excellent politician with big future. Labour will struggle to wrestle the constituency from her is my betting tip.Dura_Ace said:
I see she no longer identifies as ginger. I'd be surprised but not shocked if the Labour party would have her as has been fash-curious in the past.Taz said:Dehenna Davison replies on labour defection rumours
https://twitter.com/dehennadavison/status/1517939116675145729?s=21&t=uYt7XsAj8w0XxWuljVmNog1 -
Day trip to The Big Smoke - West End absolutely rammed - easily back to pre-pandemic levels. Enjoyed “Diary of a Somebody” about the Orton Halliwell relationship - great leads and a superb supporting cast in multiple roles. In its final week.1
-
I know this sounds bad, and believe me I really aren’t a sexist pig, but I do wonder if the menopause can sometimes do something to women’s attitudes and views that make them more reactionary and prone to that kind of tutting, suspicion of the modern world, everything was better in my day approach that the Mail mines so successfully.OldKingCole said:
Isn't the Mail's female readership 'of an age' and perhaps background, which tut about a 'hussy'?Eabhal said:
Isn't it a majority female readership?RochdalePioneers said:
A sensible story for sensible times. The MoS rightly calls out the scandal that Angela Rayner has a Vagina. You know, that unmentionable thing with all kinds of noxious oozings. Distracts the chaps, unseemly. Shouldn't be allowed in politics.northern_monkey said:Classy!
So a very serious story. There are too many women with vaginas distracting the chaps and they really should Know Their Limits and not be there at all. We could start by ignoring all these vagina fiends involved in politics especially Cressida Dick and Sue Grey. So, no FPNs and critical reports for the PM. Back to business, vote Conservative, huzzah.
Its the people who *buy* the Hate Mail we should be worried about.
It's such a bonkers thing to publish I wonder if it stems from the idea that women are more likely to comment on clothing etc
Seen it in my mum, and other women of that age. It might be just an aging thing generally cos of course there is that tendency to drift rightward as you age regardless of gender, but I sometimes ponder if the menopause, the hormonal changes, exacerbate the effect, particularly if the woman is finding it difficult to live with her symptoms. God knows I don’t envy women for having to go through it.
I was discussing it with a very old friend of mine the other day, who recently started HRT, and she said her mum had definitely shifted rightwards, strikingly so, since the menopause.
Or maybe I’m talking bollocks.0 -
Notable that @Keir_Starmer stressing to @sophieraworth his 'priority' is 'cracking down on those criminal gangs' who put people in cross Channel small boats.
Pressed on 'safe routes' processing centres: "The best place would be country nearest where they are fleeing from"
Which, yes, sounds very much like the Govt's position.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1518155830251638784?s=20&t=Q5XQ-mfiQf2x0v0ctnvXUw
1 -
Performance. Our record economic growth sees the economy smaller than it was before, and that's clearly the top of a roll-back slope with inflation and fuel and crap pay rises all smashing the momentum into reverse.DavidL said:
Interest rates and gilt rates are on the up, no question. But a fair bit of the interest bill at the moment is a paper transfer with the BoE and doesn't cost the government anything. Of course, this is one of the reasons that inflation is out of control... There is no such thing as a free lunch.TOPPING said:1. Saw The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent yesterday. Was excellent thoroughly recommend (no one else at all in the cinema at the 6pm viewing).
2. Whyte didn't turn up to the fight last night. Perhaps he really was overawed by the occasion/opponent I'm not sure he landed a single shot before getting sparked out. People expected a tear up and tear up came there none.
3. Spoke to someone v close to govt last week and they were super worried about govt finances. Forget about lower spending they were seeing a likelihood of cuts. The debt servicing bill is eye watering and unsustainable. That puts the Cons in a difficult place in the run up to any election.
You earn £lotsandlots. I earn less but still £lots. There are so many poor sods out there who work far harder jobs than we do for £less and they are directly feeling it even if you are not.
People can't feed their kids with rhetoric.3 -
I could see a lot of people hoping that Macron wins, but only narrowly, and that other people will do the dirty work of voting for him so that they don't have to sully their hands.Mexicanpete said:
My fear is Melanchon's Corbynista morons will stay at home or vote Le Pen because they hate Centrists more than they do Fascists.TimS said:My optimistic prediction for today is that Le Pen will slightly underperform and it’ll be 57:43. I hope I’m right.
Hopefully I'm wrong and French voters will find it easy to vote against Le Pen in huge numbers.0 -
It does? Hadn't realised the Iranians and Iraqis and Afghanis and Somalis were all fleeing from Rwanda.CarlottaVance said:Notable that @Keir_Starmer stressing to @sophieraworth his 'priority' is 'cracking down on those criminal gangs' who put people in cross Channel small boats.
Pressed on 'safe routes' processing centres: "The best place would be country nearest where they are fleeing from"
Which, yes, sounds very much like the Govt's position.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1518155830251638784?s=20&t=Q5XQ-mfiQf2x0v0ctnvXUw1 -
I’ve seen some gaslighting in my time, but the new book from transgender professor Grace Lavery takes the biscuit. It is almost entirely about Lavery’s penis – as confirmed by its title, Please Miss: A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Penis – and yet if any of you dare to refer to Lavery as a man you will be branded a bigot. It has page after depressing page about Mr Lavery’s cock – how shrivelled it has become since he started popping female hormone pills, how it ‘does very little but flop around’, how it occasionally ‘takes a stab at stiffening’ – and yet anyone who says ‘He must be a bloke, then’ will be denounced as a foul transphobe deserving of cancellation. It goes on and on about boners and ballsacks and the ‘Lacanian phallus’ – imagine Jay from The Inbetweeners getting a PhD in Queer Studies – and yet woe betide those who refuse to bow down to the idea that this dick obsessed with his dick is in fact a woman. Literally, legally, actually a woman.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/04/23/how-the-trans-ideology-dehumanises-women/#.YmSnyIOGefA.twitter0 -
Processing applications for UK asylum in say Turkey is very much like deporting people from UK to Rwanda? I can literally not see one single point of resemblance.CarlottaVance said:Notable that @Keir_Starmer stressing to @sophieraworth his 'priority' is 'cracking down on those criminal gangs' who put people in cross Channel small boats.
Pressed on 'safe routes' processing centres: "The best place would be country nearest where they are fleeing from"
Which, yes, sounds very much like the Govt's position.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1518155830251638784?s=20&t=Q5XQ-mfiQf2x0v0ctnvXUw0 -
I don't think my mother shifted rightwards in her 50's. She could be quite right-wing before, but, as someone who carved out a career for herself in the late 1920's/early 30's she had quite a few feminist attitudes!northern_monkey said:
I know this sounds bad, and believe me I really aren’t a sexist pig, but I do wonder if the menopause can sometimes do something to women’s attitudes and views that make them more reactionary and prone to that kind of tutting, suspicion of the modern world, everything was better in my day approach that the Mail mines so successfully.OldKingCole said:
Isn't the Mail's female readership 'of an age' and perhaps background, which tut about a 'hussy'?Eabhal said:
Isn't it a majority female readership?RochdalePioneers said:
A sensible story for sensible times. The MoS rightly calls out the scandal that Angela Rayner has a Vagina. You know, that unmentionable thing with all kinds of noxious oozings. Distracts the chaps, unseemly. Shouldn't be allowed in politics.northern_monkey said:Classy!
So a very serious story. There are too many women with vaginas distracting the chaps and they really should Know Their Limits and not be there at all. We could start by ignoring all these vagina fiends involved in politics especially Cressida Dick and Sue Grey. So, no FPNs and critical reports for the PM. Back to business, vote Conservative, huzzah.
Its the people who *buy* the Hate Mail we should be worried about.
It's such a bonkers thing to publish I wonder if it stems from the idea that women are more likely to comment on clothing etc
Seen it in my mum, and other women of that age. It might be just an aging thing generally cos of course there is that tendency to drift rightward as you age regardless of gender, but I sometimes ponder if the menopause, the hormonal changes, exacerbate the effect, particularly if the woman is finding it difficult to live with her symptoms. God knows I don’t envy women for having to go through it.
I was discussing it with a very old friend of mine the other day, who recently started HRT, and she said her mum had definitely shifted rightwards, strikingly so, since the menopause.
Or maybe I’m talking bollocks.
And my wife has shifted leftwards over the course of our 60 years together, although she blames me!3 -
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…9 -
'Scum' is a horrible word. Not because of any hidden meaning but because the sound is particularly ugly. It used to be a PB favourite. I would be surprised if you haven't used it?JosiasJessop said:
"genuinely apologised."RochdalePioneers said:
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.Roger said:
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?Foxy said:
Ms Rayner today shows why she really gets under the skin of the Tory front bench:northern_monkey said:Classy!
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1518126842934448129?t=R5mVCX6m7ndibBIUPa96xw&s=19
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
She eventually apologised, after being forced. I don't see her apology as being particularly genuine.
26th September: "Labour conference: Angela Rayner stands by calling Boris Johnson 'scum'"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/26/angela-rayner-stands-by-remarks-calling-tories-scum
29th October: "Angela Rayner 'unreservedly' apologises for Conservative 'scum' comments"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59081482
Her first attempts were to excuse her comments as they were down to her 'northern roots; it it was only after a month that she 'apologised'.
But if you aren't worried about the aesthetics just the meaning then you could say she was ahead of the game. The word is defined as 'A contemptible person'. At the time she said it that was a minority view. Now we know what we know there are few who would describe him as anything else0 -
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.2 -
Not for the first time in recent years, one wishes there was a “None of the Above” or “Re-Open Nominations” option in a national election.LostPassword said:
I could see a lot of people hoping that Macron wins, but only narrowly, and that other people will do the dirty work of voting for him so that they don't have to sully their hands.Mexicanpete said:
My fear is Melanchon's Corbynista morons will stay at home or vote Le Pen because they hate Centrists more than they do Fascists.TimS said:My optimistic prediction for today is that Le Pen will slightly underperform and it’ll be 57:43. I hope I’m right.
Hopefully I'm wrong and French voters will find it easy to vote against Le Pen in huge numbers.
0 -
It is also possible that CCHQ does not want a double whammy with defeats at Wakefield and in the local elections in the same week, month or quarter.Pro_Rata said:
Unless he's been told "don't, we'll sort the timing" and it gets subsumed by a GEdixiedean said:OT, but I see the MP for Wakefield hasn't yet applied for the Chiltern Hundreds, despite his Party wanting to get it over with.
It simply drags the issue out locally.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/24/mp-convicted-of-sexually-molesting-boy-15-fails-to-keep-his-promise-to-resign0 -
Isn't there some means of petitioning?DecrepiterJohnL said:
It is also possible that CCHQ does not want a double whammy with defeats at Wakefield and in the local elections in the same week, month or quarter.Pro_Rata said:
Unless he's been told "don't, we'll sort the timing" and it gets subsumed by a GEdixiedean said:OT, but I see the MP for Wakefield hasn't yet applied for the Chiltern Hundreds, despite his Party wanting to get it over with.
It simply drags the issue out locally.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/24/mp-convicted-of-sexually-molesting-boy-15-fails-to-keep-his-promise-to-resign0 -
Well, the log of the order of magnitude is less than two, yes.Farooq said:
Yes, but that's less than two log orders of magnitude. Pretty close, all told.Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
I’d like to know who gets results where it’s more than two (apart from calculations of vacuum energy density, obviously).0 -
One hopes so. Oddly the only active drug I can think of where a 10 oom od might be survivable is lsdOldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.0 -
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?OldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.1 -
Out by a factor of ten is one order of magnitude, 100 is two and so on; the easy way to think of it is how many places out is the decimal point.OldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.0 -
Think you're right. I've had several 'discussions' with prescribers over does where a factor of 10 has been involved.IshmaelZ said:
One hopes so. Oddly the only active drug I can think of where a 10 oom od might be survivable is lsdOldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
When I were a lad, back in the 50's and studying pharmacy, we had to learn all the doses of commonly prescribed drugs and were examined on our memory of them.1 -
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.Sandpit said:
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?OldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.4 -
In many cases the pill would weigh more than the patient: 10 micrograms would become 100 kg.IshmaelZ said:
One hopes so. Oddly the only active drug I can think of where a 10 oom od might be survivable is lsdOldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.1 -
Young pharmacists spend a considerable amount of time on calculations and dose review. Trouble is, of course, most of the time prescribers get it right, so it's easy to just run down a list and sign it off. One has to be aware of the possibility of error all the time.Fysics_Teacher said:
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.Sandpit said:
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?OldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.0 -
Shame you changed the typo: “the possibility of terror” has a good ring to it.OldKingCole said:
Young pharmacists spend a considerable amount of time on calculations and dose review. Trouble is, of course, most of the time prescribers get it right, so it's easy to just run down a list and sign it off. One has to be aware of the possibility of error all the time.Fysics_Teacher said:
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.Sandpit said:
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?OldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.2 -
French turnout at midday .
26.41%
This is a a bit higher than the first round but down 2 points on the 2017 second round .0 -
I have almost certainly used the word in the past. I shouldn't, and it's something I try not to use any more. But I am not a politician.Roger said:
'Scum' is a horrible word. Not because of any hidden meaning but because the sound is particularly ugly. It used to be a PB favourite. I would be surprised if you haven't used it?JosiasJessop said:
"genuinely apologised."RochdalePioneers said:
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.Roger said:
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?Foxy said:
Ms Rayner today shows why she really gets under the skin of the Tory front bench:northern_monkey said:Classy!
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1518126842934448129?t=R5mVCX6m7ndibBIUPa96xw&s=19
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
She eventually apologised, after being forced. I don't see her apology as being particularly genuine.
26th September: "Labour conference: Angela Rayner stands by calling Boris Johnson 'scum'"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/26/angela-rayner-stands-by-remarks-calling-tories-scum
29th October: "Angela Rayner 'unreservedly' apologises for Conservative 'scum' comments"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59081482
Her first attempts were to excuse her comments as they were down to her 'northern roots; it it was only after a month that she 'apologised'.
But if you aren't worried about the aesthetics just the meaning then you could say she was ahead of the game. The word is defined as 'A contemptible person'. At the time she said it that was a minority view. Now we know what we know there are few who would describe him as anything else
But when it comes to 'a contemptible person', I'd include people who say the 'talent' should be able to abuse women. Can you think of a PB regular who said such a thing, before 'Me Too' made the problem in his industry even more obvious?
Contemptible indeed.
0 -
The 'discussion' I had with an anesthetist when by him wakened at 2am one morning about the strength of the pre-prepared syringes in the theatre certainly awakened 'terror' in me!Fysics_Teacher said:
Shame you changed the typo: “the possibility of terror” has a good ring to it.OldKingCole said:
Young pharmacists spend a considerable amount of time on calculations and dose review. Trouble is, of course, most of the time prescribers get it right, so it's easy to just run down a list and sign it off. One has to be aware of the possibility of error all the time.Fysics_Teacher said:
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.Sandpit said:
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?OldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.1 -
I always think when you've decided to go with the genocide deniers as your source of book reviews you might want to take a wee moment of self reflection.Farooq said:
I'll be honest, it still sounds a better read than SpikedCarlottaVance said:I’ve seen some gaslighting in my time, but the new book from transgender professor Grace Lavery takes the biscuit. It is almost entirely about Lavery’s penis – as confirmed by its title, Please Miss: A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Penis – and yet if any of you dare to refer to Lavery as a man you will be branded a bigot. It has page after depressing page about Mr Lavery’s cock – how shrivelled it has become since he started popping female hormone pills, how it ‘does very little but flop around’, how it occasionally ‘takes a stab at stiffening’ – and yet anyone who says ‘He must be a bloke, then’ will be denounced as a foul transphobe deserving of cancellation. It goes on and on about boners and ballsacks and the ‘Lacanian phallus’ – imagine Jay from The Inbetweeners getting a PhD in Queer Studies – and yet woe betide those who refuse to bow down to the idea that this dick obsessed with his dick is in fact a woman. Literally, legally, actually a woman.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/04/23/how-the-trans-ideology-dehumanises-women/#.YmSnyIOGefA.twitter0 -
Given the size of the error I previously admitted to, that was wise.Farooq said:
I'm proud/ashamed to say I checked your calculation.Fysics_Teacher said:
In many cases the pill would weigh more than the patient: 10 micrograms would become 100 kg.IshmaelZ said:
One hopes so. Oddly the only active drug I can think of where a 10 oom od might be survivable is lsdOldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
1 -
Although boundary changes tip it slightly back towards Labour.MoonRabbit said:
I watched three hours of live HoC on Tuesday and Dehenna Davison was the only one to impress me with how clearly and strongly she spoke. She is an excellent politician with big future. Labour will struggle to wrestle the constituency from her is my betting tip.Dura_Ace said:
I see she no longer identifies as ginger. I'd be surprised but not shocked if the Labour party would have her as has been fash-curious in the past.Taz said:Dehenna Davison replies on labour defection rumours
https://twitter.com/dehennadavison/status/1517939116675145729?s=21&t=uYt7XsAj8w0XxWuljVmNog
But it has been swinging Tory at every election this Century.0 -
Having had more than a few GAs I’m glad someone is checking…OldKingCole said:
The 'discussion' I had with an anesthetist when by him wakened at 2am one morning about the strength of the pre-prepared syringes in the theatre certainly awakened 'terror' in me!Fysics_Teacher said:
Shame you changed the typo: “the possibility of terror” has a good ring to it.OldKingCole said:
Young pharmacists spend a considerable amount of time on calculations and dose review. Trouble is, of course, most of the time prescribers get it right, so it's easy to just run down a list and sign it off. One has to be aware of the possibility of error all the time.Fysics_Teacher said:
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.Sandpit said:
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?OldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.1 -
I have seen several errors in computing caused by Mb (Megabit) being confused with MB (MegaByte). It is why Megabit is mostly shortened to Mbit nowadays. I've also seen comments in code where people use Mb instead of MB or vice versa.Fysics_Teacher said:
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.Sandpit said:
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?OldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.
Also ISPs tent to use Mbps to measure their speeds, whereas lots of people seem to refer to it as MBps.
Edit: and kB and kb as well...2 -
As much as I disagree with @AngelaRayner on almost every political issue I respect her as a parliamentarian and deplore the misogyny directed at her anonymously today.
https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1518169693638561792?
2 -
Do you object to bint on sexual or racial grounds? It couldn't in origin be more neutral - it's just girl, daughter of. Even features in the name of the mother of the Prophet, Aminah bint Wahb.Farooq said:
We shouldn't be too precious these things. I would always try to avoid words than insult protected characteristics (e.g. "bint") and try to avoid using derogatory words for large groups of people, especially when it captures a large number of unknowable people.JosiasJessop said:
I have almost certainly used the word in the past. I shouldn't, and it's something I try not to use any more. But I am not a politician.Roger said:
'Scum' is a horrible word. Not because of any hidden meaning but because the sound is particularly ugly. It used to be a PB favourite. I would be surprised if you haven't used it?JosiasJessop said:
"genuinely apologised."RochdalePioneers said:
The "Tory scum" speech was the making of her. Its far too easy to speak to your core, especially when you were a Cobynista. She'd already dropped the Jeremy and become a far more serious player than Wrong-Daily, but still pandered to the "scum" thing.Roger said:
Well done Angela Rayner! Money couldn't buy you a page like that. It does just about everything. From being a not very impressive hang over from the Corbyn era this turns her into a real player. I noticed she's started working on her image a couple of weeks ago. Now when she has something to say people will listen. Whatever the Mail were trying to do I can't imagine. Maybe they're as pissed off with the Tories as the rest of us?Foxy said:
Ms Rayner today shows why she really gets under the skin of the Tory front bench:northern_monkey said:Classy!
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1518126842934448129?t=R5mVCX6m7ndibBIUPa96xw&s=19
I hope this experience doesn’t put off a single person like me, with a background like mine from aspiring to participate in public life.
That would break my heart. 💔
We need more people in politics with backgrounds like mine - and fewer as a hobby to help their mates.
7/9
Reaction was swift and harsh inside the party and out. She genuinely apologised and reformed. Note that Steve Baker says he is now VONC because of the clear insincerity of the PM apologising to the Commons on Tuesday afternoon then ranting away to the '22 on Tuesday evening.
Another reason why they have to take her out. Authentic, northern, fiesty, but clearly articulate and clever. And understands what humility is.
She eventually apologised, after being forced. I don't see her apology as being particularly genuine.
26th September: "Labour conference: Angela Rayner stands by calling Boris Johnson 'scum'"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/26/angela-rayner-stands-by-remarks-calling-tories-scum
29th October: "Angela Rayner 'unreservedly' apologises for Conservative 'scum' comments"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59081482
Her first attempts were to excuse her comments as they were down to her 'northern roots; it it was only after a month that she 'apologised'.
But if you aren't worried about the aesthetics just the meaning then you could say she was ahead of the game. The word is defined as 'A contemptible person'. At the time she said it that was a minority view. Now we know what we know there are few who would describe him as anything else
But when it comes to 'a contemptible person', I'd include people who say the 'talent' should be able to abuse women. Can you think of a PB regular who said such a thing, before 'Me Too' made the problem in his industry even more obvious?
Contemptible indeed.
So for example "Tory voters are scum" is wrong. "Tory ministers are scum" is acceptable. I don't subscribe to either view, by the way, I'm using those because it's closest to what Rayner said.
There's nothing wrong with calling an individual scum. Some people ARE that contemptible. I would use that words to describe Donald Trump without any hesitation. And since typing that last sentence, I've sat and reflected on it, and I'm even more solidly behind the use of that word. It fits perfectly.
I'm guessing from your name you knew that though.
1 -
Whoever did the accuweather forecast for Catalonia seems to have been an order of magnitude out for the cloud cover today. Most of it has burnt off and I’m now basking in the sunshine that I should have been watching the tortoises enjoy. I’ve never been so sad to see the sun. Oh well.. I shall just have to return some day; I want to for the Little Yellow Train too.
There also seemed to have been an order of magnitude error in the design of my shower. I always try to leave bathrooms dry; I leave a towel within reach of the shower so I can dry myself thoroughly in the cubicle - I don’t even get the shower mat wet.
This morning, I was ready to go in for my shower and was just checking the temperature and then adjusted the power to maximum (who doesn’t?). This caused the shower head to fly up in its cradle so it was showering everywhere in the bathroom except in the cubicle. My illogical reaction was, rather than just turning the shower off, to try to grab the shower head - which then came away from the cradle and sprayed at my clean clothes and previously dry towel. I told the lovely receptionist, just so she would know if the cleaners told her that the guest in 206 had managed to get the ceiling wet. Given her laughter, I think it made her morning!
3 -
How, Mr J, are the blue-tits in your nest-box doing? Ours are much later in nest building, although if it's the same pair as last year, perhaps they've learned from bitter experience.JosiasJessop said:
I have seen several errors in computing caused by Mb (Megabit) being confused with MB (MegaByte). It is why Megabit is mostly shortened to Mbit nowadays. I've also seen comments in code where people use Mb instead of MB or vice versa.Fysics_Teacher said:
Confusion between mg and micro grams would worry me.Sandpit said:
10x = one order of magnitude. Wasn’t there a study that suggested that dosage errors were much more common under the metric system, so the authorities had to devise new processes to catch the errors before the drug got to the patient?OldKingCole said:
One of the effects of medicine switching from the apothecaries system of weights and measures to the metric was that errors started to be of at least 10 orders of magnitude!Fysics_Teacher said:
I regard myself as reasonably numerate, but my worst mathematical mistake involved an answer that was 68 orders of magnitude out.Nigelb said:.
It reflects the larger reality that an awful lot of folk are not very numerate.Farooq said:One of the most depressingly tedious arguments in recent years has been the Diane Abbott / Priti Patel maths thing
PB is of course a shining exception…
Edit; think I've got that wrong. I meant doses (etc) were 10x (at least) what ought to have been intended.
Trying to teach people to spot and avoid powers of ten errors takes up a noticeable portion of my working life.
Also ISPs tent to use Mbps to measure their speeds, whereas lots of people seem to refer to it as MBps.
Edit: and kB and kb as well...1 -
Interesting thread:
Scholz and Draghi gave major interviews less than 1w apart to @corriere & @derspiegel.
Contexts differ, deliverables may not be radically apart. But in a war, narratives matter.
Instructive to compare answers on ia: arming Ukr, energy dependence, and econ fallout of war. 1/
https://twitter.com/Fatassinari/status/15181316362102169600 -
Of interest to those betting on the Grand Prix - it’s very much raining in northern Italy, two hours before the start of the race. Every support race has seen at least two safety cars, even those where it was dry. Value at 1/10.0
