LAB now a 67% betting chance to win most seats – politicalbetting.com
Inevitably given the way the polls have moved to LAB in the last couple of months that the party is now rated as a 67% betting chance to win most seats at the next general election
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
It was a long way offside. For once VAR worked well.
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
It was a long way offside. For once VAR worked well.
Its the delay that I hate, or rather everybody thinks its a goal, then some extended time later there is oh wait, what's this...
Cricket and tennis players immediately challenge a decision. So we all know, it might not be a wicket etc.
Looks like we'll be in this dull stasis for the next two years. Tories clinging on, unable to agree even with each other, and therefore initiate nothing, while the majority get poorer. Happy days.
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
It was a long way offside. For once VAR worked well.
Its the delay that I hate.
Then blame the linesman who didn't flag despite it being "a long way offside".
There's definitely been a slight slippage in the Labour share in recent polls, but it hasn't benefited the Tories much. Mostly to minor parties.
If you look at the wikipedia graph, the conservative vote has been on a downward trend since 2019 at an average of about 0.4% per month. Blips (but reverting to trend) were the initial Covid outbreak in March 2020, then the delivery of the vaccines in 2021 and partygate at the start of 2022. Will Sunak as pm enable a reversion to trend, or better?
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
It was a long way offside. For once VAR worked well.
Its the delay that I hate.
Then blame the linesman who didn't flag despite it being "a long way offside".
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
It was a long way offside. For once VAR worked well.
Its the delay that I hate.
Then blame the linesman who didn't flag despite it being "a long way offside".
That's the directive from FIFA I believe.
Ultimately, key offsides are all done by VAR. It really doesn't matter what the on-field linesman thinks. We saw this last season with Arsenal v Brighton. There wasn't a clear view of whether Martinelli was onside or not, but the AVAR has to guess rather than go with on-field decision. They guessed offside (on-field linesman thought onside).
🚨🚨New Voting Intention🚨🚨 Labour lead is eighteen points in latest results from Deltapoll. Con 30% (+5) Lab 48% (-3) Lib Dem 10% (+1) Other 12% (-3) Fieldwork: 24th - 28th November 2022 Sample: 1,062 GB adults (Changes from 17th - 19th November 2022) https://twitter.com/DeltapollUK/status/1597283660004470784/photo/1
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
It was a long way offside. For once VAR worked well.
Its the delay that I hate.
Then blame the linesman who didn't flag despite it being "a long way offside".
That's the directive from FIFA I believe.
It's standard in all VAR competitions not to flag offside until the play is completed, but if FIFA have directed the linesmen not to flag at all on goals, that's insane even by their standards.
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
It was a long way offside. For once VAR worked well.
Its the delay that I hate.
Then blame the linesman who didn't flag despite it being "a long way offside".
That's the directive from FIFA I believe.
It's standard in all VAR competitions not to flag offside until the play is completed, but if FIFA have directed the linesmen not to flag at all on goals, that's insane even by their standards.
Not really. Whether the linesman thinks it's offside or not doesn't matter. The only way the linesman has an impact in that incident is to call it in real time. But they are, understandably, very risk averse.
🚨🚨New Voting Intention🚨🚨 Labour lead is eighteen points in latest results from Deltapoll. Con 30% (+5) Lab 48% (-3) Lib Dem 10% (+1) Other 12% (-3) Fieldwork: 24th - 28th November 2022 Sample: 1,062 GB adults (Changes from 17th - 19th November 2022) https://twitter.com/DeltapollUK/status/1597283660004470784/photo/1
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
It was a long way offside. For once VAR worked well.
Its the delay that I hate.
Then blame the linesman who didn't flag despite it being "a long way offside".
That's the directive from FIFA I believe.
It's standard in all VAR competitions not to flag offside until the play is completed, but if FIFA have directed the linesmen not to flag at all on goals, that's insane even by their standards.
Not really. Whether the linesman thinks it's offside or not doesn't matter. The only way the linesman has an impact in that incident is to call it in real time. But they are, understandably, very risk averse.
And "in real time" is what Francis was asking for - certainly on clear offsides the linesman should flag.
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
It was a long way offside. For once VAR worked well.
Its the delay that I hate.
Then blame the linesman who didn't flag despite it being "a long way offside".
That's the directive from FIFA I believe.
It's standard in all VAR competitions not to flag offside until the play is completed, but if FIFA have directed the linesmen not to flag at all on goals, that's insane even by their standards.
Not really. Whether the linesman thinks it's offside or not doesn't matter. The only way the linesman has an impact in that incident is to call it in real time. But they are, understandably, very risk averse.
And "in real time" is what Francis was asking for - certainly on clear offsides the linesman should flag.
I can see why the linesman didn't flag. He needs to be sure that the player has become active, and that maybe wasn't obvious (okay, he was active even if he didn't touch it, but I don't blame the linesman for being ultra cautious).
Even with the win, this is unimpressive from Brazil. Only France have really put two performances together.
France have got the best balanced team, but Brazil can obviously turn it on at any moment with the 87 forwards they have picked in their squad....If it comes, a Brazil vs France game could be a cracker.
🚨🚨New Voting Intention🚨🚨 Labour lead is eighteen points in latest results from Deltapoll. Con 30% (+5) Lab 48% (-3) Lib Dem 10% (+1) Other 12% (-3) Fieldwork: 24th - 28th November 2022 Sample: 1,062 GB adults (Changes from 17th - 19th November 2022) https://twitter.com/DeltapollUK/status/1597283660004470784/photo/1
Looking at the wikipedia graph that is currently around average for Lab but good for Con.
Looks like we'll be in this dull stasis for the next two years. Tories clinging on, unable to agree even with each other, and therefore initiate nothing, while the majority get poorer. Happy days.
Mone, Raab, Braverman, Zahawi likely to detonate. 2 more years of channel crossings. Winter of CoL crisis not really under way yet.
European nations wanting to wear OneLove captain's armbands are sending out a "divisive message", says Qatar World Cup chief Hassan Al-Thawadi.
"It goes back to the simple fact that this is a part of the world that has its own set of values. It is a part of the world - not Qatar, I'm talking about the Arab world.
"So if you're making a statement here in Qatar or specifically addressed to Qatar, and by extension the Islamic world, or course I take issue with that. It leaves a very divisive message."
🚨🚨New Voting Intention🚨🚨 Labour lead is eighteen points in latest results from Deltapoll. Con 30% (+5) Lab 48% (-3) Lib Dem 10% (+1) Other 12% (-3) Fieldwork: 24th - 28th November 2022 Sample: 1,062 GB adults (Changes from 17th - 19th November 2022) https://twitter.com/DeltapollUK/status/1597283660004470784/photo/1
Looking at the wikipedia graph that is currently around average for Lab but good for Con.
Conservatives have not been above 30 in any poll effectively since the mini budget fiasco.
Dominic Cummings has followed in the footsteps of his pal Steve Bannon and talked about having government bods murdered whom he doesn't like. (Imagine if someone on the left did that. It'd be all over the media.)
For Bannon it was FBI director Christopher Wray and government biologist Anthony Fauci, and beheading and heads on spikes. For Cummings it's government special advisers who have attacked science funding, and hanging them from lampposts in Downing Street.
His statement made me realise two things: 1. he thinks he's coming back; 2. he won't come back.
He may get a job in the US for PE2024 though. Goodness knows for which candidate if so. For some reason he seems very interested in AOC. I don't know enough about US politics to know the extent that what's happening in one major party affects what's happening in the other in the run-up to the nomination of candidates.
Labour still very likely to win most seats, a majority less certain
Agree. The prob of most seats is higher than 67%. More like 75-80 I would have thought. For the Tories to get there requires a route that does not as yet have an open door.
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
It was a long way offside. For once VAR worked well.
Its the delay that I hate, or rather everybody thinks its a goal, then some extended time later there is oh wait, what's this...
Cricket and tennis players immediately challenge
a decision. So we all know, it might not be a
wicket etc.
Absolutely right. VAR is a great addition per se but needs to be based around a challenge system as you say: as in tennis, cricket and rugby league that would become an exciting and strategic element to the sport in and of itself.
Even with the win, this is unimpressive from Brazil. Only France have really put two performances together.
France have got the best balanced team, but Brazil can obviously turn it on at any moment with the 87 forwards they have picked in their squad....If it comes, a Brazil vs France game could be a cracker.
Shame that it can't come until the Semis at least, and more likely not until the Final (assuming both Brazil and France top their group). (And if the Final, then it'll more than likely end up being a cagey, cautious affair rather than the rollocking you score 3, we'll score 4 approach that the infinate number of Brazilian forwards should encourage)
I'm not watching at the moment - what did it do this time? Get a decision right again?
It was the technically the correct decision for an offside in the build up to the goal, but all that excitement, all that emotion, that release, no player on the field thought they had been hard done by....and then probably a minute after the goal the ref waves his arms, and another minute, we get it was offside.
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
It was a long way offside. For once VAR worked well.
It was certainly offside but the delay is excruciating and unnecessary.
You can't help thinking that one day VAR will disallow a goal for something that happened on the coach on its way to the stadium.
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
I've pretty much given up on the cinema - seems to me that nearly all "big" films are either DC/MCU or some sequel trotted out because it's an easy money maker.
I think the only film I've seen in the cinema this year is Elvis.
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
I've pretty much given up on the cinema - seems to me that nearly all "big" films are either DC/MCU or some sequel trotted out because it's an easy money maker.
I think the only film I've seen in the cinema this year is Elvis.
That is one of the problems, yes.
It’s possible that studios are struggling to compete with the amount of money that (until recently at least) has been thrown around by the streamers.
Interesting thread. There has been a lot of discussion around the effects of winter on operations. I thought I’d outline a couple of aspects of winter fighting that are both critical and often under appreciated. BLUF: Winter will likely favour the Ukrainian military. 1/17 https://twitter.com/Jack_Watling/status/1596698941852033025
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
I've pretty much given up on the cinema - seems to me that nearly all "big" films are either DC/MCU or some sequel trotted out because it's an easy money maker.
I think the only film I've seen in the cinema this year is Elvis.
That is one of the problems, yes.
It’s possible that studios are struggling to compete with the amount of money that (until recently at least) has been thrown around by the streamers.
The cinema near me reeks of "desperate teenager with an uncertain relationship to deodorant but a deep commitment to perfume/aftershave" which makes them wholly unappealing places to watch films.
First thing on a Saturday morning with the 9yo is just about tolerable when there is an occasional film out they might like.
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
There certainly is - I mentioned I've been over 25 times this year, with a variety of genres, and several of those included films I'd never heard of until they popped up at like 1-2 screenings a day.
European nations wanting to wear OneLove captain's armbands are sending out a "divisive message", says Qatar World Cup chief Hassan Al-Thawadi.
"It goes back to the simple fact that this is a part of the world that has its own set of values. It is a part of the world - not Qatar, I'm talking about the Arab world.
"So if you're making a statement here in Qatar or specifically addressed to Qatar, and by extension the Islamic world, or course I take issue with that. It leaves a very divisive message."
I agree with him - sick of the virtue signalling and arrogance. Also Gary Lineker with his explanation of only reporting on the world cup not supporting it makes me puke - Gary just admit you are not Mother Teresa and are there for the money - its ok most would respect you more for that than pathetic weasel words
European nations wanting to wear OneLove captain's armbands are sending out a "divisive message", says Qatar World Cup chief Hassan Al-Thawadi.
"It goes back to the simple fact that this is a part of the world that has its own set of values. It is a part of the world - not Qatar, I'm talking about the Arab world.
"So if you're making a statement here in Qatar or specifically addressed to Qatar, and by extension the Islamic world, or course I take issue with that. It leaves a very divisive message."
I agree with him - sick of the virtue signalling and arrogance
His statement is just a whinge that he doesn't like messages other countries put out, it's certainly no less arrogant than those he is whinging about. It's a pretty transparent attempt to shift the conversation from 'X is wrong' to 'Saying X is wrong is wrong', which I'm sure he has no ulterior motive for - because I doubt they like people saying things even not during football tournaments, so that is a distraction.
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
There certainly is - I mentioned I've been over 25 times this year, with a variety of genres, and several of those included films I'd never heard of until they popped up at like 1-2 screenings a day.
It feels like a collective loss of nerve by the studios and distributors.
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
Even where the marketing cuts through, it's more successful at getting people to talk about the film than to go and watch it. Perhaps like pop music, the glory days of cinema are behind us and it's lost its cultural centrality.
I had to apply for a second current account today, for various family reasons I won't go into. As part of it, I made the distinctly unpleasant discovery that Lloyds have no meaningful security measures in place on existing customers registering for online banking. In effect, somebody with my name, knowing my account details and phone number, could register for online banking and empty my account in 15 minutes without anyone noticing.
I've always set my face against online personal banking because I thought it was so insecure, but I never dreamed it would be so bad that I'd be vulnerable to being hacked even if I didn't have it.
Are there any banks out there that do have proper security on setting up online accounts so they can't be accessed by any spotty teenager with a laptop? Because if so, I would like to move to them.
(What was worse was Lloyd's, when I rang up to complain, tried to pretend that their systems were very secure because they were encrypted. Which may be true, but is also irrelevant if they're going to make personation so easy.)
European nations wanting to wear OneLove captain's armbands are sending out a "divisive message", says Qatar World Cup chief Hassan Al-Thawadi.
"It goes back to the simple fact that this is a part of the world that has its own set of values. It is a part of the world - not Qatar, I'm talking about the Arab world.
"So if you're making a statement here in Qatar or specifically addressed to Qatar, and by extension the Islamic world, or course I take issue with that. It leaves a very divisive message."
I agree with him - sick of the virtue signalling and arrogance
His statement is just a whinge that he doesn't like messages other countries put out, it's certainly no less arrogant than those he is whinging about. It's a pretty transparent attempt to shift the conversation from 'X is wrong' to 'Saying X is wrong is wrong', which I'm sure he has no ulterior motive for - because I doubt they like people saying things even not during football tournaments, so that is a distraction.
I have this sneaking suspicion Tony might have had a few quid from Qatar over the years....
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
I've pretty much given up on the cinema - seems to me that nearly all "big" films are either DC/MCU or some sequel trotted out because it's an easy money maker.
I think the only film I've seen in the cinema this year is Elvis.
That's my observation.
They are crap films.
Also, the window of opportunity to see them is sometimes too short - like 2-3 weeks. Not enough for word to get around and diaries to be rejigged with babysitters if it's good and worth seeing.
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
There certainly is - I mentioned I've been over 25 times this year, with a variety of genres, and several of those included films I'd never heard of until they popped up at like 1-2 screenings a day.
It feels like a collective loss of nerve by the studios and distributors.
They need to figure out how to make movies less expensive - if you need hundreds of millions to break even its a huge gamble and of course studios are risk averse and some will bomb hard.
Low budget stuff like many horror movies by people like Blumhouse can be good or bad, but doing badly at the box office doesn't matter so much as you'll probably still make a profit, and the big successes will pay for another 15 movies, rather than banking it all on a franchise.
But you don't need to go that low, just more mid budget.
I don’t think this is just a UK problem, but the Tories seem unaware of the issue, and Labour have no answers either.
The problem is not just money.
If only it were, that has a solution - problem is we don't seem to get much for our money, and simplistic options like 'cut red tape/admin' don't seem to help any either. So we pay a lot for shit.
They are promoting Meet the Fabelmans a lot near me, but I figure that’s because I live on the UWS which has the most “Meet the Fabelmans” friendly demographic in the United States.
I have two small kids, and literally went to the cinema two weekends ago. Never bloody heard of “Strange World” until that article.
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
There certainly is - I mentioned I've been over 25 times this year, with a variety of genres, and several of those included films I'd never heard of until they popped up at like 1-2 screenings a day.
It feels like a collective loss of nerve by the studios and distributors.
They need to figure out how to make movies less expensive - if you need hundreds of millions to break even its a huge gamble and of course studios are risk averse and some will bomb hard.
Low budget stuff like many horror movies by people like Blumhouse can be good or bad, but doing badly at the box office doesn't matter so much as you'll probably still make a profit, and the big successes will pay for another 15 movies, rather than banking it all on a franchise.
But you don't need to go that low, just more mid budget.
This is a good thesis.
The Marvelisation film has exploded film budgets, which in turn has meant studios have played safe to the point of insipidity.
Then you have Covid, and the rise of home cinema. I don’t have a TV but I understand that the average screen size is now massive.
I had to apply for a second current account today, for various family reasons I won't go into. As part of it, I made the distinctly unpleasant discovery that Lloyds have no meaningful security measures in place on existing customers registering for online banking. In effect, somebody with my name, knowing my account details and phone number, could register for online banking and empty my account in 15 minutes without anyone noticing.
I've always set my face against online personal banking because I thought it was so insecure, but I never dreamed it would be so bad that I'd be vulnerable to being hacked even if I didn't have it.
Are there any banks out there that do have proper security on setting up online accounts so they can't be accessed by any spotty teenager with a laptop? Because if so, I would like to move to them.
(What was worse was Lloyd's, when I rang up to complain, tried to pretend that their systems were very secure because they were encrypted. Which may be true, but is also irrelevant if they're going to make personation so easy.)
This may be better than nothing ... and FWIW, once it's set up is a different matter from the setup.
I had to apply for a second current account today, for various family reasons I won't go into. As part of it, I made the distinctly unpleasant discovery that Lloyds have no meaningful security measures in place on existing customers registering for online banking. In effect, somebody with my name, knowing my account details and phone number, could register for online banking and empty my account in 15 minutes without anyone noticing.
I've always set my face against online personal banking because I thought it was so insecure, but I never dreamed it would be so bad that I'd be vulnerable to being hacked even if I didn't have it.
Are there any banks out there that do have proper security on setting up online accounts so they can't be accessed by any spotty teenager with a laptop? Because if so, I would like to move to them.
(What was worse was Lloyd's, when I rang up to complain, tried to pretend that their systems were very secure because they were encrypted. Which may be true, but is also irrelevant if they're going to make personation so easy.)
This may be better than nothing ... and FWIW, once it's set up is a different matter from the setup.
But that's actually missing the point. I'm not bothered about whether it's secure once it's set up. The issue is it's not secure in actually being set up. There is no meaningful check to ensure it's genuine.
Arguably, if it's secure after that it's almost worse, as it means there will be one way of stopping them.
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
There certainly is - I mentioned I've been over 25 times this year, with a variety of genres, and several of those included films I'd never heard of until they popped up at like 1-2 screenings a day.
It feels like a collective loss of nerve by the studios and distributors.
They need to figure out how to make movies less expensive - if you need hundreds of millions to break even its a huge gamble and of course studios are risk averse and some will bomb hard.
Low budget stuff like many horror movies by people like Blumhouse can be good or bad, but doing badly at the box office doesn't matter so much as you'll probably still make a profit, and the big successes will pay for another 15 movies, rather than banking it all on a franchise.
But you don't need to go that low, just more mid budget.
I have been to the cinema a lot this year (more than most years) and seen a mixture of good and bad - Good films include the recent "the Menu" and "Triangle of Sadness" , also a while back the " The fall" was great and better than I thought it would be . Ok films included "the lost King" which had a great subject of course but tried too hard to be "woke" when it was not needed (in the sense of all the males portrayed being patronising to Philippa Langley ) - Worst but most hyped movie seen this year has to be "Nope" which was turgid . Liked Elvis as well
European nations wanting to wear OneLove captain's armbands are sending out a "divisive message", says Qatar World Cup chief Hassan Al-Thawadi.
"It goes back to the simple fact that this is a part of the world that has its own set of values. It is a part of the world - not Qatar, I'm talking about the Arab world.
"So if you're making a statement here in Qatar or specifically addressed to Qatar, and by extension the Islamic world, or course I take issue with that. It leaves a very divisive message."
I agree with him - sick of the virtue signalling and arrogance
His statement is just a whinge that he doesn't like messages other countries put out, it's certainly no less arrogant than those he is whinging about. It's a pretty transparent attempt to shift the conversation from 'X is wrong' to 'Saying X is wrong is wrong', which I'm sure he has no ulterior motive for - because I doubt they like people saying things even not during football tournaments, so that is a distraction.
Agreed. It’s pretty arrogant to invite half the world to your country as guests, and then tell them them have to abide by your irrational prejudices. Even if you’ve paid god knows how many millions in bribes for the privilege.
I had to apply for a second current account today, for various family reasons I won't go into. As part of it, I made the distinctly unpleasant discovery that Lloyds have no meaningful security measures in place on existing customers registering for online banking. In effect, somebody with my name, knowing my account details and phone number, could register for online banking and empty my account in 15 minutes without anyone noticing.
I've always set my face against online personal banking because I thought it was so insecure, but I never dreamed it would be so bad that I'd be vulnerable to being hacked even if I didn't have it.
Are there any banks out there that do have proper security on setting up online accounts so they can't be accessed by any spotty teenager with a laptop? Because if so, I would like to move to them.
(What was worse was Lloyd's, when I rang up to complain, tried to pretend that their systems were very secure because they were encrypted. Which may be true, but is also irrelevant if they're going to make personation so easy.)
This may be better than nothing ... and FWIW, once it's set up is a different matter from the setup.
But that's actually missing the point. I'm not bothered about whether it's secure once it's set up. The issue is it's not secure in actually being set up. There is no meaningful check to ensure it's genuine.
Arguably, if it's secure after that it's almost worse, as it means there will be one way of stopping them.
I did grasp the dilemma.
But from memory, it's usual to make checks such as sending letters to your registered address.
I don’t think this is just a UK problem, but the Tories seem unaware of the issue, and Labour have no answers either.
The problem is not just money.
If only it were, that has a solution - problem is we don't seem to get much for our money, and simplistic options like 'cut red tape/admin' don't seem to help any either. So we pay a lot for shit.
I don't see any solutions being offered.
If departments are asked to cut budgets, they would rather cut frontline services, and therefore can parade their bleeding stumps, and get more money next time. It's in nobody's interests to cut actual fat from the system.
I had to apply for a second current account today, for various family reasons I won't go into. As part of it, I made the distinctly unpleasant discovery that Lloyds have no meaningful security measures in place on existing customers registering for online banking. In effect, somebody with my name, knowing my account details and phone number, could register for online banking and empty my account in 15 minutes without anyone noticing.
I've always set my face against online personal banking because I thought it was so insecure, but I never dreamed it would be so bad that I'd be vulnerable to being hacked even if I didn't have it.
Are there any banks out there that do have proper security on setting up online accounts so they can't be accessed by any spotty teenager with a laptop? Because if so, I would like to move to them.
(What was worse was Lloyd's, when I rang up to complain, tried to pretend that their systems were very secure because they were encrypted. Which may be true, but is also irrelevant if they're going to make personation so easy.)
This may be better than nothing ... and FWIW, once it's set up is a different matter from the setup.
But that's actually missing the point. I'm not bothered about whether it's secure once it's set up. The issue is it's not secure in actually being set up. There is no meaningful check to ensure it's genuine.
Are you describing their process accurately? According to this they will ring you to authenticate the phone number when you register:
This might not be what you want to hear, but you're probably better off embracing internet banking than continuing to set your face against it. It's very mature technology now.
I don’t think this is just a UK problem, but the Tories seem unaware of the issue, and Labour have no answers either.
The problem is not just money.
The issue is that public sector productivity is a disaster. It soaks up money and resources and outputs at a much lower rate than the private sector. I think in the UK public sector employees are a particular case of both useless and overpaid in a whole host of roles and they act to prevent front line roles from performing at higher productivity levels. It's a poisonous atmosphere as front line workers just want to get on with the job while those unproductive and overpaid types stifle any drive to, you know, do the actual job.
I said it on here the other day and the UK state sector defenders were out in force, the solution is to sack 50% of admin and other non front line roles, ban all consulting and hiring of day rate public sector consultants, put in place a hiring freeze and change job roles to cover whatever the 50% of people who got sacked were supposed to be doing, give the people who stick around a 30-40% pay rise, pump the rest of the money into front line recruitment.
It's almost a certainty that we wouldn't notice the difference and after a few years we'd see big improvements in output because there's more money for front line services and less being eaten up by the unproductive paper pushers.
You could probably repeat that process a few times and hollow out the DfE to give teachers a bigger slice of the education budget and start to chip away at the teacher shortage, do it at the NHS so that we get more capital investment, payrises and more recruitment among front line staff. Do it at the MoD and fund a proper military.
Osborne and Cameron had it right when they chipped away at the state sector, May and Boris has let the state grow to a completely out of control level and it is stifling output and the economy as these bureaucrats invent rules and processes to justify their continued employment.
I had to apply for a second current account today, for various family reasons I won't go into. As part of it, I made the distinctly unpleasant discovery that Lloyds have no meaningful security measures in place on existing customers registering for online banking. In effect, somebody with my name, knowing my account details and phone number, could register for online banking and empty my account in 15 minutes without anyone noticing.
I've always set my face against online personal banking because I thought it was so insecure, but I never dreamed it would be so bad that I'd be vulnerable to being hacked even if I didn't have it.
Are there any banks out there that do have proper security on setting up online accounts so they can't be accessed by any spotty teenager with a laptop? Because if so, I would like to move to them.
(What was worse was Lloyd's, when I rang up to complain, tried to pretend that their systems were very secure because they were encrypted. Which may be true, but is also irrelevant if they're going to make personation so easy.)
Golly. Are you sure? Not to doubt you, but that sounds batshit. Do they not send a letter to your known address to which you have to respond before it is activated?
My current beef is, first direct insist on displaying my shareholding account balance on the phone banking app. Now I ain't no rockefeller, but there's enough there to make a 3rd world kidnapper start cutting major body parts off me. I have just learned how to hide the banking app on my phone. Trouble is, it took me about 3 minutes and anyone who knows how to do it, can immediately tell that the phone has hidden apps on it, and, again, make with the body part threats.
I had to apply for a second current account today, for various family reasons I won't go into. As part of it, I made the distinctly unpleasant discovery that Lloyds have no meaningful security measures in place on existing customers registering for online banking. In effect, somebody with my name, knowing my account details and phone number, could register for online banking and empty my account in 15 minutes without anyone noticing.
I've always set my face against online personal banking because I thought it was so insecure, but I never dreamed it would be so bad that I'd be vulnerable to being hacked even if I didn't have it.
Are there any banks out there that do have proper security on setting up online accounts so they can't be accessed by any spotty teenager with a laptop? Because if so, I would like to move to them.
(What was worse was Lloyd's, when I rang up to complain, tried to pretend that their systems were very secure because they were encrypted. Which may be true, but is also irrelevant if they're going to make personation so easy.)
Starling is pretty strong. Video based identity check with passport and manual verification.
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
I've pretty much given up on the cinema - seems to me that nearly all "big" films are either DC/MCU or some sequel trotted out because it's an easy money maker.
I think the only film I've seen in the cinema this year is Elvis.
That's my observation.
They are crap films.
Also, the window of opportunity to see them is sometimes too short - like 2-3 weeks. Not enough for word to get around and diaries to be rejigged with babysitters if it's good and worth seeing.
Buy a fuck off sized wall mountable telly, 55' or upwards. Hitch it to £150 worth of stereo speakers. Never go to the cinema again.
I don’t think this is just a UK problem, but the Tories seem unaware of the issue, and Labour have no answers either.
The problem is not just money.
The issue is that public sector productivity is a disaster. It soaks up money and resources and outputs at a much lower rate than the private sector. I think in the UK public sector employees are a particular case of both useless and overpaid in a whole host of roles and they act to prevent front line roles from performing at higher productivity levels. It's a poisonous atmosphere as front line workers just want to get on with the job while those unproductive and overpaid types stifle any drive to, you know, do the actual job.
I said it on here the other day and the UK state sector defenders were out in force, the solution is to sack 50% of admin and other non front line roles, ban all consulting and hiring of day rate public sector consultants, put in place a hiring freeze and change job roles to cover whatever the 50% of people who got sacked were supposed to be doing, give the people who stick around a 30-40% pay rise, pump the rest of the money into front line recruitment.
It's almost a certainty that we wouldn't notice the difference and after a few years we'd see big improvements in output because there's more money for front line services and less being eaten up by the unproductive paper pushers.
You could probably repeat that process a few times and hollow out the DfE to give teachers a bigger slice of the education budget and start to chip away at the teacher shortage, do it at the NHS so that we get more capital investment, payrises and more recruitment among front line staff. Do it at the MoD and fund a proper military.
Osborne and Cameron had it right when they chipped away at the state sector, May and Boris has let the state grow to a completely out of control level and it is stifling output and the economy as these bureaucrats invent rules and processes to justify their continued employment.
I don’t agree with your prescription, for example the NHS has *less* administration staff than peer systems.
I think the problem is that Covid has basically fucked management efficiency. I know I sound like a Daily Mail reader, but the fact that Sheryl needs to take a dog for a walk is not a good reason for not turning up to the all staff.
I don’t blame Sheryl by the way, it’s a systemic issue, and not limited to the public sector. I also see it in the collapse of service from HSBC UK.
I don’t think this is just a UK problem, but the Tories seem unaware of the issue, and Labour have no answers either.
The problem is not just money.
The issue is that public sector productivity is a disaster. It soaks up money and resources and outputs at a much lower rate than the private sector. I think in the UK public sector employees are a particular case of both useless and overpaid in a whole host of roles and they act to prevent front line roles from performing at higher productivity levels. It's a poisonous atmosphere as front line workers just want to get on with the job while those unproductive and overpaid types stifle any drive to, you know, do the actual job.
I said it on here the other day and the UK state sector defenders were out in force, the solution is to sack 50% of admin and other non front line roles, ban all consulting and hiring of day rate public sector consultants, put in place a hiring freeze and change job roles to cover whatever the 50% of people who got sacked were supposed to be doing, give the people who stick around a 30-40% pay rise, pump the rest of the money into front line recruitment.
It's almost a certainty that we wouldn't notice the difference and after a few years we'd see big improvements in output because there's more money for front line services and less being eaten up by the unproductive paper pushers.
You could probably repeat that process a few times and hollow out the DfE to give teachers a bigger slice of the education budget and start to chip away at the teacher shortage, do it at the NHS so that we get more capital investment, payrises and more recruitment among front line staff. Do it at the MoD and fund a proper military.
Osborne and Cameron had it right when they chipped away at the state sector, May and Boris has let the state grow to a completely out of control level and it is stifling output and the economy as these bureaucrats invent rules and processes to justify their continued employment.
Totally agree and i have worked in all three sectors - private ,public and third sector- By far the worse for staff entitlement is the public sector and anyone saying it is efficient is living in cloud cuckoo land. To me the best model for a lot of services is the third sector however and surprised not more worker or consumer cooperatives are not around
The issue is that public sector productivity is a disaster. It soaks up money and resources and outputs at a much lower rate than the private sector. I think in the UK public sector employees are a particular case of both useless and overpaid in a whole host of roles and they act to prevent front line roles from performing at higher productivity levels. It's a poisonous atmosphere as front line workers just want to get on with the job while those unproductive and overpaid types stifle any drive to, you know, do the actual job.
I said it on here the other day and the UK state sector defenders were out in force, the solution is to sack 50% of admin and other non front line roles, ban all consulting and hiring of day rate public sector consultants, put in place a hiring freeze and change job roles to cover whatever the 50% of people who got sacked were supposed to be doing, give the people who stick around a 30-40% pay rise, pump the rest of the money into front line recruitment.
It's almost a certainty that we wouldn't notice the difference and after a few years we'd see big improvements in output because there's more money for front line services and less being eaten up by the unproductive paper pushers.
You could probably repeat that process a few times and hollow out the DfE to give teachers a bigger slice of the education budget and start to chip away at the teacher shortage, do it at the NHS so that we get more capital investment, payrises and more recruitment among front line staff. Do it at the MoD and fund a proper military.
Osborne and Cameron had it right when they chipped away at the state sector, May and Boris has let the state grow to a completely out of control level and it is stifling output and the economy as these bureaucrats invent rules and processes to justify their continued employment.
Far be it from me to be another public sector "defender" (as though that's somehow a bad thing) but having worked in both public and private sectors, it's my experience they are much more alike than you suggest.
As to your specifics, the argument for banning all consultancy is an interesting one. I certainly think having to pay them up to £1500 per day is an obscene waste of public money but bringing in specialist knowledge to an organisation where it doesn't exist is hardly the monopoly of the public sector.
A local Council is an amalgam of businesses across a wide range of sectors, much less homogenous than most private companies. Yes, the average public sector authority doesn't have to worry about shareholders or a profit and can operate to margins most private firms cannot but the fact remains it's a lot of ground to cover and often in areas which private companies can't touch because there's no money in it for them.
I'd also add one of the biggest problems for local Government is central Government which ties the hands of Councils through capping and by imposing regulatory responsibilities on a whole range of areas driven by legislation (NOT EU legislation but good old fashioned UK state interventionism).
I'd argue devolving real financial authority and responsibility from Westminster would be a much better issue than your notion of culling "unproductive and overpaid types".
I don’t think this is just a UK problem, but the Tories seem unaware of the issue, and Labour have no answers either.
The problem is not just money.
The issue is that public sector productivity is a disaster. It soaks up money and resources and outputs at a much lower rate than the private sector. I think in the UK public sector employees are a particular case of both useless and overpaid in a whole host of roles and they act to prevent front line roles from performing at higher productivity levels. It's a poisonous atmosphere as front line workers just want to get on with the job while those unproductive and overpaid types stifle any drive to, you know, do the actual job.
I said it on here the other day and the UK state sector defenders were out in force, the solution is to sack 50% of admin and other non front line roles, ban all consulting and hiring of day rate public sector consultants, put in place a hiring freeze and change job roles to cover whatever the 50% of people who got sacked were supposed to be doing, give the people who stick around a 30-40% pay rise, pump the rest of the money into front line recruitment.
It's almost a certainty that we wouldn't notice the difference and after a few years we'd see big improvements in output because there's more money for front line services and less being eaten up by the unproductive paper pushers.
You could probably repeat that process a few times and hollow out the DfE to give teachers a bigger slice of the education budget and start to chip away at the teacher shortage, do it at the NHS so that we get more capital investment, payrises and more recruitment among front line staff. Do it at the MoD and fund a proper military.
Osborne and Cameron had it right when they chipped away at the state sector, May and Boris has let the state grow to a completely out of control level and it is stifling output and the economy as these bureaucrats invent rules and processes to justify their continued employment.
I don’t agree with your prescription, for example the NHS has *less* administration staff than peer systems.
I think the problem is that Covid has basically fucked management efficiency. I know I sound like a Daily Mail reader, but the fact that Sheryl needs to take a dog for a walk is not a good reason for not turning up to the all staff.
I don’t blame Sheryl by the way, it’s a systemic issue, and not limited to the private sector. I also see it in the collapse of service from HSBC UK.
But it's that those admin staff are completely useless that's the issue. They invent a bunch of rules and processes to justify their jobs. There would be no difference to provision of services if those rules and processes didn't exist yet no one is willing to step up and get rid of it all. Over time that turns into a completely unmanageable set of processes and procedures that few understand except high paid public sector consultants who set them up, quit and then offer their services at 3x the rate. One big change the government could make is ban the recruitment of consultants who gave previously worked for the public sector in the last two years. No more revolving door for consulting.
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
I've pretty much given up on the cinema - seems to me that nearly all "big" films are either DC/MCU or some sequel trotted out because it's an easy money maker.
I think the only film I've seen in the cinema this year is Elvis.
That's my observation.
They are crap films.
Also, the window of opportunity to see them is sometimes too short - like 2-3 weeks. Not enough for word to get around and diaries to be rejigged with babysitters if it's good and worth seeing.
Buy a fuck off sized wall mountable telly, 55' or upwards. Hitch it to £150 worth of stereo speakers. Never go to the cinema again.
I had to apply for a second current account today, for various family reasons I won't go into. As part of it, I made the distinctly unpleasant discovery that Lloyds have no meaningful security measures in place on existing customers registering for online banking. In effect, somebody with my name, knowing my account details and phone number, could register for online banking and empty my account in 15 minutes without anyone noticing.
I've always set my face against online personal banking because I thought it was so insecure, but I never dreamed it would be so bad that I'd be vulnerable to being hacked even if I didn't have it.
Are there any banks out there that do have proper security on setting up online accounts so they can't be accessed by any spotty teenager with a laptop? Because if so, I would like to move to them.
(What was worse was Lloyd's, when I rang up to complain, tried to pretend that their systems were very secure because they were encrypted. Which may be true, but is also irrelevant if they're going to make personation so easy.)
This may be better than nothing ... and FWIW, once it's set up is a different matter from the setup.
But that's actually missing the point. I'm not bothered about whether it's secure once it's set up. The issue is it's not secure in actually being set up. There is no meaningful check to ensure it's genuine.
Arguably, if it's secure after that it's almost worse, as it means there will be one way of stopping them.
I did grasp the dilemma.
But from memory, it's usual to make checks such as sending letters to your registered address.
I don’t think this is just a UK problem, but the Tories seem unaware of the issue, and Labour have no answers either.
The problem is not just money.
The issue is that public sector productivity is a disaster. It soaks up money and resources and outputs at a much lower rate than the private sector. I think in the UK public sector employees are a particular case of both useless and overpaid in a whole host of roles and they act to prevent front line roles from performing at higher productivity levels. It's a poisonous atmosphere as front line workers just want to get on with the job while those unproductive and overpaid types stifle any drive to, you know, do the actual job.
I said it on here the other day and the UK state sector defenders were out in force, the solution is to sack 50% of admin and other non front line roles, ban all consulting and hiring of day rate public sector consultants, put in place a hiring freeze and change job roles to cover whatever the 50% of people who got sacked were supposed to be doing, give the people who stick around a 30-40% pay rise, pump the rest of the money into front line recruitment.
It's almost a certainty that we wouldn't notice the difference and after a few years we'd see big improvements in output because there's more money for front line services and less being eaten up by the unproductive paper pushers.
You could probably repeat that process a few times and hollow out the DfE to give teachers a bigger slice of the education budget and start to chip away at the teacher shortage, do it at the NHS so that we get more capital investment, payrises and more recruitment among front line staff. Do it at the MoD and fund a proper military.
Osborne and Cameron had it right when they chipped away at the state sector, May and Boris has let the state grow to a completely out of control level and it is stifling output and the economy as these bureaucrats invent rules and processes to justify their continued employment.
I don’t agree with your prescription, for example the NHS has *less* administration staff than peer systems.
I think the problem is that Covid has basically fucked management efficiency. I know I sound like a Daily Mail reader, but the fact that Sheryl needs to take a dog for a walk is not a good reason for not turning up to the all staff.
I don’t blame Sheryl by the way, it’s a systemic issue, and not limited to the private sector. I also see it in the collapse of service from HSBC UK.
I suspect there's a Laffer curve type effect going on here. Too much admin is bad, but so is too little. Since certain admin functions have to be done, they end up being done by interestingly trained people as unpaid overtime or skimping on their actual role. That's cheaper but less efficient, since less medicine or teaching or whatever gets done.
I'm pretty sure, for example, that City types get way more admin support than schools manage with.
The issue is that public sector productivity is a disaster. It soaks up money and resources and outputs at a much lower rate than the private sector. I think in the UK public sector employees are a particular case of both useless and overpaid in a whole host of roles and they act to prevent front line roles from performing at higher productivity levels. It's a poisonous atmosphere as front line workers just want to get on with the job while those unproductive and overpaid types stifle any drive to, you know, do the actual job.
I said it on here the other day and the UK state sector defenders were out in force, the solution is to sack 50% of admin and other non front line roles, ban all consulting and hiring of day rate public sector consultants, put in place a hiring freeze and change job roles to cover whatever the 50% of people who got sacked were supposed to be doing, give the people who stick around a 30-40% pay rise, pump the rest of the money into front line recruitment.
It's almost a certainty that we wouldn't notice the difference and after a few years we'd see big improvements in output because there's more money for front line services and less being eaten up by the unproductive paper pushers.
You could probably repeat that process a few times and hollow out the DfE to give teachers a bigger slice of the education budget and start to chip away at the teacher shortage, do it at the NHS so that we get more capital investment, payrises and more recruitment among front line staff. Do it at the MoD and fund a proper military.
Osborne and Cameron had it right when they chipped away at the state sector, May and Boris has let the state grow to a completely out of control level and it is stifling output and the economy as these bureaucrats invent rules and processes to justify their continued employment.
Far be it from me to be another public sector "defender" (as though that's somehow a bad thing) but having worked in both public and private sectors, it's my experience they are much more alike than you suggest.
As to your specifics, the argument for banning all consultancy is an interesting one. I certainly think having to pay them up to £1500 per day is an obscene waste of public money but bringing in specialist knowledge to an organisation where it doesn't exist is hardly the monopoly of the public sector.
A local Council is an amalgam of businesses across a wide range of sectors, much less homogenous than most private companies. Yes, the average public sector authority doesn't have to worry about shareholders or a profit and can operate to margins most private firms cannot but the fact remains it's a lot of ground to cover and often in areas which private companies can't touch because there's no money in it for them.
I'd also add one of the biggest problems for local Government is central Government which ties the hands of Councils through capping and by imposing regulatory responsibilities on a whole range of areas driven by legislation (NOT EU legislation but good old fashioned UK state interventionism).
I'd argue devolving real financial authority and responsibility from Westminster would be a much better issue than your notion of culling "unproductive and overpaid types".
But the issue is that those day rate consultants helped to set up those systems and processes that require that specialised knowledge and ultimately if no one did those jobs no one would notice other than removing a tick box from a monthly form.
The issues is less acute in the US, I think, because there are few public services anyway.
Private sector efficiency depends on how competitive the market is.
For example, Verizon my ISP (I’m currently on the phone to them) is notoriously shite perhaps because the market is effectively a duopoly.
Max’s comments on forecourt competition are highly relevant. Never mind the public sector, the private sector, and I feel it is especially the case in the UK, is full of cosy little cartels.
I think Thatcher got this, but no Tory since really has. Labour barely understands what a private market is.
I had to apply for a second current account today, for various family reasons I won't go into. As part of it, I made the distinctly unpleasant discovery that Lloyds have no meaningful security measures in place on existing customers registering for online banking. In effect, somebody with my name, knowing my account details and phone number, could register for online banking and empty my account in 15 minutes without anyone noticing.
I've always set my face against online personal banking because I thought it was so insecure, but I never dreamed it would be so bad that I'd be vulnerable to being hacked even if I didn't have it.
Are there any banks out there that do have proper security on setting up online accounts so they can't be accessed by any spotty teenager with a laptop? Because if so, I would like to move to them.
(What was worse was Lloyd's, when I rang up to complain, tried to pretend that their systems were very secure because they were encrypted. Which may be true, but is also irrelevant if they're going to make personation so easy.)
This may be better than nothing ... and FWIW, once it's set up is a different matter from the setup.
But that's actually missing the point. I'm not bothered about whether it's secure once it's set up. The issue is it's not secure in actually being set up. There is no meaningful check to ensure it's genuine.
Are you describing their process accurately? According to this they will ring you to authenticate the phone number when you register:
This might not be what you want to hear, but you're probably better off embracing internet banking than continuing to set your face against it. It's very mature technology now.
They will ring if they have the right phone number. Leaving aside that phone numbers themselves are quite vulnerable to hacking, they don’t do it if they are told not to. As I found out by doing it.
‘Mature technology’ is not a reason for doing anything. It may just mean they’ve been lucky for a long time. Chernobyl, the Titanic and the Hindenburg were all mature technology.
I don’t think this is just a UK problem, but the Tories seem unaware of the issue, and Labour have no answers either.
The problem is not just money.
The issue is that public sector productivity is a disaster. It soaks up money and resources and outputs at a much lower rate than the private sector. I think in the UK public sector employees are a particular case of both useless and overpaid in a whole host of roles and they act to prevent front line roles from performing at higher productivity levels. It's a poisonous atmosphere as front line workers just want to get on with the job while those unproductive and overpaid types stifle any drive to, you know, do the actual job.
I said it on here the other day and the UK state sector defenders were out in force, the solution is to sack 50% of admin and other non front line roles, ban all consulting and hiring of day rate public sector consultants, put in place a hiring freeze and change job roles to cover whatever the 50% of people who got sacked were supposed to be doing, give the people who stick around a 30-40% pay rise, pump the rest of the money into front line recruitment.
It's almost a certainty that we wouldn't notice the difference and after a few years we'd see big improvements in output because there's more money for front line services and less being eaten up by the unproductive paper pushers.
You could probably repeat that process a few times and hollow out the DfE to give teachers a bigger slice of the education budget and start to chip away at the teacher shortage, do it at the NHS so that we get more capital investment, payrises and more recruitment among front line staff. Do it at the MoD and fund a proper military.
Osborne and Cameron had it right when they chipped away at the state sector, May and Boris has let the state grow to a completely out of control level and it is stifling output and the economy as these bureaucrats invent rules and processes to justify their continued employment.
I don’t agree with your prescription, for example the NHS has *less* administration staff than peer systems.
I think the problem is that Covid has basically fucked management efficiency. I know I sound like a Daily Mail reader, but the fact that Sheryl needs to take a dog for a walk is not a good reason for not turning up to the all staff.
I don’t blame Sheryl by the way, it’s a systemic issue, and not limited to the public sector. I also see it in the collapse of service from HSBC UK.
I don't get this - I'm just as busy when I work from home (on calls, or working, back to back 9am to 6pm) and never have time to mow the lawn or eat lunch; barely to take a piss. The difference is I'm far less exhausted because I'm only commuting 3 days a week not 5.
If people are fucking about at home in a way they wouldn't in the office then, obviously, they don't have enough to do and their management is shit.
It's a really old skool way of working when you need to be constantly (visually) supervised to be trusted to do anything, and suggests a really poor management culture.
The issues is less acute in the US, I think, because there are few public services anyway.
Private sector efficiency depends on how competitive the market is.
For example, Verizon my ISP (I’m currently on the phone to them) is notoriously shite perhaps because the market is effectively a duopoly.
Max’s comments on forecourt competition are highly relevant. Never mind the public sector, the private sector, and I feel it is especially the case in the UK, is full of cosy little cartels.
I think Thatcher got this, but no Tory since really has. Labour barely understands what a private market is.
Without sounding too much like Corbyn, the massive globalisation we have seen over the past 20 years has resulted in many industries where there has been huge consolidation resulting in duopoly or very small number of major players who perhaps don't even really compete for the same customers.
They are promoting Meet the Fabelmans a lot near me, but I figure that’s because I live on the UWS which has the most “Meet the Fabelmans” friendly demographic in the United States.
I have two small kids, and literally went to the cinema two weekends ago. Never bloody heard of “Strange World” until that article.
The complete lack of advertising tells you how much work Disney put in into making it a successfully movie (none at all).
Rumour has it though that higher ups in Disney want to gut the film animation department.
There was an interesting comment this morning about the declining birth rate. This will have an impact (as it did before) on education and many other aspects of public sector provision.
If we reach the point where schools cannot function due to declining pupil numbers, we will see more mergers which will in turn release school land and buildings for possible residential redevelopment.
Some will also remember the furore over school playing field sales in the 1990s. As a point of information, when a school becomes an Academy, the land and buildings are held by the Academy Trust on a long lease but only while the Academy is using them - if the school closes, the land and property revert to the local Council so again there may be opportunities to redevelop school sites.
The corollary of that is this works well until the birth rate starts rising again and there's no capacity in the school system.
Comments
It either has to be a challenge system or instant decision.
Cricket and tennis players immediately challenge a decision. So we all know, it might not be a wicket etc.
Happy days.
If you look at the wikipedia graph, the conservative vote has been on a downward trend since 2019 at an average of about 0.4% per month. Blips (but reverting to trend) were the initial Covid outbreak in March 2020, then the delivery of the vaccines in 2021 and partygate at the start of 2022. Will Sunak as pm enable a reversion to trend, or better?
Labour lead is eighteen points in latest results from Deltapoll.
Con 30% (+5)
Lab 48% (-3)
Lib Dem 10% (+1)
Other 12% (-3)
Fieldwork: 24th - 28th November 2022
Sample: 1,062 GB adults
(Changes from 17th - 19th November 2022) https://twitter.com/DeltapollUK/status/1597283660004470784/photo/1
Only France have really put two performances together.
Unknown unknowns.
Gonna be less boring than you think.
"It goes back to the simple fact that this is a part of the world that has its own set of values. It is a part of the world - not Qatar, I'm talking about the Arab world.
"So if you're making a statement here in Qatar or specifically addressed to Qatar, and by extension the Islamic world, or course I take issue with that. It leaves a very divisive message."
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/63785482
For Bannon it was FBI director Christopher Wray and government biologist Anthony Fauci, and beheading and heads on spikes. For Cummings it's government special advisers who have attacked science funding, and hanging them from lampposts in Downing Street.
His statement made me realise two things:
1. he thinks he's coming back;
2. he won't come back.
He may get a job in the US for PE2024 though. Goodness knows for which candidate if so. For some reason he seems very interested in AOC. I don't know enough about US politics to know the extent that what's happening in one major party affects what's happening in the other in the run-up to the nomination of candidates.
Scary.
You can't help thinking that one day VAR will disallow a goal for something that happened on the coach on its way to the stadium.
This is interesting on the terrible Thanksgiving weekend box office.
https://www.indiewire.com/2022/11/worst-thanksgiving-weekend-box-office-history-1234785622/
I haven’t even heard of some of these, there’s a massive marketing failure here somewhere, among other issues.
I think the only film I've seen in the cinema this year is Elvis.
It’s possible that studios are struggling to compete with the amount of money that (until recently at least) has been thrown around by the streamers.
There has been a lot of discussion around the effects of winter on operations. I thought I’d outline a couple of aspects of winter fighting that are both critical and often under appreciated. BLUF: Winter will likely favour the Ukrainian military. 1/17
https://twitter.com/Jack_Watling/status/1596698941852033025
First thing on a Saturday morning with the 9yo is just about tolerable when there is an occasional film out they might like.
I had to apply for a second current account today, for various family reasons I won't go into. As part of it, I made the distinctly unpleasant discovery that Lloyds have no meaningful security measures in place on existing customers registering for online banking. In effect, somebody with my name, knowing my account details and phone number, could register for online banking and empty my account in 15 minutes without anyone noticing.
I've always set my face against online personal banking because I thought it was so insecure, but I never dreamed it would be so bad that I'd be vulnerable to being hacked even if I didn't have it.
Are there any banks out there that do have proper security on setting up online accounts so they can't be accessed by any spotty teenager with a laptop? Because if so, I would like to move to them.
(What was worse was Lloyd's, when I rang up to complain, tried to pretend that their systems were very secure because they were encrypted. Which may be true, but is also irrelevant if they're going to make personation so easy.)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11478259/Tony-Blair-tells-LGBT-campaigners-not-disrespect-World-Cup-hosts-Qatar.html
They are crap films.
Also, the window of opportunity to see them is sometimes too short - like 2-3 weeks. Not enough for word to get around and diaries to be rejigged with babysitters if it's good and worth seeing.
Low budget stuff like many horror movies by people like Blumhouse can be good or bad, but doing badly at the box office doesn't matter so much as you'll probably still make a profit, and the big successes will pay for another 15 movies, rather than banking it all on a franchise.
But you don't need to go that low, just more mid budget.
https://twitter.com/samfr/status/1597208466703032320?s=46&t=kIx7ITW3UXYaGg-ixUfZ2w
I don’t think this is just a UK problem, but the Tories seem unaware of the issue, and Labour have no answers either.
The problem is not just money.
I don't see any solutions being offered.
I have two small kids, and literally went to the cinema two weekends ago. Never bloody heard of “Strange World” until that article.
The Marvelisation film has exploded film budgets, which in turn has meant studios have played safe to the point of insipidity.
Then you have Covid, and the rise of home cinema. I don’t have a TV but I understand that the average screen size is now massive.
https://www.which.co.uk/money/banking/banking-security-and-new-ways-to-pay/online-banking-security/how-safe-is-online-banking-ayvfj7p8cctc
Arguably, if it's secure after that it's almost worse, as it means there will be one way of stopping them.
It’s pretty arrogant to invite half the world to your country as guests, and then tell them them have to abide by your irrational prejudices.
Even if you’ve paid god knows how many millions in bribes for the privilege.
But from memory, it's usual to make checks such as sending letters to your registered address.
https://www.lloydsbank.com/online-banking/how-to-register.html
This might not be what you want to hear, but you're probably better off embracing internet banking than continuing to set your face against it. It's very mature technology now.
I said it on here the other day and the UK state sector defenders were out in force, the solution is to sack 50% of admin and other non front line roles, ban all consulting and hiring of day rate public sector consultants, put in place a hiring freeze and change job roles to cover whatever the 50% of people who got sacked were supposed to be doing, give the people who stick around a 30-40% pay rise, pump the rest of the money into front line recruitment.
It's almost a certainty that we wouldn't notice the difference and after a few years we'd see big improvements in output because there's more money for front line services and less being eaten up by the unproductive paper pushers.
You could probably repeat that process a few times and hollow out the DfE to give teachers a bigger slice of the education budget and start to chip away at the teacher shortage, do it at the NHS so that we get more capital investment, payrises and more recruitment among front line staff. Do it at the MoD and fund a proper military.
Osborne and Cameron had it right when they chipped away at the state sector, May and Boris has let the state grow to a completely out of control level and it is stifling output and the economy as these bureaucrats invent rules and processes to justify their continued employment.
My current beef is, first direct insist on displaying my shareholding account balance on the phone banking app. Now I ain't no rockefeller, but there's enough there to make a 3rd world kidnapper start cutting major body parts off me. I have just learned how to hide the banking app on my phone. Trouble is, it took me about 3 minutes and anyone who knows how to do it, can immediately tell that the phone has hidden apps on it, and, again, make with the body part threats.
NEW: Several candidates have turned down role of Rishi Sunak’s ethics adviser after he refused to offer enhanced powers
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1597267601033678848
Collateralised fund obligations: how private equity securitised itself
https://www.ft.com/content/e4c4fd61-341e-4f5b-9a46-796fc3bdcb03
I think the problem is that Covid has basically fucked management efficiency. I know I sound like a Daily Mail reader, but the fact that Sheryl needs to take a dog for a walk is not a good reason for not turning up to the all staff.
I don’t blame Sheryl by the way, it’s a systemic issue, and not limited to the public sector. I also see it in the collapse of service from HSBC UK.
I am voluntarily sin-binning myself.
As to your specifics, the argument for banning all consultancy is an interesting one. I certainly think having to pay them up to £1500 per day is an obscene waste of public money but bringing in specialist knowledge to an organisation where it doesn't exist is hardly the monopoly of the public sector.
A local Council is an amalgam of businesses across a wide range of sectors, much less homogenous than most private companies. Yes, the average public sector authority doesn't have to worry about shareholders or a profit and can operate to margins most private firms cannot but the fact remains it's a lot of ground to cover and often in areas which private companies can't touch because there's no money in it for them.
I'd also add one of the biggest problems for local Government is central Government which ties the hands of Councils through capping and by imposing regulatory responsibilities on a whole range of areas driven by legislation (NOT EU legislation but good old fashioned UK state interventionism).
I'd argue devolving real financial authority and responsibility from Westminster would be a much better issue than your notion of culling "unproductive and overpaid types".
I'm pretty sure, for example, that City types get way more admin support than schools manage with.
I got it in six guesses. A couple of lucky guesses and a hunch.
Private sector efficiency depends on how competitive the market is.
For example, Verizon my ISP (I’m currently on the phone to them) is notoriously shite perhaps because the market is effectively a duopoly.
Max’s comments on forecourt competition are highly relevant. Never mind the public sector, the private sector, and I feel it is especially the case in the UK, is full of cosy little cartels.
I think Thatcher got this, but no Tory since really has. Labour barely understands what a private market is.
‘Mature technology’ is not a reason for doing anything. It may just mean they’ve been lucky for a long time. Chernobyl, the Titanic and the Hindenburg were all mature technology.
If people are fucking about at home in a way they wouldn't in the office then, obviously, they don't have enough to do and their management is shit.
It's a really old skool way of working when you need to be constantly (visually) supervised to be trusted to do anything, and suggests a really poor management culture.
Rumour has it though that higher ups in Disney want to gut the film animation department.
There was an interesting comment this morning about the declining birth rate. This will have an impact (as it did before) on education and many other aspects of public sector provision.
If we reach the point where schools cannot function due to declining pupil numbers, we will see more mergers which will in turn release school land and buildings for possible residential redevelopment.
Some will also remember the furore over school playing field sales in the 1990s. As a point of information, when a school becomes an Academy, the land and buildings are held by the Academy Trust on a long lease but only while the Academy is using them - if the school closes, the land and property revert to the local Council so again there may be opportunities to redevelop school sites.
The corollary of that is this works well until the birth rate starts rising again and there's no capacity in the school system.