Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Why I think that LAB will struggle to get a majority – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,015
edited December 2022 in General
imageWhy I think that LAB will struggle to get a majority – politicalbetting.com

The above dataset is from the latest YouGov poll which as you can see gives LAB a 24% lead over the Tories which is one of the highest of recent surveys. An interesting set of figures is the second grouping which does not exclude those not having a party choice. This represents just under a third of the total CON vote from the last election and my guess is that a significant part of this will actually go back on the day

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,846
    1st but no majority like SKS
  • Options
    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,007
    TwitterFiles2 is gonna be waaaaaaay bigger than the first iteration
  • Options
    On topic, I fully agree with OGH.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,939
    Leon said:

    TwitterFiles2 is gonna be waaaaaaay bigger than the first iteration

    Given the first edition was a complete non-story, that's not a high bar.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,939

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
  • Options

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    Buy them Grammarly, which is currently advertising that it advises on email tone?
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,258
    I'm not going to keep repeating why I'm sure @MikeSmithson is wrong about this. He's not going to change his mind, I don't think,

    But, yes, I'm sure he's wrong. This isn't some flash in the pan lead. It's a sea-change in British politics, such as happens once in a generation at best.

    I will just point out though that the rot set in long before Truss and Kwarteng. It's revisionist to suggest otherwise. Labour will hardly need to remind us about the awful pandemic experiences in which Boris' sleazy tories told us one thing and practised another. The visceral erosion of tory support began long ago. Boris was found to be totally unsuitable for the top job and the chaos began back then. And I need hardly add that the Brexit which Boris delivered us has found to be a disaster. Even my Leave friends are now saying it.

    I suggest that we should all be thinking of the opposite: just how HUGE might Labour's lead be? How low will the tory numbers fall? The reason many of them are starting to leave the ship is because they know it's sinking.

    I suggest the ballpark figure is 100-150 tory MPs but it could go lower if circumstances continue to conspire against them, which seems pretty likely.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,258
    edited December 2022

    On topic, I fully agree with OGH.

    Of course you do.

    Older people generally find change difficult to accept or believe. More than youngsters they tend to pin their assessment of the world on what has happened before. This isn't all bad. Often it displays the great wisdom of experience.

    However, when a sea-change in attitudes occurs older people generally take longer to catch up.

    The other category who are finding it hard to accept are the blue filter tories. They see the world through a prism and cling to every last vestige of hope. Just as love is blind so are beliefs.

    This is not intended to be taken as personal, or rude, it's just that the objective, empirical, evidence all points to a sea change in this country. You simply don't come back from poll deficits like these. It's like 1945 again or 1997, and there is nothing now the tories can do to avert the electoral catastrophe that is coming their way.
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    TwitterFiles2 is gonna be waaaaaaay bigger than the first iteration

    Given the first edition was a complete non-story, that's not a high bar.
    Sfaict (after a couple of minutes) tonight's excitement is that Twitter used shadow bans (defined more widely than usual) which is so wrong that Elon's New Twitter will stop it tell people if they have been shadow banned.
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
    More basic. It goes along the lines of quoting the email of the customer and saying how we would deal with it, but this has been prefaced to begin with by saying they need to give it in a professional way.

    I have told my main email handler for all of December he MUST use this and only if at the end of the month if his emails have improved then he can not do so. Progress! :)
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937

    rcs1000 said:

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
    More basic. It goes along the lines of quoting the email of the customer and saying how we would deal with it, but this has been prefaced to begin with by saying they need to give it in a professional way.

    I have told my main email handler for all of December he MUST use this and only if at the end of the month if his emails have improved then he can not do so. Progress! :)
    I would be slightly cautious about using it for professional work, especially if there is client-confidential data in anything you input. Not only is all the work being sent to an 'unknown' server; but the data might end up in a training data set.
  • Options
    Mikest1982Mikest1982 Posts: 84
    edited December 2022

    rcs1000 said:

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
    More basic. It goes along the lines of quoting the email of the customer and saying how we would deal with it, but this has been prefaced to begin with by saying they need to give it in a professional way.

    I have told my main email handler for all of December he MUST use this and only if at the end of the month if his emails have improved then he can not do so. Progress! :)
    I would be slightly cautious about using it for professional work, especially if there is client-confidential data in anything you input. Not only is all the work being sent to an 'unknown' server; but the data might end up in a training data set.
    Already considered. Anything confidential or may be harmful will not be fed through.

    It's clear this is the future and we have had a meeting already to discuss this and work out how to take best advantage.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,258

    rcs1000 said:

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
    More basic. It goes along the lines of quoting the email of the customer and saying how we would deal with it, but this has been prefaced to begin with by saying they need to give it in a professional way.

    I have told my main email handler for all of December he MUST use this and only if at the end of the month if his emails have improved then he can not do so. Progress! :)
    I would be slightly cautious about using it for professional work, especially if there is client-confidential data in anything you input. Not only is all the work being sent to an 'unknown' server; but the data might end up in a training data set.
    It's clear this is the future
    Dystopia

    Having dissed those who find change hard to adapt to, there are some (many) things about modern life from which I recoil.

    I was hopeful that the pandemic might cause a recalibration and a return to more nature-based life. To an extent it did but the techno giants are creeping back into every crevice of life and I, for one, wish to raise my hand in dissent.

    I wouldn't go as far as gluing myself to a motorway or throwing paint over a famous canvass but the techno west's merry-go-round is so very wrong on so many levels.
  • Options
    Heathener said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
    More basic. It goes along the lines of quoting the email of the customer and saying how we would deal with it, but this has been prefaced to begin with by saying they need to give it in a professional way.

    I have told my main email handler for all of December he MUST use this and only if at the end of the month if his emails have improved then he can not do so. Progress! :)
    I would be slightly cautious about using it for professional work, especially if there is client-confidential data in anything you input. Not only is all the work being sent to an 'unknown' server; but the data might end up in a training data set.
    It's clear this is the future
    Dystopia

    Having dissed those who find change hard to adapt to, there are some (many) things about modern life from which I recoil.

    I was hopeful that the pandemic might cause a recalibration and a return to more nature-based life. To an extent it did but the techno giants are creeping back into every crevice of life and I, for one, wish to raise my hand in dissent.

    I wouldn't go as far as gluing myself to a motorway or throwing paint over a famous canvass but the techno west's merry-go-round is so very wrong on so many levels.
    Correct and I don't like it either, but it's happening sadly.
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
    Actually, there's a thought - will there be a future whereby parents buy customised AI bots to their liking that parent their kids to their style?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Heathener said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
    More basic. It goes along the lines of quoting the email of the customer and saying how we would deal with it, but this has been prefaced to begin with by saying they need to give it in a professional way.

    I have told my main email handler for all of December he MUST use this and only if at the end of the month if his emails have improved then he can not do so. Progress! :)
    I would be slightly cautious about using it for professional work, especially if there is client-confidential data in anything you input. Not only is all the work being sent to an 'unknown' server; but the data might end up in a training data set.
    It's clear this is the future
    Dystopia

    Having dissed those who find change hard to adapt to, there are some (many) things about modern life from which I recoil.

    I was hopeful that the pandemic might cause a recalibration and a return to more nature-based life. To an extent it did but the techno giants are creeping back into every crevice of life and I, for one, wish to raise my hand in dissent.

    I wouldn't go as far as gluing myself to a motorway or throwing paint over a famous canvass but the techno west's merry-go-round is so very wrong on so many levels.
    I'm intensely relaxed about it. The last few centuries have seen massive amounts of compressed change, and we coped. As I've said passim, my great-granddad lived from something like the 1870s to the 1960s, and the changes he saw in life far outstrip what we are seeing today. My dad was probably the last generation taught to plough with horses for 'real' use, immediately after the war.

    And yet I'd rather live as an 'ordinary' person today than in 1870. Or 1970, for that matter.

    Yes, the country does face problems, as does the world. But we will muddle through, as we always have done.
  • Options
    Mikest1982Mikest1982 Posts: 84
    edited December 2022
    "The more things change, the more they stay the same" - ChatGPT

    Wait, is that right? ;)

    Heathener said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
    More basic. It goes along the lines of quoting the email of the customer and saying how we would deal with it, but this has been prefaced to begin with by saying they need to give it in a professional way.

    I have told my main email handler for all of December he MUST use this and only if at the end of the month if his emails have improved then he can not do so. Progress! :)
    I would be slightly cautious about using it for professional work, especially if there is client-confidential data in anything you input. Not only is all the work being sent to an 'unknown' server; but the data might end up in a training data set.
    It's clear this is the future
    Dystopia

    Having dissed those who find change hard to adapt to, there are some (many) things about modern life from which I recoil.

    I was hopeful that the pandemic might cause a recalibration and a return to more nature-based life. To an extent it did but the techno giants are creeping back into every crevice of life and I, for one, wish to raise my hand in dissent.

    I wouldn't go as far as gluing myself to a motorway or throwing paint over a famous canvass but the techno west's merry-go-round is so very wrong on so many levels.
    I'm intensely relaxed about it. The last few centuries have seen massive amounts of compressed change, and we coped. As I've said passim, my great-granddad lived from something like the 1870s to the 1960s, and the changes he saw in life far outstrip what we are seeing today. My dad was probably the last generation taught to plough with horses for 'real' use, immediately after the war.

    And yet I'd rather live as an 'ordinary' person today than in 1870. Or 1970, for that matter.

    Yes, the country does face problems, as does the world. But we will muddle through, as we always have done.
  • Options
    I'm still on a Lab maj of around the 50-60 mark. Nothing terribly spectacular, but perfectly serviceable. The Kwarteng budget, the Truss disaster, cost of living crisis and "time for a change" have ended the Tories chances next time round. They won't be decimated a la 45 or 97, but they will be out of power for at the very least one term; quite possibly two. Frankly, the way they have carried on over the past few years it is deserved.
  • Options
    'terms' (it's early and bloody freezing)...
  • Options
    These are the geographical breaks from the same poll:

    London
    Lab 60%
    Con 17%
    LD 12%
    Grn 5%
    Ref 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 40%
    Con 32%
    LD 11%
    Grn 8%
    Ref 8%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 46%
    Con 25%
    Ref 9%
    LD 8%
    Grn 7%
    PC 3%

    North
    Lab 60%
    Con 18%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 5%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 43%
    Lab 29%
    Con 12%
    Ref 6%
    LD 6%
    Grn 4%
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,582
    edited December 2022
    Why will the Tories be sub 200 seats? Because of morons like Opperman. Apparently building a coal mine is carbon neutral, providing you don't burn the coal! So that's fine then...

    https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1600998426296324097?t=Bu6ZgwXYDx1n-wDeOWlrwA&s=19
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Foxy said:

    Why will the Tories be sub 200 seats? Because of morons like Opperman. Apparently building a coal mine is carbon neutral, providing you don't burn the coal! So that's fine then...

    https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1600998426296324097?t=Bu6ZgwXYDx1n-wDeOWlrwA&s=19

    You are against this coal mine, then?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937

    "The more things change, the more they stay the same" - ChatGPT

    Wait, is that right? ;)

    Heathener said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
    More basic. It goes along the lines of quoting the email of the customer and saying how we would deal with it, but this has been prefaced to begin with by saying they need to give it in a professional way.

    I have told my main email handler for all of December he MUST use this and only if at the end of the month if his emails have improved then he can not do so. Progress! :)
    I would be slightly cautious about using it for professional work, especially if there is client-confidential data in anything you input. Not only is all the work being sent to an 'unknown' server; but the data might end up in a training data set.
    It's clear this is the future
    Dystopia

    Having dissed those who find change hard to adapt to, there are some (many) things about modern life from which I recoil.

    I was hopeful that the pandemic might cause a recalibration and a return to more nature-based life. To an extent it did but the techno giants are creeping back into every crevice of life and I, for one, wish to raise my hand in dissent.

    I wouldn't go as far as gluing myself to a motorway or throwing paint over a famous canvass but the techno west's merry-go-round is so very wrong on so many levels.
    I'm intensely relaxed about it. The last few centuries have seen massive amounts of compressed change, and we coped. As I've said passim, my great-granddad lived from something like the 1870s to the 1960s, and the changes he saw in life far outstrip what we are seeing today. My dad was probably the last generation taught to plough with horses for 'real' use, immediately after the war.

    And yet I'd rather live as an 'ordinary' person today than in 1870. Or 1970, for that matter.

    Yes, the country does face problems, as does the world. But we will muddle through, as we always have done.
    Nope.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,582

    These are the geographical breaks from the same poll:

    London
    Lab 60%
    Con 17%
    LD 12%
    Grn 5%
    Ref 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 40%
    Con 32%
    LD 11%
    Grn 8%
    Ref 8%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 46%
    Con 25%
    Ref 9%
    LD 8%
    Grn 7%
    PC 3%

    North
    Lab 60%
    Con 18%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 5%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 43%
    Lab 29%
    Con 12%
    Ref 6%
    LD 6%
    Grn 4%

    Looks like a Tory blood bath, even if some of the DKs do decide to vote for a donkey with a blue rosette.

    Lab 8% ahead in "Rest of South" and 21% ahead in "Midlands and Wales".
  • Options
    Touche

    "The more things change, the more they stay the same" - ChatGPT

    Wait, is that right? ;)

    Heathener said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
    More basic. It goes along the lines of quoting the email of the customer and saying how we would deal with it, but this has been prefaced to begin with by saying they need to give it in a professional way.

    I have told my main email handler for all of December he MUST use this and only if at the end of the month if his emails have improved then he can not do so. Progress! :)
    I would be slightly cautious about using it for professional work, especially if there is client-confidential data in anything you input. Not only is all the work being sent to an 'unknown' server; but the data might end up in a training data set.
    It's clear this is the future
    Dystopia

    Having dissed those who find change hard to adapt to, there are some (many) things about modern life from which I recoil.

    I was hopeful that the pandemic might cause a recalibration and a return to more nature-based life. To an extent it did but the techno giants are creeping back into every crevice of life and I, for one, wish to raise my hand in dissent.

    I wouldn't go as far as gluing myself to a motorway or throwing paint over a famous canvass but the techno west's merry-go-round is so very wrong on so many levels.
    I'm intensely relaxed about it. The last few centuries have seen massive amounts of compressed change, and we coped. As I've said passim, my great-granddad lived from something like the 1870s to the 1960s, and the changes he saw in life far outstrip what we are seeing today. My dad was probably the last generation taught to plough with horses for 'real' use, immediately after the war.

    And yet I'd rather live as an 'ordinary' person today than in 1870. Or 1970, for that matter.

    Yes, the country does face problems, as does the world. But we will muddle through, as we always have done.
    Nope.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,582

    Foxy said:

    Why will the Tories be sub 200 seats? Because of morons like Opperman. Apparently building a coal mine is carbon neutral, providing you don't burn the coal! So that's fine then...

    https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1600998426296324097?t=Bu6ZgwXYDx1n-wDeOWlrwA&s=19

    You are against this coal mine, then?
    I have no opinion on it.

    Idiotic to argue that it is carbon neutral provided you don't burn the coal.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,985
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Why will the Tories be sub 200 seats? Because of morons like Opperman. Apparently building a coal mine is carbon neutral, providing you don't burn the coal! So that's fine then...

    https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1600998426296324097?t=Bu6ZgwXYDx1n-wDeOWlrwA&s=19

    You are against this coal mine, then?
    I have no opinion on it.

    Idiotic to argue that it is carbon neutral provided you don't burn the coal.
    Hopefully XR/JSO/Greens make it impractical and/or too expensive to operate.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Why will the Tories be sub 200 seats? Because of morons like Opperman. Apparently building a coal mine is carbon neutral, providing you don't burn the coal! So that's fine then...

    https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1600998426296324097?t=Bu6ZgwXYDx1n-wDeOWlrwA&s=19

    You are against this coal mine, then?
    I have no opinion on it.

    Idiotic to argue that it is carbon neutral provided you don't burn the coal.
    The mining can be carbon neutral - and many mining companies are striving towards that. Idiotic to say otherwise. ;)

    And if the coal replaces 'dirtier' types of coal, then it may actually be a positive (though worse than not burning coal at all).
  • Options
    Heathener said:

    On topic, I fully agree with OGH.

    Of course you do.

    Older people generally find change difficult to accept or believe. More than youngsters they tend to pin their assessment of the world on what has happened before. This isn't all bad. Often it displays the great wisdom of experience.

    However, when a sea-change in attitudes occurs older people generally take longer to catch up.

    The other category who are finding it hard to accept are the blue filter tories. They see the world through a prism and cling to every last vestige of hope. Just as love is blind so are beliefs.

    This is not intended to be taken as personal, or rude, it's just that the objective, empirical, evidence all points to a sea change in this country. You simply don't come back from poll deficits like these. It's like 1945 again or 1997, and there is nothing now the tories can do to avert the electoral catastrophe that is coming their way.
    How much of your own money have you bet on this?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    It's amazing how the left's view on coal mining has changed over the decades. Forty years ago they were manning the picket lines with the miners; today they don't care about miners.

    Oh, hang on. It wasn't decades ago. Seven years ago:
    "Corbynmania went into orbit when the Labour leadership frontrunner revealed he would reopen coal mines if he becomes Prime Minister."

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/labour-leadership-contender-jeremy-corbyn-9817411
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,939

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Why will the Tories be sub 200 seats? Because of morons like Opperman. Apparently building a coal mine is carbon neutral, providing you don't burn the coal! So that's fine then...

    https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1600998426296324097?t=Bu6ZgwXYDx1n-wDeOWlrwA&s=19

    You are against this coal mine, then?
    I have no opinion on it.

    Idiotic to argue that it is carbon neutral provided you don't burn the coal.
    The mining can be carbon neutral - and many mining companies are striving towards that. Idiotic to say otherwise. ;)

    And if the coal replaces 'dirtier' types of coal, then it may actually be a positive (though worse than not burning coal at all).
    There are also cleaner and dirtier ways to burn coal.

    I'm a big fan of in situ gasification, which would be a great way to exploit the UK's massive deposits under the North Sea.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,582

    It's amazing how the left's view on coal mining has changed over the decades. Forty years ago they were manning the picket lines with the miners; today they don't care about miners.

    Oh, hang on. It wasn't decades ago. Seven years ago:
    "Corbynmania went into orbit when the Labour leadership frontrunner revealed he would reopen coal mines if he becomes Prime Minister."

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/labour-leadership-contender-jeremy-corbyn-9817411

    The Tories do keep copying Corbyns manifesto!
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    It's amazing how the left's view on coal mining has changed over the decades. Forty years ago they were manning the picket lines with the miners; today they don't care about miners.

    Oh, hang on. It wasn't decades ago. Seven years ago:
    "Corbynmania went into orbit when the Labour leadership frontrunner revealed he would reopen coal mines if he becomes Prime Minister."

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/labour-leadership-contender-jeremy-corbyn-9817411

    The Tories do keep copying Corbyns manifesto!
    Not to mention his trajectory towards extreme unelectability.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Off-topic:

    The Merriam-Webster dictionary has a 'time machine' option, showing (they claim) when a word first appeared in print. It's quite fun.

    For instance, 400 years ago "Scotchwoman" first appeared in print. And in a foreshadowing of Leon, so did "superintellectual"

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/time-traveler/1622

    I'm glad to have exposed this flummery, and hope you will be forgiving as I enunciate the scenic but latterly inexplainable time-based etymology of our urbane language.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Foxy said:

    It's amazing how the left's view on coal mining has changed over the decades. Forty years ago they were manning the picket lines with the miners; today they don't care about miners.

    Oh, hang on. It wasn't decades ago. Seven years ago:
    "Corbynmania went into orbit when the Labour leadership frontrunner revealed he would reopen coal mines if he becomes Prime Minister."

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/labour-leadership-contender-jeremy-corbyn-9817411

    The Tories do keep copying Corbyns manifesto!
    It isn't though, if you read what he said. ;)
  • Options
    Good morning, everyone.

    Question for the green enthusiasts: without coal, how do you make steel? If you're not making wind turbines (and many other things) from steel, what are you going to use?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,256

    Heathener said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Welp, I'm with Leon on this ChatGPT aka OpenAI matter.

    I run a business and we are already looking at ways we can train the first line of staff who answer emails to use this to improve how they respond.

    I've been trying to persuade my kids to run their homework through it: this is the question, this is my answer, what am I missing?
    More basic. It goes along the lines of quoting the email of the customer and saying how we would deal with it, but this has been prefaced to begin with by saying they need to give it in a professional way.

    I have told my main email handler for all of December he MUST use this and only if at the end of the month if his emails have improved then he can not do so. Progress! :)
    I would be slightly cautious about using it for professional work, especially if there is client-confidential data in anything you input. Not only is all the work being sent to an 'unknown' server; but the data might end up in a training data set.
    It's clear this is the future
    Dystopia

    Having dissed those who find change hard to adapt to, there are some (many) things about modern life from which I recoil.

    I was hopeful that the pandemic might cause a recalibration and a return to more nature-based life. To an extent it did but the techno giants are creeping back into every crevice of life and I, for one, wish to raise my hand in dissent.

    I wouldn't go as far as gluing myself to a motorway or throwing paint over a famous canvass but the techno west's merry-go-round is so very wrong on so many levels.
    I'm intensely relaxed about it. The last few centuries have seen massive amounts of compressed change, and we coped. As I've said passim, my great-granddad lived from something like the 1870s to the 1960s, and the changes he saw in life far outstrip what we are seeing today. My dad was probably the last generation taught to plough with horses for 'real' use, immediately after the war.

    And yet I'd rather live as an 'ordinary' person today than in 1870. Or 1970, for that matter.

    Yes, the country does face problems, as does the world. But we will muddle through, as we always have done.
    On Tuesday I was wandering round the St Paul’s area in London, where I started work in the early ‘80s; of course the area has changed remarkably since then - but it occurred to me that counting the same number of years back from when I started work and London would have been at wartime; something that already seemed like ancient history when I started my working life. Whether life, culture and society have changed more between 1980 and 2020 than they did between 1940 and 1980 is an interesting question. The answer, probably, is that change doesn’t feel so dramatic if you’ve live through it and seen it gradually.
  • Options
    England shitting the bed in Multan.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,256
    edited December 2022

    Off-topic:

    The Merriam-Webster dictionary has a 'time machine' option, showing (they claim) when a word first appeared in print. It's quite fun.

    For instance, 400 years ago "Scotchwoman" first appeared in print. And in a foreshadowing of Leon, so did "superintellectual"

    In the same vein, I see that the first use of ‘twat’ was in 1656.
  • Options
    On topic, indeed, and lest we forget Corbyn's toxic legacy where he bequeathed Starmer fewer MPs than Michael Foot won in 1983.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,582

    Good morning, everyone.

    Question for the green enthusiasts: without coal, how do you make steel? If you're not making wind turbines (and many other things) from steel, what are you going to use?

    Electric arc furnaces using renewable energy, particularly good for scrap steel it seems.

    Currently we export most of our scrap steel for processing elsewhere. Incidentally 83% of the coal produced by the new mine is for export too.

  • Options

    Good morning, everyone.

    Question for the green enthusiasts: without coal, how do you make steel? If you're not making wind turbines (and many other things) from steel, what are you going to use?

    The piss & wind from Brexiteers, Scot Nats, and the Just Stop Oil mobs.
  • Options
    A Michelle before lunch on day one on your test debut is quite impressive.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,256
    edited December 2022
    Heathener said:

    On topic, I fully agree with OGH.

    You simply don't come back from poll deficits like these.
    Despite your analysis of the trashing of the Tory brand probably being on the money, that comment of yours is actually wrong, isn’t it? History shows that you pretty much always come back from poll deficits like those; the question is simply how far?

    I doubt fear/mistrust of Labour has completely disappeared merely because Corbyn is out of the party. Mike is right that many of those hesitant Tories will return, Big_G style, when it comes to the vote - and that not insignificant number telling pollsters they will vote Reform most likely won’t have that option when it comes to the real vote. Plus the system is effectively weighted to favour the Tories, especially under the new boundaries, and it is ever so easy to forget that this is so. Who remembers, now, that more people voted for anti-Brexit or second referendum parties last time; even the BBC occasionally slips and reports that ‘most people’ voted for Brexit in 2019.

    I am pretty sure, like you, that the Tories will lose next time, but am also conscious that I want this to be so. I don’t think an unprecedented wipeout is as yet nailed on.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    This is where Ben Foakes might have been useful…

    It’s also where an attempt to bat time would have been sensible.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    This is where Ben Foakes might have been useful…

    It’s also where an attempt to bat time would have been sensible.

    He's not getting the gloves back when Bairstow's fit.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,256
    One thing is for sure; you hear more music in London from the 1980s nowadays than you heard from the 1940s during the 1980s!
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    ydoethur said:

    This is where Ben Foakes might have been useful…

    It’s also where an attempt to bat time would have been sensible.

    He's not getting the gloves back when Bairstow's fit.
    If not, more fool Brendon McCullum.

    Brook should be the one to make way for Bairstow until he’s learned judgement.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,492
    Leon said:

    TwitterFiles2 is gonna be waaaaaaay bigger than the first iteration

    10x a nothingburger is just a bigger .nothingburger

    And I bet Musk doesn't publish any of the communications from the Trump camp over the story.
    So far the 'openness' has been entirely one sided.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,492
    ydoethur said:

    This is where Ben Foakes might have been useful…

    It’s also where an attempt to bat time would have been sensible.

    Let's see Pakistan bat before we reach a conclusion.

    Though I have to agree this looks more of a Foakes pitch.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Foxy said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Question for the green enthusiasts: without coal, how do you make steel? If you're not making wind turbines (and many other things) from steel, what are you going to use?

    Electric arc furnaces using renewable energy, particularly good for scrap steel it seems.

    Currently we export most of our scrap steel for processing elsewhere. Incidentally 83% of the coal produced by the new mine is for export too.

    We've been exporting scrap for decades. Back in the 1980s my dad had a very large pile of scrap structural steel in a yard that was waiting for the price to increase. After a year or so it all went to a local scrapyard, and then onto a ship to China.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    This is where Ben Foakes might have been useful…

    It’s also where an attempt to bat time would have been sensible.

    He's not getting the gloves back when Bairstow's fit.
    If not, more fool Brendon McCullum.

    Brook should be the one to make way for Bairstow until he’s learned judgement.
    Are you doubting the wisdom of Brendon McCullum?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    IanB2 said:

    Off-topic:

    The Merriam-Webster dictionary has a 'time machine' option, showing (they claim) when a word first appeared in print. It's quite fun.

    For instance, 400 years ago "Scotchwoman" first appeared in print. And in a foreshadowing of Leon, so did "superintellectual"

    In the same vein, I see that the first use of ‘twat’ was in 1656.
    So "superintellectual" came before twat. I can see how the former could cause someone to say the latter ... ;)
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,492

    Good morning, everyone.

    Question for the green enthusiasts: without coal, how do you make steel? If you're not making wind turbines (and many other things) from steel, what are you going to use?

    https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/08/cumbria-coalmine-is-owned-by-private-equity-firm-with-caymans-base
    ...West Cumbria Mining is promoting the use of its coking coal in the UK steel industry, with the slogan: “Great coal, great steel, Great Britain.” However, the vast majority of the coal produced will be exported, because most UK steel producers have rejected the coal, which is high in sulphur and surplus to their needs. European steelmakers are also turning away from coal to pursue electric arc furnaces and renewable energy....
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,492

    A Michelle before lunch on day one on your test debut is quite impressive.

    Are we having a Mone about it ?
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,157
    ydoethur said:

    This is where Ben Foakes might have been useful…

    It’s also where an attempt to bat time would have been sensible.

    Alternative hupothesis is that bad though it looks, previous England sides would have been 70-5, not 180-5. This is a different pitch to the last one.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    Yougov have RefUK much higher than other pollsters at 8%, and most of that to the Tories share and they are on 30% even without any gains back from Labour
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,015
    Heathener said:

    I'm not going to keep repeating why I'm sure @MikeSmithson is wrong about this. He's not going to change his mind, I don't think,

    But, yes, I'm sure he's wrong. This isn't some flash in the pan lead. It's a sea-change in British politics, such as happens once in a generation at best.

    I will just point out though that the rot set in long before Truss and Kwarteng. It's revisionist to suggest otherwise. Labour will hardly need to remind us about the awful pandemic experiences in which Boris' sleazy tories told us one thing and practised another. The visceral erosion of tory support began long ago. Boris was found to be totally unsuitable for the top job and the chaos began back then. And I need hardly add that the Brexit which Boris delivered us has found to be a disaster. Even my Leave friends are now saying it.

    I suggest that we should all be thinking of the opposite: just how HUGE might Labour's lead be? How low will the tory numbers fall? The reason many of them are starting to leave the ship is because they know it's sinking.

    I suggest the ballpark figure is 100-150 tory MPs but it could go lower if circumstances continue to conspire against them, which seems pretty likely.

    That’s an emotional response not a data driven one. You may be right but it’s a dangerous approach to betting

  • Options
    Foxy said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Question for the green enthusiasts: without coal, how do you make steel? If you're not making wind turbines (and many other things) from steel, what are you going to use?

    Electric arc furnaces using renewable energy, particularly good for scrap steel it seems.

    Currently we export most of our scrap steel for processing elsewhere. Incidentally 83% of the coal produced by the new mine is for export too.

    I think it's more strategic: it's westernising coking coal production that we'd otherwise have to source from Russia and China.

    It probably lowers carbon emissions overall due to much longer transits required for the coal from those countries, and this has a 25 year lifespan only so it's a bridging facility.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    This is where Ben Foakes might have been useful…

    It’s also where an attempt to bat time would have been sensible.

    He's not getting the gloves back when Bairstow's fit.
    If not, more fool Brendon McCullum.

    Brook should be the one to make way for Bairstow until he’s learned judgement.
    Are you doubting the wisdom of Brendon McCullum?
    Peter Moores started well too.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,492

    ydoethur said:

    This is where Ben Foakes might have been useful…

    It’s also where an attempt to bat time would have been sensible.

    Alternative hupothesis is that bad though it looks, previous England sides would have been 70-5, not 180-5. This is a different pitch to the last one.
    Unlike the previous game, this is very much a bowlers' pitch, and given the test team's previous struggles against decent spin, you're probably right.
    Let's see how our bowlers do.
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,164
  • Options

    It's amazing how the left's view on coal mining has changed over the decades. Forty years ago they were manning the picket lines with the miners; today they don't care about miners.

    Oh, hang on. It wasn't decades ago. Seven years ago:
    "Corbynmania went into orbit when the Labour leadership frontrunner revealed he would reopen coal mines if he becomes Prime Minister."

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/labour-leadership-contender-jeremy-corbyn-9817411

    Also the right for the reverse reason. Hilarious to see wazzocks like Darren Grimes championing miners and mining from the right.

    Nobody wins making party political points from decades ago. So much has changed.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    IanB2 said:

    Off-topic:

    The Merriam-Webster dictionary has a 'time machine' option, showing (they claim) when a word first appeared in print. It's quite fun.

    For instance, 400 years ago "Scotchwoman" first appeared in print. And in a foreshadowing of Leon, so did "superintellectual"

    In the same vein, I see that the first use of ‘twat’ was in 1656.
    So "superintellectual" came before twat. I can see how the former could cause someone to say the latter ... ;)
    Superintellectuals and twats go together of course:

    https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/735078-the-poet-robert-browning-caused-considerable-consternation-by-including-the

    (The link isn't a terribly accurate account of what happened but it will do.)
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    This is where Ben Foakes might have been useful…

    It’s also where an attempt to bat time would have been sensible.

    He's not getting the gloves back when Bairstow's fit.
    If not, more fool Brendon McCullum.

    Brook should be the one to make way for Bairstow until he’s learned judgement.
    Are you doubting the wisdom of Brendon McCullum?
    Peter Moores started well too.
    He was so awesome that they brought him back for a second stint.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,492
    edited December 2022

    Foxy said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Question for the green enthusiasts: without coal, how do you make steel? If you're not making wind turbines (and many other things) from steel, what are you going to use?

    Electric arc furnaces using renewable energy, particularly good for scrap steel it seems.

    Currently we export most of our scrap steel for processing elsewhere. Incidentally 83% of the coal produced by the new mine is for export too.

    I think it's more strategic: it's westernising coking coal production that we'd otherwise have to source from Russia and China...
    Or Australia or the US.

    And we're expecting to export over 85% of production.

    It's not strategic at all; it's an offshore private equity project that makes very little sense from the POV of the UK.
  • Options
    I agree with Mike. If you take Scotland out of the equation, as you should, Labour needs huge gains in England to get to a majority and pretty substantial ones to get to a plurality. While I can see the latter happening, the former still seems a stretch to me. As much as I’d love to see people like Rees Mogg lose their seats, it’s hard to imagine it happening when push comes to shove. As things stand, I expect Starmer to be the next PM, but for Labour to be a minority government.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937

    It's amazing how the left's view on coal mining has changed over the decades. Forty years ago they were manning the picket lines with the miners; today they don't care about miners.

    Oh, hang on. It wasn't decades ago. Seven years ago:
    "Corbynmania went into orbit when the Labour leadership frontrunner revealed he would reopen coal mines if he becomes Prime Minister."

    https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/labour-leadership-contender-jeremy-corbyn-9817411

    Also the right for the reverse reason. Hilarious to see wazzocks like Darren Grimes championing miners and mining from the right.

    Nobody wins making party political points from decades ago. So much has changed.
    Darren Grimes was not leader of a major political party, who nearly made it into government. And 2015 was not 'decades ago'.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,015
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Why will the Tories be sub 200 seats? Because of morons like Opperman. Apparently building a coal mine is carbon neutral, providing you don't burn the coal! So that's fine then...

    https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1600998426296324097?t=Bu6ZgwXYDx1n-wDeOWlrwA&s=19

    You are against this coal mine, then?
    I have no opinion on it.

    Idiotic to argue that it is carbon neutral provided you don't burn the coal.
    No - it depends how you define your terms
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,157
    There is a significant role for this type of land management, but the pro dredgers are more for areas such as the Somerset levels. It’s not run off from hard standing that’s the issue there, it’s that the land was drained by man, and if you stop draining it (partly by dredging to keep the water moving) it floods.
    If you want to return to a time before man and flood the levels, then fine. Buy out those who live there and let nature take its course.
    If you aren’t prepared to do that, some dredging will be needed.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    This is where Ben Foakes might have been useful…

    It’s also where an attempt to bat time would have been sensible.

    He's not getting the gloves back when Bairstow's fit.
    If not, more fool Brendon McCullum.

    Brook should be the one to make way for Bairstow until he’s learned judgement.
    Are you doubting the wisdom of Brendon McCullum?
    Peter Moores started well too.
    He was so awesome that they brought him back for a second stint.
    What Einstein probably didn't say about insanity.
  • Options
    All South Koreans to become younger as traditional age system scrapped
    ...
    Koreans are deemed to be a year old when born and a year is added every 1 January. It’s this age most commonly cited by Koreans in everyday life.

    A separate system also exists for conscription purposes or calculating the legal age to drink alcohol and smoke, in which a person’s age is calculated from zero at birth and a year is added on 1 January.

    Since the early 1960s, however, South Korea has for medical and legal documents also used the international norm of calculating from zero at birth and adding a year on every birthday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/09/all-south-koreans-to-become-younger-as-traditional-age-system-scrapped

    Globalisation claims another victim.
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    These are the geographical breaks from the same poll:

    London
    Lab 60%
    Con 17%
    LD 12%
    Grn 5%
    Ref 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 40%
    Con 32%
    LD 11%
    Grn 8%
    Ref 8%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 46%
    Con 25%
    Ref 9%
    LD 8%
    Grn 7%
    PC 3%

    North
    Lab 60%
    Con 18%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 5%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 43%
    Lab 29%
    Con 12%
    Ref 6%
    LD 6%
    Grn 4%

    Looks like a Tory blood bath, even if some of the DKs do decide to vote for a donkey with a blue rosette.

    Lab 8% ahead in "Rest of South" and 21% ahead in "Midlands and Wales".
    I think nearly all those Ref votes will end up voting Con, so Midlands and Rest of South still reasonably competitive, but the Tories are heading for obliteration everywhere else. Differential turnout could be key. Starmer ought to be terrified of Lab Maj becoming the accepted wisdom.
  • Options
    Interesting answers on arc furnaces. I'll look into that and see what to make of it.
  • Options

    I agree with Mike. If you take Scotland out of the equation, as you should, Labour needs huge gains in England to get to a majority and pretty substantial ones to get to a plurality. While I can see the latter happening, the former still seems a stretch to me. As much as I’d love to see people like Rees Mogg lose their seats, it’s hard to imagine it happening when push comes to shove. As things stand, I expect Starmer to be the next PM, but for Labour to be a minority government.

    Starmer has entirely given up on Scotland. His every move is focused on Middle England.

    Wise in the short term, but idiotic in the long term. Scotland is off, and with her disappears much of England’s energy and water. And sole nuclear base.

    Falmouth: don’t say you weren’t warned!
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,572
    edited December 2022
    The coal mine is another example, along with the shenanigans around the NIP, of the conservative government indulging in projects that impair the UK’s soft power and brand value way more than any conceivable financial benefit.

    The mine will be tiny, produce mediocre coal and probably have a foreshortened useful economic life as met coal gets phased out of steel production in the next couple of decades. Makes no economic sense. Meanwhile - completely out of proportion to any environmental impact of the mine itself - it
    gives every country under pressure to reduce coal use the opportunity to point and shout hypocrite, and carry on as before.

    The national brand wrecking equivalent of a brand like John Lewis cutting costs by using sweatshop child labour for its clothing.
  • Options
    For our friends in the north:

    The SNP /Green Government is considering higher income tax rates for Scots earning over £43,663 in a bid to shore up public services. Ministers are looking at whether to put up the 41p and 46p rates in next week’s Budget.

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/scottish-government-considering-income-tax-28687827?
  • Options
    RattersRatters Posts: 776
    edited December 2022
    I think it's a mistake to see 2019 as the true baseline here. That was an exceptional election where a significant part of the electorate leant the Tories their vote to 'get Brexit done' and where Boris was perceived as very different to traditional Tories.

    The Tory election results from between 2010 and 2017 where they won between 300 and 320 seats are a more useful baseline from which to assess likely changes. I think their economic and political position is far worse than in any of those.

    How badly they do will depend on part on whether we are through to people's disposable incomes improving again by then.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,939

    Interesting answers on arc furnaces. I'll look into that and see what to make of it.

    Re steel, it's complicated.

    Coal (metallurgical, not thermal) is used in three different ways in the production of steel:

    - as a reducing agent
    - as a source of heat
    - as a source of carbon

    The heat component is fairly easy to replace, but the others are not so simple.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited December 2022

    I agree with Mike. If you take Scotland out of the equation, as you should, Labour needs huge gains in England to get to a majority and pretty substantial ones to get to a plurality. While I can see the latter happening, the former still seems a stretch to me. As much as I’d love to see people like Rees Mogg lose their seats, it’s hard to imagine it happening when push comes to shove. As things stand, I expect Starmer to be the next PM, but for Labour to be a minority government.

    Starmer has entirely given up on Scotland. His every move is focused on Middle England.

    Wise in the short term, but idiotic in the long term. Scotland is off, and with her disappears much of England’s energy and water. And sole nuclear base.

    Falmouth: don’t say you weren’t warned!
    You mean, like her offshore wind resources? Which are not nearly as large as England's?

    And Scotland does not, and never has, send water to England. Except bottled water, which is not really important in the grand scheme of things.
  • Options
    RH1992RH1992 Posts: 788
    edited December 2022

    I agree with Mike. If you take Scotland out of the equation, as you should, Labour needs huge gains in England to get to a majority and pretty substantial ones to get to a plurality. While I can see the latter happening, the former still seems a stretch to me. As much as I’d love to see people like Rees Mogg lose their seats, it’s hard to imagine it happening when push comes to shove. As things stand, I expect Starmer to be the next PM, but for Labour to be a minority government.

    Starmer has entirely given up on Scotland. His every move is focused on Middle England.

    Wise in the short term, but idiotic in the long term. Scotland is off, and with her disappears much of England’s energy and water. And sole nuclear base.

    Falmouth: don’t say you weren’t warned!
    Information requested
    I would like to know to what extent Scotland supplies England with water, how many water pipeline run from Scotland to England, can I see a map to this national linkup.

    Response
    The answer to your question is that whilst Scotland has a relative abundance of fresh water compared to an increasing number of parts of the world that are becoming water stressed due to population growth and climate factors, there are no current plans to export water to England or internationally.

    https://www.gov.scot/publications/foi-202000104273/
    Never let facts get in the way of a good grievance. It's the way of the Scottish nationalist.

    Let's also not forget that the two largest offshore wind farms on the planet are off the coast of Yorkshire, not Edinburgh.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,492
    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting answers on arc furnaces. I'll look into that and see what to make of it.

    Re steel, it's complicated.

    Coal (metallurgical, not thermal) is used in three different ways in the production of steel:

    - as a reducing agent
    - as a source of heat
    - as a source of carbon

    The heat component is fairly easy to replace, but the others are not so simple.
    Nor is the Cumbria coal particularly desirable for them.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    RH1992 said:

    I agree with Mike. If you take Scotland out of the equation, as you should, Labour needs huge gains in England to get to a majority and pretty substantial ones to get to a plurality. While I can see the latter happening, the former still seems a stretch to me. As much as I’d love to see people like Rees Mogg lose their seats, it’s hard to imagine it happening when push comes to shove. As things stand, I expect Starmer to be the next PM, but for Labour to be a minority government.

    Starmer has entirely given up on Scotland. His every move is focused on Middle England.

    Wise in the short term, but idiotic in the long term. Scotland is off, and with her disappears much of England’s energy and water. And sole nuclear base.

    Falmouth: don’t say you weren’t warned!
    Information requested
    I would like to know to what extent Scotland supplies England with water, how many water pipeline run from Scotland to England, can I see a map to this national linkup.

    Response
    The answer to your question is that whilst Scotland has a relative abundance of fresh water compared to an increasing number of parts of the world that are becoming water stressed due to population growth and climate factors, there are no current plans to export water to England or internationally.

    https://www.gov.scot/publications/foi-202000104273/
    Never let facts get in the way of a good grievance. It's the way of the Scottish nationalist.

    Let's also not forget that the two largest offshore wind farms on the planet are off the coast of Yorkshire, not Edinburgh.
    I think he's confusing Scotland and Wales. Which *does* export vast amounts of water to England.

    He isn't really a grievance merchant though. Just an English-hating bully.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189
    TimS said:

    The coal mine is another example, along with the shenanigans around the NIP, of the conservative government indulging in projects that impair the UK’s soft power and brand value way more than any conceivable financial benefit.

    The mine will be tiny, produce mediocre coal and probably have a foreshortened useful economic life as met coal gets phased out of steel production in the next couple of decades. Makes no economic sense. Meanwhile - completely out of proportion to any environmental impact of the mine itself - it
    gives every country under pressure to reduce coal use the opportunity to point and shout hypocrite, and carry on as before.

    The national brand wrecking equivalent of a brand like John Lewis cutting costs by using sweatshop child labour for its clothing.

    I can't pretend to know about the economics of the mine or the likely trajectory of the steel industry. However, so long as no public money is at risk, I'm not all that fussed.

    However, on the point about "optics", I'm sorry, but it's bollocks. If the rest of the world is so immature as to wilfully conflate coking coal and thermal coal, then we're fucked anyway.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    tlg86 said:

    TimS said:

    The coal mine is another example, along with the shenanigans around the NIP, of the conservative government indulging in projects that impair the UK’s soft power and brand value way more than any conceivable financial benefit.

    The mine will be tiny, produce mediocre coal and probably have a foreshortened useful economic life as met coal gets phased out of steel production in the next couple of decades. Makes no economic sense. Meanwhile - completely out of proportion to any environmental impact of the mine itself - it
    gives every country under pressure to reduce coal use the opportunity to point and shout hypocrite, and carry on as before.

    The national brand wrecking equivalent of a brand like John Lewis cutting costs by using sweatshop child labour for its clothing.

    I can't pretend to know about the economics of the mine or the likely trajectory of the steel industry. However, so long as no public money is at risk, I'm not all that fussed.

    However, on the point about "optics", I'm sorry, but it's bollocks. If the rest of the world is so immature as to wilfully conflate coking coal and thermal coal, then we're fucked anyway.
    I think we should also remember if it wasn't that, they would find another excuse.

    Legacy burning of coal and oil is popular at the moment and fits in nicely with the agenda of those mad fascists Leon gets bent out by the international left.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    I agree with Mike. If you take Scotland out of the equation, as you should, Labour needs huge gains in England to get to a majority and pretty substantial ones to get to a plurality. While I can see the latter happening, the former still seems a stretch to me. As much as I’d love to see people like Rees Mogg lose their seats, it’s hard to imagine it happening when push comes to shove. As things stand, I expect Starmer to be the next PM, but for Labour to be a minority government.

    Starmer has entirely given up on Scotland. His every move is focused on Middle England.

    Wise in the short term, but idiotic in the long term. Scotland is off, and with her disappears much of England’s energy and water. And sole nuclear base.

    Falmouth: don’t say you weren’t warned!
    You mean, like her offshore wind resources? Which are not nearly as large as England's?

    And Scotland does not, and never has, send water to England. Except bottled water, which is not really important in the grand scheme of things.
    Scotland’s “exports” of power to rUK amounted to less than 5% total demand. And that’s before major English offshore wind farms come on line. In the 2014 SNP “Scotland’s Future” they were very keen to remain part of a single energy market in the U.K. I wonder why?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,256

    Heathener said:

    I'm not going to keep repeating why I'm sure @MikeSmithson is wrong about this. He's not going to change his mind, I don't think,

    But, yes, I'm sure he's wrong. This isn't some flash in the pan lead. It's a sea-change in British politics, such as happens once in a generation at best.

    I will just point out though that the rot set in long before Truss and Kwarteng. It's revisionist to suggest otherwise. Labour will hardly need to remind us about the awful pandemic experiences in which Boris' sleazy tories told us one thing and practised another. The visceral erosion of tory support began long ago. Boris was found to be totally unsuitable for the top job and the chaos began back then. And I need hardly add that the Brexit which Boris delivered us has found to be a disaster. Even my Leave friends are now saying it.

    I suggest that we should all be thinking of the opposite: just how HUGE might Labour's lead be? How low will the tory numbers fall? The reason many of them are starting to leave the ship is because they know it's sinking.

    I suggest the ballpark figure is 100-150 tory MPs but it could go lower if circumstances continue to conspire against them, which seems pretty likely.

    That’s an emotional response not a data driven one. You may be right but it’s a dangerous approach to betting

    For betting, we have our friend Big_G as our weathervane. He's now intending to vote Labour - if that's still the case come 2024, it'll be a Tory wipeout; if however by then he's found a reason to return to type, it's a straightforward defeat...
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited December 2022

    ydoethur said:

    I agree with Mike. If you take Scotland out of the equation, as you should, Labour needs huge gains in England to get to a majority and pretty substantial ones to get to a plurality. While I can see the latter happening, the former still seems a stretch to me. As much as I’d love to see people like Rees Mogg lose their seats, it’s hard to imagine it happening when push comes to shove. As things stand, I expect Starmer to be the next PM, but for Labour to be a minority government.

    Starmer has entirely given up on Scotland. His every move is focused on Middle England.

    Wise in the short term, but idiotic in the long term. Scotland is off, and with her disappears much of England’s energy and water. And sole nuclear base.

    Falmouth: don’t say you weren’t warned!
    You mean, like her offshore wind resources? Which are not nearly as large as England's?

    And Scotland does not, and never has, send water to England. Except bottled water, which is not really important in the grand scheme of things.
    Scotland’s “exports” of power to rUK amounted to less than 5% total demand. And that’s before major English offshore wind farms come on line. In the 2014 SNP “Scotland’s Future” they were very keen to remain part of a single energy market in the U.K. I wonder why?
    It was a reference to Stuart's last appearance on these boards, where he falsely claimed Scotland was a world leader in offshore wind power, not England, before we all roundly duffed him up for lying.

    Although to be fair, he was only repeating a lie that's very popular in the SNP at the moment. He may not have realised it wasn't true because he's never been one to check his facts.

    It's actually really quite disturbing to see the level of derangement Scottish Nationalism or, at least, a large and vocal chunk of it, seems to have developed. I'm starting to think I was unfair to Farage in comparing them to him.
  • Options
    So, glancing over the Wikipedia page, it seems electric arc furnaces are useful for effectively recycling scrap steel, and for smaller scale/stop-start production. But they cannot, it seems, be used for primary steelmaking.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_arc_furnace
  • Options

    All South Koreans to become younger as traditional age system scrapped
    ...
    Koreans are deemed to be a year old when born and a year is added every 1 January. It’s this age most commonly cited by Koreans in everyday life.

    A separate system also exists for conscription purposes or calculating the legal age to drink alcohol and smoke, in which a person’s age is calculated from zero at birth and a year is added on 1 January.

    Since the early 1960s, however, South Korea has for medical and legal documents also used the international norm of calculating from zero at birth and adding a year on every birthday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/09/all-south-koreans-to-become-younger-as-traditional-age-system-scrapped

    Globalisation claims another victim.

    Can you imagine if this was us? The kind of culture wars madness that would ensue if a government tried to move us to the global standard?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    All South Koreans to become younger as traditional age system scrapped
    ...
    Koreans are deemed to be a year old when born and a year is added every 1 January. It’s this age most commonly cited by Koreans in everyday life.

    A separate system also exists for conscription purposes or calculating the legal age to drink alcohol and smoke, in which a person’s age is calculated from zero at birth and a year is added on 1 January.

    Since the early 1960s, however, South Korea has for medical and legal documents also used the international norm of calculating from zero at birth and adding a year on every birthday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/09/all-south-koreans-to-become-younger-as-traditional-age-system-scrapped

    Globalisation claims another victim.

    Can you imagine if this was us? The kind of culture wars madness that would ensue if a government tried to move us to the global standard?
    Let's wait and see...
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189
    edited December 2022
    In some ways, what matters in life is what school year you are. Perhaps we should give our age relative to 1 September.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,511
    edited December 2022
    Heathener said:

    I'm not going to keep repeating why I'm sure @MikeSmithson is wrong about this. He's not going to change his mind, I don't think,

    But, yes, I'm sure he's wrong. This isn't some flash in the pan lead. It's a sea-change in British politics, such as happens once in a generation at best.

    I will just point out though that the rot set in long before Truss and Kwarteng. It's revisionist to suggest otherwise. Labour will hardly need to remind us about the awful pandemic experiences in which Boris' sleazy tories told us one thing and practised another. The visceral erosion of tory support began long ago. Boris was found to be totally unsuitable for the top job and the chaos began back then. And I need hardly add that the Brexit which Boris delivered us has found to be a disaster. Even my Leave friends are now saying it.

    I suggest that we should all be thinking of the opposite: just how HUGE might Labour's lead be? How low will the tory numbers fall? The reason many of them are starting to leave the ship is because they know it's sinking.

    I suggest the ballpark figure is 100-150 tory MPs but it could go lower if circumstances continue to conspire against them, which seems pretty likely.

    This may well be right. But 2 howevers.

    All prediction and betting is about probabilities. "Dobbin is nailed on to win the 2.30 at Newmarket" is shorthand for a rough statement about a specific event which always may or may not happen. "That so and so will occur" is a belief not a present fact (pace Aristotle's sea battle).

    The implication that it is a certainty Labour will win is therefore wrong.

    The second however is this. SFAICS no-one could put up a programme or manifesto which can be both any way truthful and leave the voter happy or assured that it can be achieved. Black swans and general uselessness have conspired to render this deeply improbable to a cynical, cold and poorer, sicker, harassed public.

    So, emotionally, it is unlikely anyone can 'win' the next election, but possible for any party to lose it. Labour are good at fouling up the moderate centre ground vote. That's why the Tories usually win elections. Polling in the last 24 months shows a weary and extremely changeable public mood. It could (though I believe won't) change back.

    But there is no chance that Labour making net gains of 125 seats is a certainty.

  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,939

    So, glancing over the Wikipedia page, it seems electric arc furnaces are useful for effectively recycling scrap steel, and for smaller scale/stop-start production. But they cannot, it seems, be used for primary steelmaking.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_arc_furnace

    That is correct (sort of). As I wrote below, coal has three roles in the primary production of steel.

    However... if coal was only used for its other two purposes: i.e. as a reducing agent and as a source of carbon, it would probably reduce coal usage in primary steel by 80% or so.

    Today, however, that doesn't make economic sense.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,717
    Heathener said:

    On topic, I fully agree with OGH.

    Of course you do.

    Older people generally find change difficult to accept or believe. More than youngsters they tend to pin their assessment of the world on what has happened before. This isn't all bad. Often it displays the great wisdom of experience.

    However, when a sea-change in attitudes occurs older people generally take longer to catch up.

    The other category who are finding it hard to accept are the blue filter tories. They see the world through a prism and cling to every last vestige of hope. Just as love is blind so are beliefs.

    This is not intended to be taken as personal, or rude, it's just that the objective, empirical, evidence all points to a sea change in this country. You simply don't come back from poll deficits like these. It's like 1945 again or 1997, and there is nothing now the tories can do to avert the electoral catastrophe that is coming their way.
    I agree with you about a labour majority, but dismissing those who disagree as because they are old and can't accept change is just dumb.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,540
    Heathener said:

    I'm not going to keep repeating why I'm sure @MikeSmithson is wrong about this. He's not going to change his mind, I don't think,

    But, yes, I'm sure he's wrong. This isn't some flash in the pan lead. It's a sea-change in British politics, such as happens once in a generation at best.

    I will just point out though that the rot set in long before Truss and Kwarteng. It's revisionist to suggest otherwise. Labour will hardly need to remind us about the awful pandemic experiences in which Boris' sleazy tories told us one thing and practised another. The visceral erosion of tory support began long ago. Boris was found to be totally unsuitable for the top job and the chaos began back then. And I need hardly add that the Brexit which Boris delivered us has found to be a disaster. Even my Leave friends are now saying it.

    I suggest that we should all be thinking of the opposite: just how HUGE might Labour's lead be? How low will the tory numbers fall? The reason many of them are starting to leave the ship is because they know it's sinking.

    I suggest the ballpark figure is 100-150 tory MPs but it could go lower if circumstances continue to conspire against them, which seems pretty likely.

    The Tories will probably win at least 200 seats in my opinion.
  • Options
    ‘The emotions of Britishness and being English, a response to David Mitchell’

    Some say that England requires no representative, accountable, democractic institutions because the institutions of the British state are, in fact, de facto English. Mitchell alludes to this Anglo-centric mindset when he informs us that “when Palmerston said "English" he meant British”. My challenge to Mitchell and other Brits who wish to save the Union is to imagine a new multi-national Britain that draws strength from its hybridity instead of riding rough-shod over the national identities of Britain by buying into these Anglo-centric, Anglo-British notions of Britishness.

    … if devolution has failed to ‘kill nationalism stone dead’, as George Robertson prophesised, it is partly because it has heightened the perception that Britain is the English State by proxy, and devolution merely an exercise in post-imperial imperialism.

    Today when the public hears British politicians refer to ‘our country’ or ‘our NHS’ it is reasonable to assume that they are talking about England or the NHS in England


    https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/emotions-of-britishness-and-being-english-response-to-david-mitchell/
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    When oil was previously ~£60 per barrel petrol prices were ~£1.43 per litre. Today they are ~£1.57 per litre. Neither the government nor opposition gives a shit about it and it is a huge source of our continued high inflation environment. Plus hitting forecourts is such an easy win for either party, everyone loathes them.
This discussion has been closed.