The Archbishop’s attack on the small boats plan makes several front pages – politicalbetting.com

Carnyx said:

Gardenwalker said:

Incidentally, these “donor dinners” or whatever they are, seem to happen every couple of months. Biden comes to Manhattan and whoever this donor is, they seem to live v close to my kids’ school.

They close down all the nearest roads, including Fifth Avenue, and it’s an absolute nightmare.

Thank goodness London doesn’t half close down just because Rishi wants to go to Wimbledon or something.

He takes a helicopter?

Fitness for fat cops is his priority.

algarkirk said:

DavidL said:

algarkirk said:

kinabalu said:

Sean_F said:

kinabalu said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

Depressing write up on BBC about Trump's town hall event. Basically that he will never stop saying 2020 was rigged, will pardon 6 Jan rioters, will definitely shift policy on Ukraine (though exactly how is unclear, but ending it in 24 hours as he suggests could only occur if he stopped ongoing support), and that the audience was eating out of the palm of his hand.

If they get the chance the party will pick him again and the representatives will fall in line.

Yes, not a good read. It's hard to see him winning the presidency back, with things as they are now, but it'd be better if he isn't on the ballot as the GOP candidate. If he gets the Nom he has to have a non-trivial chance just because of 'events', eg a Biden incident, a bank crash, something in Russia/Ukraine etc.

The nomination is his to lose. Could he become president then? Of course, especially if the economic backdrop worsens, as seems likely.

Very scary on so many levels. Good for all the worst people (eg the MAGA goons and Putin) and bad for everyone else. If it were to happen my Big Short would turn into the worst single betting loss I've ever had and I can honestly hand-on-heart say I don't even think about that aspect. That's how bleak a prospect it is.

I'd give Trump about a 40% chance of winning, if he runs against Biden. That is far too close for comfort.

Share the sentiment but I rate it more a 25%.

On this subject, there is an interesting feature about PB. SFAICS there are several people/positions that have Zero support with PBers. These include: Trump, Xi, Putin, Assad, all sides in Sudan, North Korea, the Burmese government and so on.

Of these one leaps out as different. Trump has tens of millions of loyal supporters in a free market liberal democracy with a free press.

But not a word of support on PB (me included) ever, while Trump is 5/2 with Hills to be the next POTUS.

is this because:
(a) the PB Overton window is actually quite small
(b) because nearly half the USA really are as authoritarian fascistlike as Putin and co and Trump's position resembles 1930s Germany
(c) something else. (What?)

The fairly universal ability to recognise a turd by its smell?

I would generally agree with this. It's the tens of millions of USA voters who don't that is troubling in the 1930s sort of sense. So it isn't 'fairly universal' at this moment.

Trump - like so many other demagogues - identified a genuine failing in the American economic and political system and set out to exploit it for his own ends. Just because he has been discredited in the eyes of most people doesn't mean the issues he sought to exploit have gone away. People are desperate and when he fails it is difficult for them to see whereelse they can turn. I think this applies to the majority of his support which has coalesced around a genuinely corrupt and self serving core both in the Republican party and the country as a whole.

I wrote about this for PB back in January 2021

https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/01/09/this-is-not-about-trump-except-of-course-it-is/

BlancheLivermore said:

Dialup said:

The planning system must be changed so mobile phone masts can be built anywhere they are needed. People should not be allowed to reject them. This is critical infrastructure

You know who said something along those lines?

Has Dialup denied being a new identity for CHB - if not I am not sure of the need for the ongoing investigation.

kinabalu said:

TOPPING said:

kinabalu said:

algarkirk said:

kinabalu said:

Sean_F said:

kinabalu said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

Depressing write up on BBC about Trump's town hall event. Basically that he will never stop saying 2020 was rigged, will pardon 6 Jan rioters, will definitely shift policy on Ukraine (though exactly how is unclear, but ending it in 24 hours as he suggests could only occur if he stopped ongoing support), and that the audience was eating out of the palm of his hand.

If they get the chance the party will pick him again and the representatives will fall in line.

Yes, not a good read. It's hard to see him winning the presidency back, with things as they are now, but it'd be better if he isn't on the ballot as the GOP candidate. If he gets the Nom he has to have a non-trivial chance just because of 'events', eg a Biden incident, a bank crash, something in Russia/Ukraine etc.

The nomination is his to lose. Could he become president then? Of course, especially if the economic backdrop worsens, as seems likely.

Very scary on so many levels. Good for all the worst people (eg the MAGA goons and Putin) and bad for everyone else. If it were to happen my Big Short would turn into the worst single betting loss I've ever had and I can honestly hand-on-heart say I don't even think about that aspect. That's how bleak a prospect it is.

I'd give Trump about a 40% chance of winning, if he runs against Biden. That is far too close for comfort.

Share the sentiment but I rate it more a 25%.

On this subject, there is an interesting feature about PB. SFAICS there are several people/positions that have Zero support with PBers. These include: Trump, Xi, Putin, Assad, all sides in Sudan, North Korea, the Burmese government and so on.

Of these one leaps out as different. Trump has tens of millions of loyal supporters in a free market liberal democracy with a free press.

But not a word of support on PB (me included) ever, while Trump is 5/2 with Hills to be the next POTUS.

is this because:
(a) the PB Overton window is actually quite small
(b) because nearly half the USA really are as authoritarian fascistlike as Putin and co and Trump's position resembles 1930s Germany
(c) something else. (What?)

An American PB equivalent might show more Trump support, I guess. There are things about the country we struggle to understand. Although tbh I think you're being a touch generous (to us) by saying 'not a word of support' for him on here ever. I recall a fair amount in the past, and ok there's very little now but still some. Plus there will be PBers who secretly have a soft spot and keep shtum to avoid a tongue lashing.

I have a soft spot for someone who is democratically elected by any given electorate so put me in the democracy not as bad as all the other systems column.

Yep. An elected President Trump is better than an unelected President Trump. However there's a risk the first leads to the second so it's best to play safe and have neither imo.

I really don't see that. Not that as we have seen we have been at the end of any kind of history but you are saying that the US is possibly headed towards autarchy I just don't believe.

Of course loathe the man but don't let that colour your usually razor-sharp assessment of the state of politics today.

Scam phone call watch. Just got a call from this number on a landline.

https://who-calls.me.uk/phone/01135139666

One of the comments:

"Offering a free medical device to all 'elderly' people over the age of 50. Claimed to be based in London, calling from a Leeds area code. Clearly using a call router and dodgy af."

Carnyx said:

JosiasJessop said:

Carnyx said:

Simply not true. BR was developing and investing in new trains enormously. Diesels, DMUs, 125, 225, electrifrication at far greater speed and value for money than today.

Privatisers were to a great extent living off BR's carcass and picking the meat from it for many years. The private railway companies were still using bloody Pacers (a mistake of BR, it should be said) decades later!

That is both right and wrong. Privatisation did lead to a years-long stall in new orders, but when that was over they really got going. But they were also battling a massive (and unexpected) increase in passengers and services.

If anything, we have the opposite problem, with stock build 10-12 years ago off to the scrappers. And that might be as much the DfT's fault as it is the operators.

Pacers were also blooming useful. They were perhaps kept a decade too long, but they should never be called a 'mistake'. They were ideal for the services they were used on.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Carnyx said:

Dialup said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Dialup said:

I am not professing to say that nationalisation will suddenly make the trains better. I just do not see what we are getting by paying private companies to run the trains.

If they were owned by the government today, they would be exactly the same, as say LNER is, we just don't have the money going abroad. I cannot see how anyone objects to that.

For a patriotic country that apparently wants to take back control, what could be more pro-Britain than that? Why are we so useless France have to run our trains? FRANCE!

Private companies built the railways. Private companies actually invest in new trains and rolling stock rather than relying on massively outdated stuff as it used to be under BR. The worst part of the rail network and the part that causes the most delays is the track and infrastructure - which is in public hands.

The train I use was bought by BR.

Dialup said:

I am not professing to say that nationalisation will suddenly make the trains better. I just do not see what we are getting by paying private companies to run the trains.

If they were owned by the government today, they would be exactly the same, as say LNER is, we just don't have the money going abroad. I cannot see how anyone objects to that.

For a patriotic country that apparently wants to take back control, what could be more pro-Britain than that? Why are we so useless France have to run our trains? FRANCE!

Private companies built the railways. Private companies actually invest in new trains and rolling stock rather than relying on massively outdated stuff as it used to be under BR. The worst part of the rail network and the part that causes the most delays is the track and infrastructure - which is in public hands.

Simply not true. BR was developing and investing in new trains enormously. Diesels, DMUs, 125, 225, electrifrication at far greater speed and value for money than today.

Privatisers were to a great extent living off BR's carcass and picking the meat from it for many years. The private railway companies were still using bloody Pacers (a mistake of BR, it should be said) decades later!

This is simply not true. After the big diesel switch over which was inevitable, BR let the whole rail network rot. Yes they had their flagship intercity 125 programme but that was at the cost of underinvestment in the other 90% of the network. And the rolling stock was old, delapidated and unrelible.

In the mid 1980s under BR there were around 650 million passenger journeys a year. In 2018 just prior to the pandemic there were 1.8 billion passenger journies a year. Almost a 3 fold increase. And railways share of total travel has doubled since privatisation. In spite of this we also have the safest railways in Europe - and far safer than they were prior to privatisation. And punctuality is almost exactly the same as it was pre-privatisation at around 90%.

Point taken re Pacers.

But both of you are using what happened in much more recent years to 'disprove' what BR would have done if it had been kept in state control. Simply not on, logically. Edit: though, by the same logic, I can't prove you are wrong!

And the combination of private firms plus DfT has been lethal in many ways. From the Railtrack disaster to the chaos of electrification.

Just look at all the graphs of investment, rail usage and safety for the last 50 years or so of the railways. Look at how they all steadily decline throughout the age of natinalised rail ownership. And look at how they all turn a corner and start to improve massively after privatisation. It is way too much of a coincidence to say it would have happened anyway.

Dura_Ace said:

Towerbridge said:

Sandpit said:

Towerbridge said:

WillG said:

Dura_Ace said:

Sandpit said:

eek said:

Sandpit said:

bondegezou said:

Malmesbury said:

A

Towerbridge said:

glw said:

Heathener said:

It's appalling but I'm probably in a minority. Especially my view that with chronic labour shortages across many sectors the answer to get Britain's economy booming is, er, migration.

We have very high net migration right now. Half a million more people, net, for the last year. That means just to meet the needs of migrants we need to build an entire Birmingham sized city, and all associated infrastructure, every couple of years. We are not coming remotely close to that.

Is there any number of migrants that you would call too many?

Im not a believer in putting set numbers of migrants as a limit. Immigration has immensely benefited this country over the last 50 years. We now have a more cosmopolitan outward looking population.

What if 6 billion people arrived in the U.K. next week?

Everything has limits. Just because the subject makes you uncomfortable, doesn’t make it go away.

I say build a Birmingham each year to cope with the increasing population. Then you hear people whining both about restrictions on immigration *and* wanting the country not to change.

If you want a more “cosmopolitan” population then you are either in favour of more Birminghams or you are an idiot. Pick one.

I don’t know that I’m favour of the current Birmingham, let alone more of them. There must be a way of accommodating an increasing population without building more Birminghams. Can we build more Milton Keyneses?

Either way, the current high rates of immigration are Conservative Party policy. If people don’t like them, vote out the Conservatives.

Population of MK is 250k, so there need to be two more MKs built every year, just to stand still on housing the population increase. Which means in practice three or four new MKs per year, for the next few years.

A tweet from earlier today (from a source I would trust to have accurate figures) reckons 700,000 immigrants arrived last year.

So it's 3 Milton Keynes a year and 2 of them probably need to be in the South East.

Yes, although 250k are Ukranians, of whom more than 80% are living with families on what’s presumably a temporary basis. There were a couple of hundred thousand from HK as well, which was a one-off but they still need housing. There were also a couple of hundred thousand who left the country last year, so net immigration is closer to 500k.

Sandpit said:

eek said:

Sandpit said:

bondegezou said:

Malmesbury said:

A

Towerbridge said:

glw said:

Heathener said:

It's appalling but I'm probably in a minority. Especially my view that with chronic labour shortages across many sectors the answer to get Britain's economy booming is, er, migration.

We have very high net migration right now. Half a million more people, net, for the last year. That means just to meet the needs of migrants we need to build an entire Birmingham sized city, and all associated infrastructure, every couple of years. We are not coming remotely close to that.

Is there any number of migrants that you would call too many?

Im not a believer in putting set numbers of migrants as a limit. Immigration has immensely benefited this country over the last 50 years. We now have a more cosmopolitan outward looking population.

What if 6 billion people arrived in the U.K. next week?

Everything has limits. Just because the subject makes you uncomfortable, doesn’t make it go away.

I say build a Birmingham each year to cope with the increasing population. Then you hear people whining both about restrictions on immigration *and* wanting the country not to change.

If you want a more “cosmopolitan” population then you are either in favour of more Birminghams or you are an idiot. Pick one.

I don’t know that I’m favour of the current Birmingham, let alone more of them. There must be a way of accommodating an increasing population without building more Birminghams. Can we build more Milton Keyneses?

Either way, the current high rates of immigration are Conservative Party policy. If people don’t like them, vote out the Conservatives.

Population of MK is 250k, so there need to be two more MKs built every year, just to stand still on housing the population increase. Which means in practice three or four new MKs per year, for the next few years.

A tweet from earlier today (from a source I would trust to have accurate figures) reckons 700,000 immigrants arrived last year.

So it's 3 Milton Keynes a year and 2 of them probably need to be in the South East.

Yes, although 250k are Ukranians, of whom more than 80% are living with families on what’s presumably a temporary basis. There were a couple of hundred thousand from HK as well, which was a one-off but they still need housing. There were also a couple of hundred thousand who left the country last year, so net immigration is closer to 500k.

Well, it is "tens of thousands" as promised by Cameron. Just 50 tens.

I don't know why gammons get sand in the vag over the channel boats. The numbers are inconsequential compared to the tory mass inward migration project.

Its alwaus amusing when the open borders brigade get to a point in the debate where they run out of logical arguments so throw out racist slurs as a way to divert attentiom from their weak position. Positively Trumpian.

Your position would be more honest if you just admitted you dont like immigrants.

The Ukranian immigrants to the UK have been awesome! Shame they’ll almost all go back to Ukraine, once the Russian army has been sent back to Russia having run out of tanks.

Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine #Zaluzhnyi, and top commander #Syrskyi rumoured to have been killed recently in Russian missile strikes.

Thats not good news.


https://twitter.com/Russia_Truth/status/1656613605243068416?s=20

There is no fucking way Zaluzhny is dead. He's the Pentagon's guy and the backup plan if Z goes off script so he is very well protected. Sirs'kiy has been so minutely micromanaged in Bakhmut it wouldn’t make any difference if he got wasted or not.

You just can't help yourself can you?

In what sense is Zaluzhny the Pentagon's guy? Yet again you want to insult the Ukrainians as if they are nothing more than American proxies. Yet it is quite clear they are anything but. Zaluzhny didn't please many in the US defence establishment with his demands for weapons last Christmas and as for the 'backup plan if Z goes off script' what's that supposed to mean? If Zelensky was on script regards what the US wants he wouldn't be talking about Crimea, demanding aircraft and long range missiles.

Why do you bother? You must know this is a site full of well informed people. Wouldn't twitter be more fertile territory for you to be spreading your snide bullshit?

TheScreamingEagles said:

Badenoch is pissing off Mr Speaker with her insult to Parliament.

https://news.sky.com/story/who-do-you-think-you-are-talking-to-speaker-rebukes-kemi-badenoch-as-tory-mps-line-up-to-criticise-eu-law-u-turn-12878350

You didn't share this piece of priceless tw@ttery.
..But staunch Brexiteers within the Conservative ranks have criticised the change, with former business secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg accusing Mr Sunak of "behaving like a Borgia"...

I'm curious - is he implying adultery, incest, theft, bribery, or murder ?
(I think we can rule out simony.)

LostPassword said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

Gardenwalker said:

Incidentally, these “donor dinners” or whatever they are, seem to happen every couple of months. Biden comes to Manhattan and whoever this donor is, they seem to live v close to my kids’ school.

They close down all the nearest roads, including Fifth Avenue, and it’s an absolute nightmare.

Thank goodness London doesn’t half close down just because Rishi wants to go to Wimbledon or something.

He takes a helicopter?

Fitness for fat cops is his priority.

I expect that the cops running alongside are those who failed the pre-escort mental arithmetic test - all part of Sunak's drive to improve Maths skills. Sounds a lot like Truss, actually.

That was funny to watch, but there were understandable reasons behind it. A protest in town and a specific threat to the PM.

Usually, the PM has one of the smallest convoys for any head of government - 5 cars and 4 bikes. The bikes are there to stop traffic ahead, rather than deal with potential incidents involving pedestrian protestors.

As @Gardenwalker says upthread, in the US they close down whole city blocks for hours, when the President passes through.

DavidL said:

Malmesbury said:

edmundintokyo said:

Andy_JS said:

"Adrian Hilton💎
@Adrian_Hilton

Fujitsu staff had ‘unrestricted and unauditable’ remote access to Post Office branch systems? Good grief. So somebody was lying in the High Court? I ask again, why is Paula Vennells still in Holy Orders with a CBE?

#PostOfficeScandal"
https://twitter.com/Adrian_Hilton/status/1656609940826476545

We just had a nice Fujitsu cock-up in Japan. They were contracted to build a system where you could print your government personal record at convenience stores. They made it save the record of the data it had to print in a file identified by the time. As soon as it started being used enough that two people in different convenient stores were using the system at the same time, the system started randomly printing out other people's data.

So Fujitsu are institutionally incapable of implementing transactionality?

The parallel will only be complete when the recipient of the wrong data gets sent to jail for having obtained it.

You realise the Met have probably read that post, and setup a unit to arrest people accessing their data while black.

BlancheLivermore said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Dialup said:

The planning system must be changed so mobile phone masts can be built anywhere they are needed. People should not be allowed to reject them. This is critical infrastructure

You know who said something along those lines?

Has Dialup denied being a new identity for CHB - if not I am not sure of the need for the ongoing investigation.

Yes

Could be worse. Casino was screaming for me to get the ban hammer for quoting things that are already in the public domain and not denied by the people saying them.

Essentially pointing out that Tory ministers do racist things and chase racist votes is libellous. Or something, as its not remotely in anyone's actual definitions of defamation when it's true.

Tories like this strategy though. Zahawi threatened libel against against a reporter who exposed the truth. Houchen and Clarke screaming about Andy McDonald supposedly libelling them/Teesworks developers in the HoC, yet they haven't gone after Private Eye who wrote it up in vivid detail with FOI evidence.

The important thing about Sunak's inflation target is that it's for inflation to halve - not to decrease too much and hit the BoE inflation target of 2%.

A few years of 5% inflation would suit the Treasury. Lots of extra tax through fiscal drag, real-terms cuts to public sector pay, etc, but not such high inflation that the public complain too much.

“A group of women who went to high school with Justice Elena Kagan wanted to send her bagels and lox from a legendary deli on the Lower East Side. But they scrapped the plan after Kagan expressed concerns about the court’s ethics rules for reporting.”
https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1656641104274415616

RochdalePioneers said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Dialup said:

The planning system must be changed so mobile phone masts can be built anywhere they are needed. People should not be allowed to reject them. This is critical infrastructure

You know who said something along those lines?

Has Dialup denied being a new identity for CHB - if not I am not sure of the need for the ongoing investigation.

Yes

Could be worse. Casino was screaming for me to get the ban hammer for quoting things that are already in the public domain and not denied by the people saying them.

Essentially pointing out that Tory ministers do racist things and chase racist votes is libellous. Or something, as its not remotely in anyone's actual definitions of defamation when it's true.

Tories like this strategy though. Zahawi threatened libel against against a reporter who exposed the truth. Houchen and Clarke screaming about Andy McDonald supposedly libelling them/Teesworks developers in the HoC, yet they haven't gone after Private Eye who wrote it up in vivid detail with FOI evidence.

I think it is a strategy used by politicians of all stripes. You really ought to try and have a little bit of subtlety to your hatred of "Tories" and then you would be seen as a little more nuanced in your views and not appear to be yet another swivel-eyed Tory-hating nutjob.

Dura_Ace said:

Nigelb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Badenoch is pissing off Mr Speaker with her insult to Parliament.

https://news.sky.com/story/who-do-you-think-you-are-talking-to-speaker-rebukes-kemi-badenoch-as-tory-mps-line-up-to-criticise-eu-law-u-turn-12878350

You didn't share this piece of priceless tw@ttery.
..But staunch Brexiteers within the Conservative ranks have criticised the change, with former business secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg accusing Mr Sunak of "behaving like a Borgia"...

I'm curious - is he implying adultery, incest, theft, bribery, or murder ?
(I think we can rule out simony.)

It's all a bit tepid from the ERGonauts. You can tell they don't really give a fuck any more.

Abandoned by Bridgen, morale is clearly slipping.

GIN1138 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Badenoch is pissing off Mr Speaker with her insult to Parliament.

https://news.sky.com/story/who-do-you-think-you-are-talking-to-speaker-rebukes-kemi-badenoch-as-tory-mps-line-up-to-criticise-eu-law-u-turn-12878350

Good for Speaker Lindsey.

All governments/ministers piss off the speaker of the day at some point or other...

Announcements of policy and legislation should always be in Parliament. The Speaker is right, even if I’m personally a fan of Kemi.

Getting 'interesting' in Pakistan, too.

Supreme Court has declared Imran Khan's arrest, by paramilitary units, from Islamabad High Court illegal. Now what does it mean? because judicial system in Pakistan is very weak & executive in no mood to listen to courts. Is this a cosmetic measure to create impression that courts exist? to send crowds back to home and then arrest through Islamabad High Court again? ...because the conduct of Chief Justice of IHC, in all this drama, has already raised very difficult questions..
https://twitter.com/MoeedNj/status/1656645853883375616

eek said:

carnforth said:

FrankBooth said:

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

#Turkey poll alert: Respected polling company Konda has released its final poll.

• Kilicdaroglu: 49.3%
• Erdogan; 43.7%
• Ogan: 4.8%
• Ince: 2.2%

It was conducted on 6-7 May, with 3480 people
https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1656588203292237825

Looks a big gap.

Big enough?

The BBC had a documentary on Erdogan with one of the commentators saying if the margin isn't big Erdogan will do what he can to try and carry on.

So what did for him? Without the earthquake, would he still be ahead?

Yep

I see one of the minor candidates has dropped out too:

https://www.barrons.com/news/turkish-candidate-drops-out-of-presidential-race-93eb5fa6?refsec=topics_afp-news

Nigel_Foremain said:

RochdalePioneers said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Dialup said:

The planning system must be changed so mobile phone masts can be built anywhere they are needed. People should not be allowed to reject them. This is critical infrastructure

You know who said something along those lines?

Has Dialup denied being a new identity for CHB - if not I am not sure of the need for the ongoing investigation.

Yes

Could be worse. Casino was screaming for me to get the ban hammer for quoting things that are already in the public domain and not denied by the people saying them.

Essentially pointing out that Tory ministers do racist things and chase racist votes is libellous. Or something, as its not remotely in anyone's actual definitions of defamation when it's true.

Tories like this strategy though. Zahawi threatened libel against against a reporter who exposed the truth. Houchen and Clarke screaming about Andy McDonald supposedly libelling them/Teesworks developers in the HoC, yet they haven't gone after Private Eye who wrote it up in vivid detail with FOI evidence.

I think it is a strategy used by politicians of all stripes. You really ought to try and have a little bit of subtlety to your hatred of "Tories" and then you would be seen as a little more nuanced in your views and not appear to be yet another swivel-eyed Tory-hating nutjob.

I can only talk about what is happening now. I am not aware of any other party hiding behind libel threats to stop the truth coming out.

I don't hate anyone - a nasty emotion which does more damage to the hater than the hatee.

Tell me that anything I said about Zahawi and Houchen/Clarke and on here earlier Casino isn't true and I will post the proof that it is. They're all frit.

Nigelb said:

“A group of women who went to high school with Justice Elena Kagan wanted to send her bagels and lox from a legendary deli on the Lower East Side. But they scrapped the plan after Kagan expressed concerns about the court’s ethics rules for reporting.”
https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1656641104274415616

Note this wasn't some performative gesture to wind up Clarence Thomas - the story dates from a couple of years back. The contrast is damning.
...The Washington Post has valued Crow’s gifts, favors and transactions with Thomas at being worth millions of dollars, including Crow purchasing Thomas’ mother’s home and paying private school tuition for Thomas’ nephew.

Starer added that Kagan, who would have received a comparatively small gift, told her in their 2021 email exchanges: “I have to take these ethics and reporting considerations very seriously.”

And unlike the women who’ve known Kagan since she was a teenager, Crow did not know Thomas before his Supreme Court appointment ..

Luckyguy1983 said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Dialup said:

The planning system must be changed so mobile phone masts can be built anywhere they are needed. People should not be allowed to reject them. This is critical infrastructure

You know who said something along those lines?

Has Dialup denied being a new identity for CHB - if not I am not sure of the need for the ongoing investigation.

Easy to deal with Dialup. Never feed a troll.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Andy_JS said:

Scam phone call watch. Just got a call from this number on a landline.

https://who-calls.me.uk/phone/01135139666

One of the comments:

"Offering a free medical device to all 'elderly' people over the age of 50. Claimed to be based in London, calling from a Leeds area code. Clearly using a call router and dodgy af."

Someone on here tried to claim to me that fraud in the UK was not endemic. It may not be endemic in the literal sense but it is widespread, constantly present and highly damaging. I saw a report on BBC this morning to say there have been over 3 million cases of fraud (I assume in last year).

The banks need to recognise that it is far too easy to con people into transferring their money. The only solution I can think of is for the banking system to at least hold transferred monies for 48 hours before it appears in another overseas account enabling a customer to realise they have been conned.

Watching from afar, there seems to be a massive disconnect between the banks insisting on multiple levels of KYC for normal customers, yet having no idea where the money went when a customer complains of being scammed with a domestic transfer.

carnforth said:

FrankBooth said:

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

#Turkey poll alert: Respected polling company Konda has released its final poll.

• Kilicdaroglu: 49.3%
• Erdogan; 43.7%
• Ogan: 4.8%
• Ince: 2.2%

It was conducted on 6-7 May, with 3480 people
https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1656588203292237825

Looks a big gap.

Big enough?

The BBC had a documentary on Erdogan with one of the commentators saying if the margin isn't big Erdogan will do what he can to try and carry on.

So what did for him? Without the earthquake, would he still be ahead?

The economy has been a mess for a while. He's been trailing in the polls for a while. According to Leon I Kemalist revival has been going on.

FrankBooth said:

carnforth said:

FrankBooth said:

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

#Turkey poll alert: Respected polling company Konda has released its final poll.

• Kilicdaroglu: 49.3%
• Erdogan; 43.7%
• Ogan: 4.8%
• Ince: 2.2%

It was conducted on 6-7 May, with 3480 people
https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1656588203292237825

Looks a big gap.

Big enough?

The BBC had a documentary on Erdogan with one of the commentators saying if the margin isn't big Erdogan will do what he can to try and carry on.

So what did for him? Without the earthquake, would he still be ahead?

The economy has been a mess for a while. He's been trailing in the polls for a while. According to Leon I Kemalist revival has been going on.

Turkey is a country of haves and have nots - the latter of whom was Erdogan's core base - so while the economy was a mess until the earthquake the mess wasn't have a major impact on Erdogan's support (it was lower but only halve the current gap).

Sandpit said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Andy_JS said:

Scam phone call watch. Just got a call from this number on a landline.

https://who-calls.me.uk/phone/01135139666

One of the comments:

"Offering a free medical device to all 'elderly' people over the age of 50. Claimed to be based in London, calling from a Leeds area code. Clearly using a call router and dodgy af."

Someone on here tried to claim to me that fraud in the UK was not endemic. It may not be endemic in the literal sense but it is widespread, constantly present and highly damaging. I saw a report on BBC this morning to say there have been over 3 million cases of fraud (I assume in last year).

The banks need to recognise that it is far too easy to con people into transferring their money. The only solution I can think of is for the banking system to at least hold transferred monies for 48 hours before it appears in another overseas account enabling a customer to realise they have been conned.

Watching from afar, there seems to be a massive disconnect between the banks insisting on multiple levels of KYC for normal customers, yet having no idea where the money went when a customer complains of being scammed with a domestic transfer.

Banks should be made to report the amount of money they're spending paying back victims of fraud, and the amount of fraud they believe has occurred within, from and to their accounts.

Sandpit said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Andy_JS said:

Scam phone call watch. Just got a call from this number on a landline.

https://who-calls.me.uk/phone/01135139666

One of the comments:

"Offering a free medical device to all 'elderly' people over the age of 50. Claimed to be based in London, calling from a Leeds area code. Clearly using a call router and dodgy af."

Someone on here tried to claim to me that fraud in the UK was not endemic. It may not be endemic in the literal sense but it is widespread, constantly present and highly damaging. I saw a report on BBC this morning to say there have been over 3 million cases of fraud (I assume in last year).

The banks need to recognise that it is far too easy to con people into transferring their money. The only solution I can think of is for the banking system to at least hold transferred monies for 48 hours before it appears in another overseas account enabling a customer to realise they have been conned.

Watching from afar, there seems to be a massive disconnect between the banks insisting on multiple levels of KYC for normal customers, yet having no idea where the money went when a customer complains of being scammed with a domestic transfer.

Regulators regulate the easy stuff.

AlistairM said:

StormShadow confirmed for Ukraine. Up to 300km range...

Interesting timing, just ahead of the predicted offensive.
It might be very useful indeed to target the ammunition dumps the Russians have pulled back outside the range of HIMARs - the threat alone will complicate their logistics.

And given the F35 won't be able to carry it, we were gong to have some spares on the shelf, as the Typhoon fleet declines in numbers.

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Badenoch is pissing off Mr Speaker with her insult to Parliament.

https://news.sky.com/story/who-do-you-think-you-are-talking-to-speaker-rebukes-kemi-badenoch-as-tory-mps-line-up-to-criticise-eu-law-u-turn-12878350

You didn't share this piece of priceless tw@ttery.
..But staunch Brexiteers within the Conservative ranks have criticised the change, with former business secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg accusing Mr Sunak of "behaving like a Borgia"...

I'm curious - is he implying adultery, incest, theft, bribery, or murder ?
(I think we can rule out simony.)

That is Kemi's leadership hopes over then. The ERG and Conservative right won't forgive her abandoning repeal of EU laws. If the Tories lose the next general election she will be seen as linked as much to the defeated Sunak as Hunt now

It was a cretinous piece of legislation, but she'll get little credit for seeing sense. Certainly not from the ERGs.

BlancheLivermore said:

Taz said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Dialup said:

The planning system must be changed so mobile phone masts can be built anywhere they are needed. People should not be allowed to reject them. This is critical infrastructure

You know who said something along those lines?

Sherlock Livermore, as I live and breathe !!!!

He was bound to foal up once he had the bit between his teeth

Better be careful or he will accuse you of battery

StillWaters said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Taz said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Dialup said:

The planning system must be changed so mobile phone masts can be built anywhere they are needed. People should not be allowed to reject them. This is critical infrastructure

You know who said something along those lines?

Sherlock Livermore, as I live and breathe !!!!

He was bound to foal up once he had the bit between his teeth

Better be careful or he will accuse you of battery

You might be correct there

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Andy_JS said:

Scam phone call watch. Just got a call from this number on a landline.

https://who-calls.me.uk/phone/01135139666

One of the comments:

"Offering a free medical device to all 'elderly' people over the age of 50. Claimed to be based in London, calling from a Leeds area code. Clearly using a call router and dodgy af."

Someone on here tried to claim to me that fraud in the UK was not endemic. It may not be endemic in the literal sense but it is widespread, constantly present and highly damaging. I saw a report on BBC this morning to say there have been over 3 million cases of fraud (I assume in last year).

The banks need to recognise that it is far too easy to con people into transferring their money. The only solution I can think of is for the banking system to at least hold transferred monies for 48 hours before it appears in another overseas account enabling a customer to realise they have been conned.

Watching from afar, there seems to be a massive disconnect between the banks insisting on multiple levels of KYC for normal customers, yet having no idea where the money went when a customer complains of being scammed with a domestic transfer.

Banks should be made to report the amount of money they're spending paying back victims of fraud, and the amount of fraud they believe has occurred within, from and to their accounts.

The outrageous thing is that people are still losing money to Authorised Push Payment Fraud (APP) and only slightly over 50% of people ever see their money back. These people are being defrauded. The banks are essentially saying they are culpable which is disgraceful, when they deny that it is the weakness of their systems that enable the fraud.

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Andy_JS said:

Scam phone call watch. Just got a call from this number on a landline.

https://who-calls.me.uk/phone/01135139666

One of the comments:

"Offering a free medical device to all 'elderly' people over the age of 50. Claimed to be based in London, calling from a Leeds area code. Clearly using a call router and dodgy af."

Someone on here tried to claim to me that fraud in the UK was not endemic. It may not be endemic in the literal sense but it is widespread, constantly present and highly damaging. I saw a report on BBC this morning to say there have been over 3 million cases of fraud (I assume in last year).

The banks need to recognise that it is far too easy to con people into transferring their money. The only solution I can think of is for the banking system to at least hold transferred monies for 48 hours before it appears in another overseas account enabling a customer to realise they have been conned.

Watching from afar, there seems to be a massive disconnect between the banks insisting on multiple levels of KYC for normal customers, yet having no idea where the money went when a customer complains of being scammed with a domestic transfer.

Banks should be made to report the amount of money they're spending paying back victims of fraud, and the amount of fraud they believe has occurred within, from and to their accounts.

Number ended in 666.. def dodgy!

algarkirk said:

kinabalu said:

Sean_F said:

kinabalu said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

Depressing write up on BBC about Trump's town hall event. Basically that he will never stop saying 2020 was rigged, will pardon 6 Jan rioters, will definitely shift policy on Ukraine (though exactly how is unclear, but ending it in 24 hours as he suggests could only occur if he stopped ongoing support), and that the audience was eating out of the palm of his hand.

If they get the chance the party will pick him again and the representatives will fall in line.

Yes, not a good read. It's hard to see him winning the presidency back, with things as they are now, but it'd be better if he isn't on the ballot as the GOP candidate. If he gets the Nom he has to have a non-trivial chance just because of 'events', eg a Biden incident, a bank crash, something in Russia/Ukraine etc.

The nomination is his to lose. Could he become president then? Of course, especially if the economic backdrop worsens, as seems likely.

Very scary on so many levels. Good for all the worst people (eg the MAGA goons and Putin) and bad for everyone else. If it were to happen my Big Short would turn into the worst single betting loss I've ever had and I can honestly hand-on-heart say I don't even think about that aspect. That's how bleak a prospect it is.

I'd give Trump about a 40% chance of winning, if he runs against Biden. That is far too close for comfort.

Share the sentiment but I rate it more a 25%.

On this subject, there is an interesting feature about PB. SFAICS there are several people/positions that have Zero support with PBers. These include: Trump, Xi, Putin, Assad, all sides in Sudan, North Korea, the Burmese government and so on.

Of these one leaps out as different. Trump has tens of millions of loyal supporters in a free market liberal democracy with a free press.

But not a word of support on PB (me included) ever, while Trump is 5/2 with Hills to be the next POTUS.

is this because:
(a) the PB Overton window is actually quite small
(b) because nearly half the USA really are as authoritarian fascistlike as Putin and co and Trump's position resembles 1930s Germany
(c) something else. (What?)

• Numbers. We are in a fallow period and will remain so until Anglophone elections restart (locals don't count ), so we're not really focussed at the moment
  
• Unrepresentativeness. PB commentators have a larger-than-usual contingent of the rich and retired, and they have more time to contribute. So the PB Overton window is shifted by them, and they tend to be anti-Trump.
  
• Banning. PB has an eclectic banning policy, and Trump fans can be collateral damage. In 2020 I ran a POTUS game with one PBer (@RichardNabavi? @NPXMP?) speaking for Biden and another (@MrEd) speaking for Trump. @MrEd is now banned for other reasons.
  

I assume that these conditions will change as we near Nov24 and a new cohort of people join to opine.

Nigelb said:

AlistairM said:

StormShadow confirmed for Ukraine. Up to 300km range...

Interesting timing, just ahead of the predicted offensive.
It might be very useful indeed to target the ammunition dumps the Russians have pulled back outside the range of HIMARs - the threat alone will complicate their logistics.

And given the F35 won't be able to carry it, we were gong to have some spares on the shelf, as the Typhoon fleet declines in numbers.

Integration with Ukrainian airframes will be interesting. Although from past experience, some will be saying how impossible it is, just as Ukraine do it (the HARM missile).

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Andy_JS said:

Scam phone call watch. Just got a call from this number on a landline.

https://who-calls.me.uk/phone/01135139666

One of the comments:

"Offering a free medical device to all 'elderly' people over the age of 50. Claimed to be based in London, calling from a Leeds area code. Clearly using a call router and dodgy af."

Someone on here tried to claim to me that fraud in the UK was not endemic. It may not be endemic in the literal sense but it is widespread, constantly present and highly damaging. I saw a report on BBC this morning to say there have been over 3 million cases of fraud (I assume in last year).

The banks need to recognise that it is far too easy to con people into transferring their money. The only solution I can think of is for the banking system to at least hold transferred monies for 48 hours before it appears in another overseas account enabling a customer to realise they have been conned.

Watching from afar, there seems to be a massive disconnect between the banks insisting on multiple levels of KYC for normal customers, yet having no idea where the money went when a customer complains of being scammed with a domestic transfer.

Banks should be made to report the amount of money they're spending paying back victims of fraud, and the amount of fraud they believe has occurred within, from and to their accounts.

They do.

https://www.ukfinance.org.uk/system/files/Fraud The Facts 2021- FINAL.pdf

viewcode said:

algarkirk said:

kinabalu said:

Sean_F said:

kinabalu said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

Depressing write up on BBC about Trump's town hall event. Basically that he will never stop saying 2020 was rigged, will pardon 6 Jan rioters, will definitely shift policy on Ukraine (though exactly how is unclear, but ending it in 24 hours as he suggests could only occur if he stopped ongoing support), and that the audience was eating out of the palm of his hand.

If they get the chance the party will pick him again and the representatives will fall in line.

Yes, not a good read. It's hard to see him winning the presidency back, with things as they are now, but it'd be better if he isn't on the ballot as the GOP candidate. If he gets the Nom he has to have a non-trivial chance just because of 'events', eg a Biden incident, a bank crash, something in Russia/Ukraine etc.

The nomination is his to lose. Could he become president then? Of course, especially if the economic backdrop worsens, as seems likely.

Very scary on so many levels. Good for all the worst people (eg the MAGA goons and Putin) and bad for everyone else. If it were to happen my Big Short would turn into the worst single betting loss I've ever had and I can honestly hand-on-heart say I don't even think about that aspect. That's how bleak a prospect it is.

I'd give Trump about a 40% chance of winning, if he runs against Biden. That is far too close for comfort.

Share the sentiment but I rate it more a 25%.

On this subject, there is an interesting feature about PB. SFAICS there are several people/positions that have Zero support with PBers. These include: Trump, Xi, Putin, Assad, all sides in Sudan, North Korea, the Burmese government and so on.

Of these one leaps out as different. Trump has tens of millions of loyal supporters in a free market liberal democracy with a free press.

But not a word of support on PB (me included) ever, while Trump is 5/2 with Hills to be the next POTUS.

is this because:
(a) the PB Overton window is actually quite small
(b) because nearly half the USA really are as authoritarian fascistlike as Putin and co and Trump's position resembles 1930s Germany
(c) something else. (What?)

• Numbers. We are in a fallow period and will remain so until Anglophone elections restart (locals don't count ), so we're not really focussed at the moment
  
• Unrepresentativeness. PB commentators have a larger-than-usual contingent of the rich and retired, and they have more time to contribute. So the PB Overton window is shifted by them, and they tend to be anti-Trump.
  
• Banning. PB has an eclectic banning policy, and Trump fans can be collateral damage. In 2020 I ran a POTUS game with one PBer (@RichardNabavi? @NPXMP?) speaking for Biden and another (@MrEd) speaking for Trump. @MrEd is now banned for other reasons.
  

I assume that these conditions will change as we near Nov24 and a new cohort of people join to opine.

If a ThomasTelford, GeorgeStephenson, RobertStevenson or JosephWhitworth appear on PB, it'd be pretty easy to see who they're sock puppets of mine...

Ah, old Joey Whitworth. An amazing man and story.

Chris said:

Andy_JS said:

Another bad poll for the Tories.

"Britain Elects
@BritainElects
Westminster voting intention:

LAB: 46% (+2)
CON: 30% (-1)
LDEM: 9% (-)
REF: 5% (-)
GRN: 3% (-)

via @Savanta_UK, 05 - 07 May"

It looks as though the LIb Dems surged too soon.

Sadly I cannot find the Spitting Image episode with The Two Davids in bed together back in the 80s with David Steele saying "But David, David, the surge, the surge, I feel the surge" or something like that.

TheScreamingEagles said:

JosiasJessop said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Andy_JS said:

Scam phone call watch. Just got a call from this number on a landline.

https://who-calls.me.uk/phone/01135139666

One of the comments:

"Offering a free medical device to all 'elderly' people over the age of 50. Claimed to be based in London, calling from a Leeds area code. Clearly using a call router and dodgy af."

Someone on here tried to claim to me that fraud in the UK was not endemic. It may not be endemic in the literal sense but it is widespread, constantly present and highly damaging. I saw a report on BBC this morning to say there have been over 3 million cases of fraud (I assume in last year).

The banks need to recognise that it is far too easy to con people into transferring their money. The only solution I can think of is for the banking system to at least hold transferred monies for 48 hours before it appears in another overseas account enabling a customer to realise they have been conned.

Watching from afar, there seems to be a massive disconnect between the banks insisting on multiple levels of KYC for normal customers, yet having no idea where the money went when a customer complains of being scammed with a domestic transfer.

Banks should be made to report the amount of money they're spending paying back victims of fraud, and the amount of fraud they believe has occurred within, from and to their accounts.

They do.

https://www.ukfinance.org.uk/system/files/Fraud The Facts 2021- FINAL.pdf

Thanks. Are there any splits by bank?

As a matter of interest, what is the process for the reporting? Are there any checks/validation of the reported data?

(Yes, I don't trust banks.)

Some banks do report them some do not at this level.

(Snip)

So it's not compulsory for them to do so?

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

When I press submit there's a great big warning that I may be committing a crime if I deliberate post misleading information/exclude relevant information.

Does this feature need to be added to PB?

Yes, although Robert may apply a Radiohead filter to it.

TOPPING said:

kinabalu said:

TOPPING said:

kinabalu said:

algarkirk said:

kinabalu said:

Sean_F said:

kinabalu said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

Depressing write up on BBC about Trump's town hall event. Basically that he will never stop saying 2020 was rigged, will pardon 6 Jan rioters, will definitely shift policy on Ukraine (though exactly how is unclear, but ending it in 24 hours as he suggests could only occur if he stopped ongoing support), and that the audience was eating out of the palm of his hand.

If they get the chance the party will pick him again and the representatives will fall in line.

Yes, not a good read. It's hard to see him winning the presidency back, with things as they are now, but it'd be better if he isn't on the ballot as the GOP candidate. If he gets the Nom he has to have a non-trivial chance just because of 'events', eg a Biden incident, a bank crash, something in Russia/Ukraine etc.

The nomination is his to lose. Could he become president then? Of course, especially if the economic backdrop worsens, as seems likely.

Very scary on so many levels. Good for all the worst people (eg the MAGA goons and Putin) and bad for everyone else. If it were to happen my Big Short would turn into the worst single betting loss I've ever had and I can honestly hand-on-heart say I don't even think about that aspect. That's how bleak a prospect it is.

I'd give Trump about a 40% chance of winning, if he runs against Biden. That is far too close for comfort.

Share the sentiment but I rate it more a 25%.

On this subject, there is an interesting feature about PB. SFAICS there are several people/positions that have Zero support with PBers. These include: Trump, Xi, Putin, Assad, all sides in Sudan, North Korea, the Burmese government and so on.

Of these one leaps out as different. Trump has tens of millions of loyal supporters in a free market liberal democracy with a free press.

But not a word of support on PB (me included) ever, while Trump is 5/2 with Hills to be the next POTUS.

is this because:
(a) the PB Overton window is actually quite small
(b) because nearly half the USA really are as authoritarian fascistlike as Putin and co and Trump's position resembles 1930s Germany
(c) something else. (What?)

An American PB equivalent might show more Trump support, I guess. There are things about the country we struggle to understand. Although tbh I think you're being a touch generous (to us) by saying 'not a word of support' for him on here ever. I recall a fair amount in the past, and ok there's very little now but still some. Plus there will be PBers who secretly have a soft spot and keep shtum to avoid a tongue lashing.

I have a soft spot for someone who is democratically elected by any given electorate so put me in the democracy not as bad as all the other systems column.

Yep. An elected President Trump is better than an unelected President Trump. However there's a risk the first leads to the second so it's best to play safe and have neither imo.

I really don't see that. Not that as we have seen we have been at the end of any kind of history but you are saying that the US is possibly headed towards autarchy I just don't believe.

Of course loathe the man but don't let that colour your usually razor-sharp assessment of the state of politics today.

Well he had to be dragged out last time, tried to rig the election, pulling rank to intimidate officials into conjuring up votes for him, tried to get his VP to quash the certification and allow States to override with slates for him to swing it and keep him in power. This is all on the record. It happened. It didn't work but he tried alright.

So, ok, a repeat and this time successful might be far from a given - but it's a definite possibility given another 4 years in control of the GOP and the Federal government, his foaming gullible base, the levers he could pull, stack the courts, stack the legislatures, placemen all over, the manipulations etc. Object: Trump/MAGA forever.

If you don't see at least a risk worth worrying about I'll have to put it down to you not following American politics that closely. Which I know you don't and it's fair enough. It's not everyone's cup of tea.

Nigelb said:

AlistairM said:

StormShadow confirmed for Ukraine. Up to 300km range...

Interesting timing, just ahead of the predicted offensive.
It might be very useful indeed to target the ammunition dumps the Russians have pulled back outside the range of HIMARs - the threat alone will complicate their logistics.

And given the F35 won't be able to carry it, we were gong to have some spares on the shelf, as the Typhoon fleet declines in numbers.

In addition, apparently is is 'has been supplied', rather than 'will supply'. That indicates they are in-country and ready for service. I hope that we and the Ukes have been busy planning the integration onto their planes.

kinabalu said:

TOPPING said:

kinabalu said:

TOPPING said:

kinabalu said:

algarkirk said:

kinabalu said:

Sean_F said:

kinabalu said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

Depressing write up on BBC about Trump's town hall event. Basically that he will never stop saying 2020 was rigged, will pardon 6 Jan rioters, will definitely shift policy on Ukraine (though exactly how is unclear, but ending it in 24 hours as he suggests could only occur if he stopped ongoing support), and that the audience was eating out of the palm of his hand.

If they get the chance the party will pick him again and the representatives will fall in line.

Yes, not a good read. It's hard to see him winning the presidency back, with things as they are now, but it'd be better if he isn't on the ballot as the GOP candidate. If he gets the Nom he has to have a non-trivial chance just because of 'events', eg a Biden incident, a bank crash, something in Russia/Ukraine etc.

The nomination is his to lose. Could he become president then? Of course, especially if the economic backdrop worsens, as seems likely.

Very scary on so many levels. Good for all the worst people (eg the MAGA goons and Putin) and bad for everyone else. If it were to happen my Big Short would turn into the worst single betting loss I've ever had and I can honestly hand-on-heart say I don't even think about that aspect. That's how bleak a prospect it is.

I'd give Trump about a 40% chance of winning, if he runs against Biden. That is far too close for comfort.

Share the sentiment but I rate it more a 25%.

On this subject, there is an interesting feature about PB. SFAICS there are several people/positions that have Zero support with PBers. These include: Trump, Xi, Putin, Assad, all sides in Sudan, North Korea, the Burmese government and so on.

Of these one leaps out as different. Trump has tens of millions of loyal supporters in a free market liberal democracy with a free press.

But not a word of support on PB (me included) ever, while Trump is 5/2 with Hills to be the next POTUS.

is this because:
(a) the PB Overton window is actually quite small
(b) because nearly half the USA really are as authoritarian fascistlike as Putin and co and Trump's position resembles 1930s Germany
(c) something else. (What?)

An American PB equivalent might show more Trump support, I guess. There are things about the country we struggle to understand. Although tbh I think you're being a touch generous (to us) by saying 'not a word of support' for him on here ever. I recall a fair amount in the past, and ok there's very little now but still some. Plus there will be PBers who secretly have a soft spot and keep shtum to avoid a tongue lashing.

I have a soft spot for someone who is democratically elected by any given electorate so put me in the democracy not as bad as all the other systems column.

Yep. An elected President Trump is better than an unelected President Trump. However there's a risk the first leads to the second so it's best to play safe and have neither imo.

I really don't see that. Not that as we have seen we have been at the end of any kind of history but you are saying that the US is possibly headed towards autarchy I just don't believe.

Of course loathe the man but don't let that colour your usually razor-sharp assessment of the state of politics today.

Well he had to be dragged out last time, tried to rig the election, pulling rank to intimidate officials into conjuring up votes for him, tried to get his VP to quash the certification and allow States to override with slates for him to swing it and keep him in power. This is all on the record. It happened. It didn't work but he tried alright.

So, ok, a repeat and this time successful might be far from a given - but it's a definite possibility given another 4 years in control of the GOP and the Federal government, his foaming gullible base, the levers he could pull, stack the courts, stack the legislatures, placemen all over, the manipulations etc. Object: Trump/MAGA forever.

If you don't see at least a risk worth worrying about I'll have to put it down to you not following American politics that closely. Which I know you don't and it's fair enough. It's not everyone's cup of tea.

Trump/MAGA forever. He couldn't even get himself together to overturn the last election I think forever is a stretch.

But as you are such a close follower of US politics I will take heed and upgrade the probability of Trump/MAGA forever from 0.000001% to 0.000002%.

Thank you for your insight. I will bet accordingly.

TheScreamingEagles said:

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Andy_JS said:

Scam phone call watch. Just got a call from this number on a landline.

https://who-calls.me.uk/phone/01135139666

One of the comments:

"Offering a free medical device to all 'elderly' people over the age of 50. Claimed to be based in London, calling from a Leeds area code. Clearly using a call router and dodgy af."

Someone on here tried to claim to me that fraud in the UK was not endemic. It may not be endemic in the literal sense but it is widespread, constantly present and highly damaging. I saw a report on BBC this morning to say there have been over 3 million cases of fraud (I assume in last year).

The banks need to recognise that it is far too easy to con people into transferring their money. The only solution I can think of is for the banking system to at least hold transferred monies for 48 hours before it appears in another overseas account enabling a customer to realise they have been conned.

Watching from afar, there seems to be a massive disconnect between the banks insisting on multiple levels of KYC for normal customers, yet having no idea where the money went when a customer complains of being scammed with a domestic transfer.

Banks should be made to report the amount of money they're spending paying back victims of fraud, and the amount of fraud they believe has occurred within, from and to their accounts.

They do.

https://www.ukfinance.org.uk/system/files/Fraud The Facts 2021- FINAL.pdf

Okay. You work for a bank. If my granny sends a bunch of money to an account at your bank, why can you not immediately associate an individual with that account, given that my granny had to jump through a thousand hoops to keep her own account open?

Sandpit said:

Andy_JS said:

edmundintokyo said:

Andy_JS said:

"Adrian Hilton💎
@Adrian_Hilton

Fujitsu staff had ‘unrestricted and unauditable’ remote access to Post Office branch systems? Good grief. So somebody was lying in the High Court? I ask again, why is Paula Vennells still in Holy Orders with a CBE?

#PostOfficeScandal"
https://twitter.com/Adrian_Hilton/status/1656609940826476545

We just had a nice Fujitsu cock-up in Japan. They were contracted to build a system where you could print your government personal record at convenience stores. They made it save the record of the data it had to print in a file identified by the time. As soon as it started being used enough that two people in different convenient stores were using the system at the same time, the system started randomly printing out other people's data.

I wonder if human beings have overestimated their ability to write infallible computer code.

It’s not just their ability to write code, it’s their inability to learn the lessons of several decades of code-writing.

The latest fad is to make something quick and dirty, then fix the bugs as the customers report them. As someone who used to test software - before it got near a customer - for a living, that’s quite the transition.

It’s not even that. They failed to do something that is A Level Computer Science.

At some point within the last few days, someone mentioned an Arthur C Clarke short story. Does anyone remember who it was or what the story was? I made a mental note to look it up but now cannot remember what I was meant to be looking up.

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Andy_JS said:

Scam phone call watch. Just got a call from this number on a landline.

https://who-calls.me.uk/phone/01135139666

One of the comments:

"Offering a free medical device to all 'elderly' people over the age of 50. Claimed to be based in London, calling from a Leeds area code. Clearly using a call router and dodgy af."

Someone on here tried to claim to me that fraud in the UK was not endemic. It may not be endemic in the literal sense but it is widespread, constantly present and highly damaging. I saw a report on BBC this morning to say there have been over 3 million cases of fraud (I assume in last year).

The banks need to recognise that it is far too easy to con people into transferring their money. The only solution I can think of is for the banking system to at least hold transferred monies for 48 hours before it appears in another overseas account enabling a customer to realise they have been conned.

Watching from afar, there seems to be a massive disconnect between the banks insisting on multiple levels of KYC for normal customers, yet having no idea where the money went when a customer complains of being scammed with a domestic transfer.

Banks should be made to report the amount of money they're spending paying back victims of fraud, and the amount of fraud they believe has occurred within, from and to their accounts.

They do.

https://www.ukfinance.org.uk/system/files/Fraud The Facts 2021- FINAL.pdf

Okay. You work for a bank. If my granny sends a bunch of money to an account at your bank, why can you not immediately associate an individual with that account, given that my granny had to jump through a thousand hoops to keep her own account open?

It depends on the circumstances.

Usually it is straight forward but there may be a kink somewhere.

Such as a redirect on the account during the account switching process.

TheScreamingEagles said:

algarkirk said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Why are monarchists such snowflakes?

Australian monarchists have demanded that the state broadcaster apologise for its coverage of the coronation, during which its Aboriginal host suggested that British royalty had left “scars”.

The Australian Monarchist League (AML) launched a petition for an apology from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) for its “biased” coverage. The league also demanded an independent inquiry into the broadcaster’s “hijacking” of the historic occasion.

The league’s chairman, Philip Benwell, urged supporters to complain, saying that there had been “vitriolic attacks on the King, the monarchy, the British settlement and everything that came thereafter”.

The state-funded broadcaster was criticised after it aired a 45-minute discussion prior to the ceremony which featured a panel dominated by pro-republic figures — including the ABC’s leading Aboriginal host, Stan Grant, who spoke about colonisation and the damage the monarchy had inflicted on indigenous Australians.

“Before we get to the fantasy Australia, the Disneyland Australia, let’s deal with the real Australia,” Grant said in the broadcast. “Let’s not imagine that we can just look at this ceremony tonight and see this as something that is distant, that is just ceremonial and doesn’t hold weight.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/australias-state-broadcaster-accused-of-vitriolic-attacks-on-the-king-sgn72wcp9

Can I just give a wave for all the other monarchists who are not snowflakes (and not fanatics either) and are unfazed by freedom of speech and opinion. And who notice that everyone is free to attack the monarchy but on the whole the monarchy is not so free to defend itself.

They have The Met to defend them, who use bad methods to silence pro-democracy supporters.

Charles Windsor has not condemned the Met's action, his silence is tacit condoning of the arrests.

More TSE bollocks.

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Badenoch is pissing off Mr Speaker with her insult to Parliament.

https://news.sky.com/story/who-do-you-think-you-are-talking-to-speaker-rebukes-kemi-badenoch-as-tory-mps-line-up-to-criticise-eu-law-u-turn-12878350

You didn't share this piece of priceless tw@ttery.
..But staunch Brexiteers within the Conservative ranks have criticised the change, with former business secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg accusing Mr Sunak of "behaving like a Borgia"...

I'm curious - is he implying adultery, incest, theft, bribery, or murder ?
(I think we can rule out simony.)

That is Kemi's leadership hopes over then. The ERG and Conservative right won't forgive her abandoning repeal of EU laws. If the Tories lose the next general election she will be seen as linked as much to the defeated Sunak as Hunt now

Far be it from me to defend Kemi, but wasn't it Sunak who pledged to repeal all EU laws within a year as part of his leadership pitch? Who's in charge?

Cookie said:

At some point within the last few days, someone mentioned an Arthur C Clarke short story. Does anyone remember who it was or what the story was? I made a mental note to look it up but now cannot remember what I was meant to be looking up.

"Refugees". It wasn't me.