LAB majority hits new high in the general election betting – politicalbetting.com

This is quite some graph on drugs deaths in Scotland. We are charging ahead of the Americans. Obviously, "SNP bad", but if this starts to infect England too...

(the graph takes a little bit of interpretation)

https://twitter.com/VictimOfMaths/status/1674444969141063680?s=20

Eabhal said:

This is quite some graph on drugs deaths in Scotland. We are charging ahead of the Americans. Obviously, "SNP bad", but if this starts to infect England too...

(the graph takes a little bit of interpretation)

https://twitter.com/VictimOfMaths/status/1674444969141063680?s=20

That's a pretty scary bunch of graphs. Looks about right though.

Leon said:

Foxy said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Sean_F said:

Gardenwalker said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gardenwalker said:

Some more (slightly wonky) evidence for my contention that one of Britain’s umpteen issues is oligopolistic markets.

https://twitter.com/gilesyb/status/1674426388592615424?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

Your contentions are based on the premise that Britain is damned and the US couldn't be better, and is a supreme level of confirmation bias that's so strong it's almost performance art.

Don’t be daft.
When have I ever said, “the US couldn’t be better”?
It’s better in many ways, worse in many others.

A good Rawlsian test might be, where would you rather be born in 2023? I’m genuinely torn by that one.

I do believe it is better for most professionals, but even there it is hardly clear cut.

The USA is an enigma. It's economic performance is excellent, compared to the rich world average. It has hugely powerful armed forces, and top class universities,

But *something* is wrong. Our standard of living is 25% lower than that of the USA, but our life expectancy is four years higher. The USA is the richest of any big economy, but nowhere in Europe do you see the sort of poverty you see there, outside Southern Italy, Jaywick, parts of the Balkans and the East.

OTOH, perhaps it is the very harshness of failure in the country that drives people to succeed.

The USA is an excellent place to be rich or a high earner, salaries for top professionals, doctors, lawyers and acedemics are higher than other western nations (hence so many very skilled workers move there). The houses are bigger and if you can afford private healthcare and private education and an expensive car and to live in a low crime area you will have a very comfortable lifestyle.

On the other hand if you are on minimum wage or unemployed in the USA, it is one of the few nations without universal healthcare, state education standards are below the western average, there is a shortage of public housing and crime where you live is likely to be rife and public transport poor outside the biggest cities

It’s better for everyone - at least income wise - beyond say decile 30%.

Not just very high earners.

It’s also, maybe two, three or four different countries really.

Blue big cities
Red big cities
Blue states
Red states

"It’s better for everyone - at least income wise - beyond say decile 30%."

This just isn't true, if you value a wider, richer, more beautiful life, with nice cities and low crime and less obesity and no Donald Trump, etc

Yes it's true if you focus solely on income and tax, but widen your perspective and it is ridiculous. Urban America is generally hideous, downtowns are car lots full of tranq addicts, people die much younger in America for a reason

The suburbs are often idyllic, like the villas of the last Romans in Britain

Interesting article on the drug crisis in America:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/06/mexico-republican-bill-2024-election/674553/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

"In the past, that impulse led Republicans to vow a war on drugs inside the United States: harsher penalties for users and dealers, more powers for police to search and seize. But this time, the users are Americans whom Republicans regard as their own. Five out of every eight victims of opioid overdose are non-Hispanic white people.

Whereas historically, fatal overdoses have been an urban problem, synthetic opioids have been taking lives almost exactly equally between urban and rural areas. In deep-blue states such as California and New York, the death rates from synthetic opioids are even worse in rural areas than in the cities.

Republican lawmakers have little appetite for a domestic crackdown that would criminalize so many of their own constituents and their constituents’ relatives."

My recent drive into Lexington Kentucky is something I will never forget

I went from the lush gorgeous horse country I had been promised (like a CGI version of a sunnier, greener, if slightly boring Berkshire) into The Walking Dead, within about five minutes (of strip malls)

Zombie addicts wandering around the centre of the road, pants halfway down their knees, addicts slumped in doorways, panhandlers lurching towards you with palsied hands extended, and the worst of them shaking and jibbering like the possessed

It was only five brief blocks, but Jeez. And when I parked downtown I realised the homeless drugged-up zombies were making their way there, as well

Not fun. Not fun at all. Scary and dystopian. And yes, as much white as black. No racial difference

And note this was not Frisco or LA or Portland or Chicago or any of the big, famously troubled cities, this was a supposedly quiet, affluent city in a nice part of Kentucky

You must have needed a hit of Tramadol to cope with the trauma.

Eabhal said:

This is quite some graph on drugs deaths in Scotland. We are charging ahead of the Americans. Obviously, "SNP bad", but if this starts to infect England too...

(the graph takes a little bit of interpretation)

https://twitter.com/VictimOfMaths/status/1674444969141063680?s=20

That is terrifying. If the UK follows America with drugs, as we have followed them with obesity, then Jeeeeeez

..

Foxy said:

AbandonedHope said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

Leon said:

Foxy said:

Carnyx said:

Foxy said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Farooq said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

'THE eco-yob carried off the Ashes pitch is the son of a millionaire private equity chief with a £6million mansion whose firm invests in climate change "opportunities"...he Sun can today reveal Knorr’s dad Robert, 54, is managing partner of mega private equity company MidEuropa, which has assets worth £4.5bn.

He and his high-flying NHS doctor wife, who share two other kids, own a £6million gated six-bed mansion in leafy Hampstead, North West London, where celebs like comedian Ricky Gervais live.

A hybrid 19-plate BMW was parked on the driveway of the swanky Spanish villa-style mansion today...Oxford University student Knorr was detained by police after chucking orange powder on to the Lord’s field.

He has now been charged with aggravated trespass.'


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/22863531/eco-jonny-bairstow-ashes-millionaire-business-mansion/

Your politics of envy are so unConservative.

Exactly what was confusing me. HYUFD is normally so in favour of posh universities such as Oxford and Cambridge because we are supposed to grovel to their products, ditto people who will gain massively from recent and future increases to IHT allowances. He ought to be performing proskynesis to this young gentleman.

I've got a measure of HYUFD. It's all about hierarchy. There are signifiers of high social status, and although a degree from a "good" university is one of them, the signifiers themselves exist in a hierarchy. And political purity is one of the highest. So an Oxford graduate who is a conservative is thus above an Oxford graduate who is a liberal, or socialist, or green. And a conservative with no degree is above still above a liberal aristo with a PhD.
He's not averse to transgressing the hierarchies or even reversing them completely when he wants to prove that a person who is "impure" is indeed impure. So a posh background is a thing to be vaunted in a neutral scenario, but when the person in question is politically suspect, it's a stick to beat them with.

For all his preaching of ideological purity, his lower-order categories are incredibly fluid in the service of the higher-order ones.

Alternative theory - the Just Stop Oil protestor was just a worthless little scrote, who clearly didn't want to 'stop oil' enough to prevent him wearing an ensemble of oil derived synthetic fibres.

Alternative alternative theory — he's an Oxford student not posh enough to lob bricks through restaurant windows.

I was thinking that too, having heard about that sort of thing from friends, one of whom had her local village gastropub trashed by one of those gangs of "undergraduates", soi-disant from the "Bullingdon Club". In what respect is this more gentlemanly? HUFD's social calculus does not offer me an answer.

The Bullingdon Club is effectively extinct, Just Stop Oil is very much still going

They don't go by that name any more, as restaurants tend to give a short and four-letter response to being rung up with "Yah? Posh Gastropub there? I'm Secretary of the Bullingdon Club and we want - "

I was once part of a dining club, though not a particularly destructive one, though we did drink rather a lot, climb out of first floor windows etc. It was the Eighties and being a bit Yah was the fashion. We always booked under the name Frank Melena, a medical joke name.

Surely not to imply that you were a bunch of shits?

More or less!

I don't think we ever tried to book the same place twice. We wore black tie, drank far too much, allowed only a token woman at each meeting, but always tipped well.

It was the Eighties in London and being a tosser was quite fashionable.

My older daughter has momentarily considered LEICESTER university

Eeek

A very dull and boring city. Nottingham is far better. I was also recently impressed by Birmingham - really - a city on the up and up.

She's very smart and could probably walk into Oxbridge, but doesn't want to ("too weird and traditional") and could also easily do UCL or Imperial (but again says No: wants to be out of London - which I understand entirely, at her age, growing up in London)

So she's looking at provincial unis. Prime candidates at the moment are St Andrews, Edinburgh, Exeter, York. Sussex is her back-up

I hated Oxford. Loved the Open Day. Interview a disaster (and rather eye-opening). Was greatly relieved when they wrote to say ‘No’.

Undergrad and postgrad #1 from St Andrews. Loved it. First prospectus I sent for and never even visited it. Postgrad #2 and PhD from Dundee. Loved it. Well worth considering especially if looking at medical/science-type things.

I was fortunate enough to go to St Ands pre-Wills and Kate. Full of yahs and hoorays but lovely and nothing objectionable. Calibre of students went downhill a bit once they realised they could snag a Prince or Princess by going there.

Sounds positive.

Of course received PB wisdom is that he would be better off as a apprentice plumber or plasterer. Or was that just other people's children?

I think the best one during the height of Brexit Britain stands alone hysteria was bigging up exciting careers in the the fish processing industry.

Leon said:

WHY are drug deaths so bad in Scotland?

I don't know the answer. Benzos is sometimes mentioned. We also just take more (I know that is stupidly simple, but worth stating). Post-industrial decline?

We also have some remarkable stats around drug related amputations. I think one small NHS board is doing one groin-injection related amputation a month? Can't find the article.

Eabhal said:

Leon said:

WHY are drug deaths so bad in Scotland?

I don't know the answer. Benzos is sometimes mentioned. We also just take more (I know that is stupidly simple, but worth stating). Post-industrial decline?

We also have some remarkable stats around drug related amputations. I think one small NHS board is doing one groin-injection related amputation a month? Can't find the article.

https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-drug-death-capital-politicians-new-powers-heroin-edinburgh/

Our police also carry naloxone now, which might start to help.

AbandonedHope said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

Leon said:

Foxy said:

Carnyx said:

Foxy said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Farooq said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

'THE eco-yob carried off the Ashes pitch is the son of a millionaire private equity chief with a £6million mansion whose firm invests in climate change "opportunities"...he Sun can today reveal Knorr’s dad Robert, 54, is managing partner of mega private equity company MidEuropa, which has assets worth £4.5bn.

He and his high-flying NHS doctor wife, who share two other kids, own a £6million gated six-bed mansion in leafy Hampstead, North West London, where celebs like comedian Ricky Gervais live.

A hybrid 19-plate BMW was parked on the driveway of the swanky Spanish villa-style mansion today...Oxford University student Knorr was detained by police after chucking orange powder on to the Lord’s field.

He has now been charged with aggravated trespass.'


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/22863531/eco-jonny-bairstow-ashes-millionaire-business-mansion/

Your politics of envy are so unConservative.

Exactly what was confusing me. HYUFD is normally so in favour of posh universities such as Oxford and Cambridge because we are supposed to grovel to their products, ditto people who will gain massively from recent and future increases to IHT allowances. He ought to be performing proskynesis to this young gentleman.

I've got a measure of HYUFD. It's all about hierarchy. There are signifiers of high social status, and although a degree from a "good" university is one of them, the signifiers themselves exist in a hierarchy. And political purity is one of the highest. So an Oxford graduate who is a conservative is thus above an Oxford graduate who is a liberal, or socialist, or green. And a conservative with no degree is above still above a liberal aristo with a PhD.
He's not averse to transgressing the hierarchies or even reversing them completely when he wants to prove that a person who is "impure" is indeed impure. So a posh background is a thing to be vaunted in a neutral scenario, but when the person in question is politically suspect, it's a stick to beat them with.

For all his preaching of ideological purity, his lower-order categories are incredibly fluid in the service of the higher-order ones.

Alternative theory - the Just Stop Oil protestor was just a worthless little scrote, who clearly didn't want to 'stop oil' enough to prevent him wearing an ensemble of oil derived synthetic fibres.

Alternative alternative theory — he's an Oxford student not posh enough to lob bricks through restaurant windows.

I was thinking that too, having heard about that sort of thing from friends, one of whom had her local village gastropub trashed by one of those gangs of "undergraduates", soi-disant from the "Bullingdon Club". In what respect is this more gentlemanly? HUFD's social calculus does not offer me an answer.

The Bullingdon Club is effectively extinct, Just Stop Oil is very much still going

They don't go by that name any more, as restaurants tend to give a short and four-letter response to being rung up with "Yah? Posh Gastropub there? I'm Secretary of the Bullingdon Club and we want - "

I was once part of a dining club, though not a particularly destructive one, though we did drink rather a lot, climb out of first floor windows etc. It was the Eighties and being a bit Yah was the fashion. We always booked under the name Frank Melena, a medical joke name.

Surely not to imply that you were a bunch of shits?

More or less!

I don't think we ever tried to book the same place twice. We wore black tie, drank far too much, allowed only a token woman at each meeting, but always tipped well.

It was the Eighties in London and being a tosser was quite fashionable.

My older daughter has momentarily considered LEICESTER university

Eeek

A very dull and boring city. Nottingham is far better. I was also recently impressed by Birmingham - really - a city on the up and up.

She's very smart and could probably walk into Oxbridge, but doesn't want to ("too weird and traditional") and could also easily do UCL or Imperial (but again says No: wants to be out of London - which I understand entirely, at her age, growing up in London)

So she's looking at provincial unis. Prime candidates at the moment are St Andrews, Edinburgh, Exeter, York. Sussex is her back-up

I hated Oxford. Loved the Open Day. Interview a disaster (and rather eye-opening). Was greatly relieved when they wrote to say ‘No’.

Undergrad and postgrad #1 from St Andrews. Loved it. First prospectus I sent for and never even visited it. Postgrad #2 and PhD from Dundee. Loved it. Well worth considering especially if looking at medical/science-type things.

I was fortunate enough to go to St Ands pre-Wills and Kate. Full of yahs and hoorays but lovely and nothing objectionable. Calibre of students went downhill a bit once they realised they could snag a Prince or Princess by going there.

One thing to say, and I daresay even with massive expansion is - it's SMALL. It's not for everyone. But if you're ready to escape the big city, it's pretty close to being a campus university, with all that entails, townspeople or no. And seaside for a uni is a wonderful thing, so much so that I now think we missed a trick not directing more university expansion at the smartening up of Clacton, Yarmouth, Grimsby and so forth. (I believe Boston was a satellite site for De Montfort but that seemed a half hearted effort).

For a red brick that combines a decent city and university with the good aspects of feeling like you are somewhere smaller, I've rarely heard a bad word about Sheffield over the years (no doubt cue some qualification here), but dyor.

kle4 said:

Always taking the easy way out during consultation - they ignore other idiotic suggestions.

Alas...

The final stage of the consultation process has produced English constituency names which are longer and more cumbersome than at any election since 1950 AND longer and more cumbersome than at any stage in the consultation process.

In 1950, the mean length of a constituency name in England was 12.7 characters.

In 2010 it had reached 15.7 characters, then a post-war high.

These final proposals are now 16.8 characters, itself up by 0.8 from 16.0 as a result of the last lot of consultations.

Just 138 English constituencies will consist of a single word.

In 1950, 230 did.

There are now going to be 203 "and" constituencies in England alone. In 1950 there were just 53 in all of the UK.
https://twitter.com/philipjcowley/status/1674023708548005888

SeaShanty should enjoy the new names though:

Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme, anyone.

In fairness I think a lot of organisations don't know the line between lawful and unlawful positive discrimination, and most of the time they're not going to get in trouble for erring on the side of doing more rather than less.

Initiatives to increase the numbers of women and people from ethnic minorities in the RAF led to unlawful positive discrimination, an inquiry has found...

The internal inquiry was sparked by the resignation of a female RAF Group Captain who told her superiors the policy penalised white men. The inquiry found she had faced significant and unreasonable pressure to meet diversity targets...

But the unnamed senior female RAF recruitment officer told her superiors that fast tracking women and ethnic minorities was contrary to the equality act and discriminated against white men.

The inquiry, conducted by the Ministry of Defence, found the pressure to meet those targets led to unlawful, positive discrimination.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66060490

kle4 said:

Andy_JS said:

I trust Steve Smith to be truthful as to whether he took a catch or not.

I don't, because players can be wrong so their truthfulness doesn't matter, but I'd have given it on replay.

Yeah, looked out to me (sadly)

Lab hold in Haringey but swing to Lib Dems.

Lib Dem hold in Dorset.

In the United States, affirmative action (as it is now called) usually loses* when voters decide directly.

For example: "Initiative 200 was a Washington state initiative to the Legislature promoted by California affirmative-action opponent Ward Connerly, and filed by Scott Smith and Tim Eyman.[1] It sought to prohibit racial and gender preferences by state and local government. It was on the Washington ballot in November 1998 and passed with 58.22% of the vote. It added to Washington's law (but not its constitution) the following language:

The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.[2]

Initiative 200 effectively curtailed any form of affirmative action in the state.[3] In April 2019, the Washington Legislature passed Initiative 1000, ending the ban on affirmative action.[4] However, in November 2019, Referendum 88 blocked Initiative 1000 from going into effect."
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initiative_200

So it has lost twice here. Washington is not a conservative state. (And twice in California.)

We learned some interesting -- and amusing -- things in the first fight about who was actually gaining from affirmative action. Washington state is a community property state, so a wealthy couple could often qualify their company as female-owned by giving a little piece of it to a minor daughter, or daughters.

And then there was this oddity: Japanese-Americans were given an advantage in contracting, but not in university admissions. As someone remarked when I mentioned this years ago, they were simultaneously "white", and "non-white".

(*I believe affirmative action has won in a few heavily black cities.)

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

You cannot trust Brexiteers like Sunak with defence.

The head of the British army could resign, allies say, amid a fierce row over further proposed cuts to land forces in the run-up to a special defence review responding to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Interviews have already begun to replace Gen Sir Patrick Sanders, who has served only a year as chief of the general staff, and friends of the military leader say he may quit even sooner if the defence secretary, Ben Wallace, imposes further cuts.

“He told Wallace that he could not deliver without more headcount and budget, and Wallace didn’t like that all,” an ally of Sanders, speaking on condition of anonymity, said. “It looks like cuts are coming and [Sanders] may use this as an opportunity to resign.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/29/head-of-british-army-could-quit-in-row-over-further-cuts

The army has 18 brass bands. There is plenty of useless tat that contributes nothing to the defence of the country and could be cut.

You expect us to defend the country with only 100 tuba players?

StillWaters said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Sean_F said:

Gardenwalker said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gardenwalker said:

Some more (slightly wonky) evidence for my contention that one of Britain’s umpteen issues is oligopolistic markets.

https://twitter.com/gilesyb/status/1674426388592615424?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

Your contentions are based on the premise that Britain is damned and the US couldn't be better, and is a supreme level of confirmation bias that's so strong it's almost performance art.

Don’t be daft.
When have I ever said, “the US couldn’t be better”?
It’s better in many ways, worse in many others.

A good Rawlsian test might be, where would you rather be born in 2023? I’m genuinely torn by that one.

I do believe it is better for most professionals, but even there it is hardly clear cut.

The USA is an enigma. It's economic performance is excellent, compared to the rich world average. It has hugely powerful armed forces, and top class universities,

But *something* is wrong. Our standard of living is 25% lower than that of the USA, but our life expectancy is four years higher. The USA is the richest of any big economy, but nowhere in Europe do you see the sort of poverty you see there, outside Southern Italy, Jaywick, parts of the Balkans and the East.

OTOH, perhaps it is the very harshness of failure in the country that drives people to succeed.

The USA is an excellent place to be rich or a high earner, salaries for top professionals, doctors, lawyers and acedemics are higher than other western nations (hence so many very skilled workers move there). The houses are bigger and if you can afford private healthcare and private education and an expensive car and to live in a low crime area you will have a very comfortable lifestyle.

On the other hand if you are on minimum wage or unemployed in the USA, it is one of the few nations without universal healthcare, state education standards are below the western average, there is a shortage of public housing and crime where you live is likely to be rife and public transport poor outside the biggest cities

It’s better for everyone - at least income wise - beyond say decile 30%.

Not just very high earners.

It’s also, maybe two, three or four different countries really.

Blue big cities
Red big cities
Blue states
Red states

"It’s better for everyone - at least income wise - beyond say decile 30%."

This just isn't true, if you value a wider, richer, more beautiful life, with nice cities and low crime and less obesity and no Donald Trump, etc

Yes it's true if you focus solely on income and tax, but widen your perspective and it is ridiculous. Urban America is generally
hideous, downtowns are car lots full of tranq addicts, people die much younger in America for a reason

The suburbs are often idyllic, like the villas of the last Romans in Britain

I live in a suburb in the US.

I mentioned where I live to a client over lunch in Toronto today… he said “that’s one of the nicest places on earth”…

Chelsea, Mass?

...

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

You cannot trust Brexiteers like Sunak with defence.

The head of the British army could resign, allies say, amid a fierce row over further proposed cuts to land forces in the run-up to a special defence review responding to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Interviews have already begun to replace Gen Sir Patrick Sanders, who has served only a year as chief of the general staff, and friends of the military leader say he may quit even sooner if the defence secretary, Ben Wallace, imposes further cuts.

“He told Wallace that he could not deliver without more headcount and budget, and Wallace didn’t like that all,” an ally of Sanders, speaking on condition of anonymity, said. “It looks like cuts are coming and [Sanders] may use this as an opportunity to resign.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/29/head-of-british-army-could-quit-in-row-over-further-cuts

The army has 18 brass bands. There is plenty of useless tat that contributes nothing to the defence of the country and could be cut.

Perhaps they serve as a torturous mind-**** to the enemy. " Stop that God awful noise and we'll surrender".

Mexicanpete said:

...

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

You cannot trust Brexiteers like Sunak with defence.

The head of the British army could resign, allies say, amid a fierce row over further proposed cuts to land forces in the run-up to a special defence review responding to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Interviews have already begun to replace Gen Sir Patrick Sanders, who has served only a year as chief of the general staff, and friends of the military leader say he may quit even sooner if the defence secretary, Ben Wallace, imposes further cuts.

“He told Wallace that he could not deliver without more headcount and budget, and Wallace didn’t like that all,” an ally of Sanders, speaking on condition of anonymity, said. “It looks like cuts are coming and [Sanders] may use this as an opportunity to resign.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/29/head-of-british-army-could-quit-in-row-over-further-cuts

The army has 18 brass bands. There is plenty of useless tat that contributes nothing to the defence of the country and could be cut.

Perhaps they serve as a torturous mind-**** to the enemy. " Stop that God awful noise and we'll surrender".

That's what the bagpipes are for, surely? A tuba doesn't really cut it.

Sean_F said:

Gardenwalker said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gardenwalker said:

Some more (slightly wonky) evidence for my contention that one of Britain’s umpteen issues is oligopolistic markets.

https://twitter.com/gilesyb/status/1674426388592615424?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

Your contentions are based on the premise that Britain is damned and the US couldn't be better, and is a supreme level of confirmation bias that's so strong it's almost performance art.

Don’t be daft.
When have I ever said, “the US couldn’t be better”?
It’s better in many ways, worse in many others.

A good Rawlsian test might be, where would you rather be born in 2023? I’m genuinely torn by that one.

I do believe it is better for most professionals, but even there it is hardly clear cut.

The USA is an enigma. It's economic performance is excellent, compared to the rich world average. It has hugely powerful armed forces, and top class universities,

But *something* is wrong. Our standard of living is 25% lower than that of the USA, but our life expectancy is four years higher. The USA is the richest of any big economy, but nowhere in Europe do you see the sort of poverty you see there, outside Southern Italy, Jaywick, parts of the Balkans and the East.

OTOH, perhaps it is the very harshness of failure in the country that drives people to succeed.

I've visited Jaywick, briefly. Although it's poor, the atmosphere was okay. Quite relaxed in fact. Didn't feel dangerous or threatening in any way. Not comparable to an American inner city.

Leon said:

Foxy said:

Carnyx said:

Foxy said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Farooq said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

'THE eco-yob carried off the Ashes pitch is the son of a millionaire private equity chief with a £6million mansion whose firm invests in climate change "opportunities"...he Sun can today reveal Knorr’s dad Robert, 54, is managing partner of mega private equity company MidEuropa, which has assets worth £4.5bn.

He and his high-flying NHS doctor wife, who share two other kids, own a £6million gated six-bed mansion in leafy Hampstead, North West London, where celebs like comedian Ricky Gervais live.

A hybrid 19-plate BMW was parked on the driveway of the swanky Spanish villa-style mansion today...Oxford University student Knorr was detained by police after chucking orange powder on to the Lord’s field.

He has now been charged with aggravated trespass.'


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/22863531/eco-jonny-bairstow-ashes-millionaire-business-mansion/

Your politics of envy are so unConservative.

Exactly what was confusing me. HYUFD is normally so in favour of posh universities such as Oxford and Cambridge because we are supposed to grovel to their products, ditto people who will gain massively from recent and future increases to IHT allowances. He ought to be performing proskynesis to this young gentleman.

I've got a measure of HYUFD. It's all about hierarchy. There are signifiers of high social status, and although a degree from a "good" university is one of them, the signifiers themselves exist in a hierarchy. And political purity is one of the highest. So an Oxford graduate who is a conservative is thus above an Oxford graduate who is a liberal, or socialist, or green. And a conservative with no degree is above still above a liberal aristo with a PhD.
He's not averse to transgressing the hierarchies or even reversing them completely when he wants to prove that a person who is "impure" is indeed impure. So a posh background is a thing to be vaunted in a neutral scenario, but when the person in question is politically suspect, it's a stick to beat them with.

For all his preaching of ideological purity, his lower-order categories are incredibly fluid in the service of the higher-order ones.

Alternative theory - the Just Stop Oil protestor was just a worthless little scrote, who clearly didn't want to 'stop oil' enough to prevent him wearing an ensemble of oil derived synthetic fibres.

Alternative alternative theory — he's an Oxford student not posh enough to lob bricks through restaurant windows.

I was thinking that too, having heard about that sort of thing from friends, one of whom had her local village gastropub trashed by one of those gangs of "undergraduates", soi-disant from the "Bullingdon Club". In what respect is this more gentlemanly? HUFD's social calculus does not offer me an answer.

The Bullingdon Club is effectively extinct, Just Stop Oil is very much still going

They don't go by that name any more, as restaurants tend to give a short and four-letter response to being rung up with "Yah? Posh Gastropub there? I'm Secretary of the Bullingdon Club and we want - "

I was once part of a dining club, though not a particularly destructive one, though we did drink rather a lot, climb out of first floor windows etc. It was the Eighties and being a bit Yah was the fashion. We always booked under the name Frank Melena, a medical joke name.

Surely not to imply that you were a bunch of shits?

More or less!

I don't think we ever tried to book the same place twice. We wore black tie, drank far too much, allowed only a token woman at each meeting, but always tipped well.

It was the Eighties in London and being a tosser was quite fashionable.

My older daughter has momentarily considered LEICESTER university

Eeek

The university where DNA profiling was invented, by Alec Jeffreys in 1984.

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

"Jeffreys says he had a "eureka moment" in his lab in Leicester after looking at the X-ray film image of a DNA experiment on 10 September 1984, which unexpectedly showed both similarities and differences between the DNA of different members of his technician's family. Within about half an hour, he continued, he realized the possible scope of DNA fingerprinting, which uses variations in the genetic information to identify individuals. The method has become important in forensic science to assist police detective work, and it has also proved useful in resolving paternity and immigration disputes. The method can also be applied to non-human species, for example in wildlife population genetics studies. Before his methods were commercialized in 1987, his laboratory was the only center in the world that carried out DNA fingerprinting, and was consequently very busy, receiving inquiries from all over the globe."

Andy_JS said:

BBC weather seems to have gone wrong, showing autumnal temperatures.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/2643743

I noticed that on their *TV forecast* a couple of hours ago!

Andy_JS said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Andy_JS said:

BBC weather seems to have gone wrong, showing autumnal temperatures.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/2643743

I noticed that on their *TV forecast* a couple of hours ago!

It's slightly odd that no-one spotted it on the TV forecast just before they aired it.

Met Office data seems OK:

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/forecast/u10j3c88x#?date=2023-06-30