The best part is if it does indeed come to pass that they didn't remove the directive, the ONLY people to blame are the Brexiteers and associated loons who were sitting on the Government benches not getting it done...
If Cruella's Rwanda plan is ruled unlawful, can Richi sack her to show his strong man credentials, or does he have to keep her so she doesn't steal his lunch money?
Do you mean, "If the will of the British people is frustrated by unelected woke judges..."?
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
We don't agree often but on this I certainly do
I listened to ITV report of the massacre at the Kfar Aza kibbutz and literally wept
I could not relate it to my wife, and whilst we need responsible reporting the tendency to upset is a concern not least for the number of children who may be watching
How many children are “watching PB”?!
I wasn't talking about PB but Sky and BBC
@Anabobazina was talking about PB. He wants us to stop talking about Gaza/israel because it upsets him. Or if we do talk about it we can only do it in very general ways or he gets tearful
It’s fairly ridiculous. Every news and social media is discussing it in depth. Yes it is hard and distressing. But it is the news
I don't get tearful. I just find it ruins PB for me, which I chiefly visit for a) entertainment b) debate and c) betting tips, in that order. Maybe some PBers like this stuff – but in that case they are very different animals to me.
Learn to scroll. Its not hard
Example. I am finding this debate about the relative combustibility of electric vehicles monumentally dull and nerdish. If I had to read all the comments I would weep, like you
But I don’t. As soon as it becomes clear that this is the subject of the comment I scroll and move on. It can be done
I don’t loudly demand that people stop talking about it. Each to their own
I didn't 'loudly demand' anything, I merely made a polite request. Clearly you aren't going to stop posting the stuff, so I'll now politely withdraw.
Oh do chill out.
I tell you what - serious offer - in future I will put WAR COMMENT on top of any comment about the war. Will that do? I mean, I think it’s kinda dumb, but if you or others genuinely get upset by mere words then you will be pre warned and you can scroll?
I really can’t do much more than that
I didn't ask you to stop posting comments about the war. I ask you (and others) whether they'd consider giving over with the detailed rolling updates of mutilated and murdered women and children. They have refused to, which is their right, of course. Don't shoot me merely for asking.
You're quie right. I have over 30 close relatives there and the only way I knew they were OK wihout calling my sister was because I knew they wouldn' have been at a rave. Neiher would hey have been in he army. Then yesterday I heard one was a soldier who was missing. Its very complicaed and while Israel have Fascists in heir government -one as minister of homeland securiy -talking abou arociies in graphic deail is jus prurien....
I'm missing a leer on my keyboard. Sorry
Yes, for the last, or ast, part of your post not the first.
If Cruella's Rwanda plan is ruled unlawful, can Richi sack her to show his strong man credentials, or does he have to keep her so she doesn't steal his lunch money?
Do you mean, "If the will of the British people is frustrated by unelected woke judges..."?
I mean if Judges uphold the Law as it stands thanks to ERG incompetence...
It was a diesel car that burned Luton to the ground. (LBC)
Only a bit of Luton. If it had burned the whole of Luton to the ground, I'd have personally funded a statue of the diesel banger as a lovely tribute for its selfless act.
'Boring but Stable' reminds me of Theresa May between Cameron's departure and the 2017 election.
May's premature apotheosis was quite extraordinary. One evening as I recall the Number 10 spin team shut up shop for the night - let the Labour party destroy itself, we'll enjoy the show, seemed to be the attitude. In retrospect this seems supremely hubristic as she then went on nearly to lose to Jeremy Corbyn and from that moment her power immediately drained away.
I am taking for granted at this point that Starmer will be Prime Minister after the next election, but it is impossible to tell when the bubble bursts. I presume that his relative popularity will last longer than Theresa May's did. Nevertheless, there are two types of politician: those who are helpless prisoners of events, and those who mistakenly believe they are not helpless prisoners of events.
On key difference between Starmer and May is that Starmer has successfully neutered the Corbynite wing of his party, where May failed to do this with the ERG wing of hers.
I'm off work cos I got badly bitten by a child yesterday. Went to NHS walk-in. Cleaned up, test for tetanus returned negative, bloods taken, a course of antibiotics in my hands, and a referral to OH for Hepatitis B test. All done in much less than 30 minutes. I know there are some horror stories, but the good ones ought to be recorded too.
It was a diesel car that burned Luton to the ground. (LBC)
Only a bit of Luton. If it had burned the whole of Luton to the ground, I'd have personally funded a statue of the diesel banger as a lovely tribute for its selfless act.
Hey, you can get to some really nice places, from Luton...
It was a diesel car that burned Luton to the ground. (LBC)
Only a bit of Luton. If it had burned the whole of Luton to the ground, I'd have personally funded a statue of the diesel banger as a lovely tribute for its selfless act.
Hey, you can get to some really nice places, from Luton...
Its like the best bits of Swindon - the sign that says "thank you for your visit" as you leave...
It was a diesel car that burned Luton to the ground. (LBC)
Only a bit of Luton. If it had burned the whole of Luton to the ground, I'd have personally funded a statue of the diesel banger as a lovely tribute for its selfless act.
It seems the car park did not have a sprinkler system which in itself is astonishing and must surely lead to a review of all such car park's fire safety systems
It was a diesel car that burned Luton to the ground. (LBC)
Only a bit of Luton. If it had burned the whole of Luton to the ground, I'd have personally funded a statue of the diesel banger as a lovely tribute for its selfless act.
Hey, you can get to some really nice places, from Luton...
Did this exploding diesel happen to be parked next to an entirely blameless and non-explosive EV by any chance?
I'm off work cos I got badly bitten by a child yesterday. Went to NHS walk-in. Cleaned up, test for tetanus returned negative, bloods taken, a course of antibiotics in my hands, and a referral to OH for Hepatitis B test. All done in much less than 30 minutes. I know there are some horror stories, but the good ones ought to be recorded too.
'Boring but Stable' reminds me of Theresa May between Cameron's departure and the 2017 election.
May's premature apotheosis was quite extraordinary. One evening as I recall the Number 10 spin team shut up shop for the night - let the Labour party destroy itself, we'll enjoy the show, seemed to be the attitude. In retrospect this seems supremely hubristic as she then went on nearly to lose to Jeremy Corbyn and from that moment her power immediately drained away.
I am taking for granted at this point that Starmer will be Prime Minister after the next election, but it is impossible to tell when the bubble bursts. I presume that his relative popularity will last longer than Theresa May's did. Nevertheless, there are two types of politician: those who are helpless prisoners of events, and those who mistakenly believe they are not helpless prisoners of events.
On key difference between Starmer and May is that Starmer has successfully neutered the Corbynite wing of his party, where May failed to do this with the ERG wing of hers.
It all stemmed from losing her majority. Throughout the rest of her premiership she was tossed to and fro between the ERG types, the DUP, and the Dominic Grieve/Anna Soubry lot. Had she gained a large majority she could have done what she wanted and probably would have shafted all three.
I wonder (not really) if this unconditional retraction and apology is off her own bat or was induced by a letter?
Am intriguedd as to how it may have been possible to damage his reputation.
Dunno, if a prominent political editor puts their hands up to a false portrayal of someone’s views it might give me pause for thought on preconceptions about their reputation. Perhaps not on PB though.
I'm off work cos I got badly bitten by a child yesterday. Went to NHS walk-in. Cleaned up, test for tetanus returned negative, bloods taken, a course of antibiotics in my hands, and a referral to OH for Hepatitis B test. All done in much less than 30 minutes. I know there are some horror stories, but the good ones ought to be recorded too.
From my anecdotal experience emergency care in the NHS is the thing it still does really, really well (clearly there can be big delays at being seen in busy periods, but the quality and standard of care is always, in my experience, very good).
The problem comes when you need to go onto the dreaded waiting list, or you have a non-‘urgent’ (but still important) health matter that you need looking at, but come up against the “system.”
I'm off work cos I got badly bitten by a child yesterday. Went to NHS walk-in. Cleaned up, test for tetanus returned negative, bloods taken, a course of antibiotics in my hands, and a referral to OH for Hepatitis B test. All done in much less than 30 minutes. I know there are some horror stories, but the good ones ought to be recorded too.
Agreed, need more good news stories about schools where children are eating teachers.
I'm off work cos I got badly bitten by a child yesterday. Went to NHS walk-in. Cleaned up, test for tetanus returned negative, bloods taken, a course of antibiotics in my hands, and a referral to OH for Hepatitis B test. All done in much less than 30 minutes. I know there are some horror stories, but the good ones ought to be recorded too.
And... you don't have to do anything to claim the money back that you didn't need to pay.
If that happened to me, I would need to pay the bills then fill out a form and send photos of all the bills to my health insurance who pay half of the costs AND I would need to fill out a diffrent and send photos of all the bills to Berlin council who pay the other half of the costs.
It was a diesel car that burned Luton to the ground. (LBC)
Only a bit of Luton. If it had burned the whole of Luton to the ground, I'd have personally funded a statue of the diesel banger as a lovely tribute for its selfless act.
It seems the car park did not have a sprinkler system which in itself is astonishing and must surely lead to a review of all such car park's fire safety systems
'Boring but Stable' reminds me of Theresa May between Cameron's departure and the 2017 election.
May's premature apotheosis was quite extraordinary. One evening as I recall the Number 10 spin team shut up shop for the night - let the Labour party destroy itself, we'll enjoy the show, seemed to be the attitude. In retrospect this seems supremely hubristic as she then went on nearly to lose to Jeremy Corbyn and from that moment her power immediately drained away.
I am taking for granted at this point that Starmer will be Prime Minister after the next election, but it is impossible to tell when the bubble bursts. I presume that his relative popularity will last longer than Theresa May's did. Nevertheless, there are two types of politician: those who are helpless prisoners of events, and those who mistakenly believe they are not helpless prisoners of events.
I think it is a pertinent point that twice in recent political history new PMs succeeding ‘charismatic’ old ones have tried to make a positive of their dull, dutiful manners. Both have had initial success in doing so, before taking a nosedive in popularity. I am of course referring to May and Gordon Brown.
There is an argument that the public don’t really want a dull dutiful type in Number 10 but a charming charismatic figure who can convincingly tell them what they want to hear. To that end I do suspect that Starmer’s ‘dullness’ will eventually become a liability rather than an asset.
However I, like you, think he is likely to have a much longer honeymoon than Brown and May did. For one thing, he is coming in as the first PM of a new party in power, which Brown and May were not. Secondly, in replacing Sunak he is not replacing anyone with any tremendous political charisma/skill (Sunak has ‘it’ - superficially - but can’t land the delivery in the same way as Blair and Cameron could), so there is not an immediate comparison to make. Thirdly he is going to get the credit for pretty much anything that goes right in his first 2-3 years in power while he can blame bad news on the Tory hangover - this will sustain him.
I do not ascribe to the view of many on here that the wheels could fall off the Labour bandwagon very early on the basis that the situation they inherit is bad. People predicted that this would happen when the Tories took over from Brown, but Cameron proved remarkably resilient in office. I do think it’s plausible that Starmer fails to get a grip on the situation and eventually after 4 or 5 years loses a majority to a Tory Party who has somehow managed to get its act together. But we are now looking very far into the future and it is extremely uncertain.
I think the election result will have a huge impact here. If Lab win a big majority, then Starmer will have no issues getting his agenda through and the Tories are more likely to pick someone ideologically pure. If Lab get a small majority, then the left could cause a lot of trouble. If it's a hung parliament, then Con are more likely to elect someone moderate in anticipation of another election
I'm off work cos I got badly bitten by a child yesterday. Went to NHS walk-in. Cleaned up, test for tetanus returned negative, bloods taken, a course of antibiotics in my hands, and a referral to OH for Hepatitis B test. All done in much less than 30 minutes. I know there are some horror stories, but the good ones ought to be recorded too.
When you walk in off the street with an obvious ailment or your bone jutting through your skin the NHS very often is fantastic. It's when it gets more complicated than that that things very often go wrong.
Increasingly looks likely that the populist Winston Peters / NZ First will hold the balance of power in NZ’s election on Saturday.
The right bloc (National, Act) look to have faltered this week, while Peters - who is now 78 - has gained momentum.
British advocates of PR should study NZ very closely to understand the possible effects of moving away from FPTP. In the 9 elections since PR was introduced in 1996, Peters has held the balance of power in 3 of them, despite typically sitting at around 5% support.
Increasingly looks likely that the populist Winston Peters / NZ First will hold the balance of power in NZ’s election on Saturday.
The right bloc (National, Act) look to have faltered this week, while Peters - who is now 78 - has gained momentum.
British advocates of PR should study NZ very closely to understand the possible effects of moving away from FPTP. In the 9 elections since PR was introduced in 1996, Peters has held the balance of power in 3 of them, despite typically sitting at around 5% support.
'Boring but Stable' reminds me of Theresa May between Cameron's departure and the 2017 election.
May's premature apotheosis was quite extraordinary. One evening as I recall the Number 10 spin team shut up shop for the night - let the Labour party destroy itself, we'll enjoy the show, seemed to be the attitude. In retrospect this seems supremely hubristic as she then went on nearly to lose to Jeremy Corbyn and from that moment her power immediately drained away.
I am taking for granted at this point that Starmer will be Prime Minister after the next election, but it is impossible to tell when the bubble bursts. I presume that his relative popularity will last longer than Theresa May's did. Nevertheless, there are two types of politician: those who are helpless prisoners of events, and those who mistakenly believe they are not helpless prisoners of events.
I think it is a pertinent point that twice in recent political history new PMs succeeding ‘charismatic’ old ones have tried to make a positive of their dull, dutiful manners. Both have had initial success in doing so, before taking a nosedive in popularity. I am of course referring to May and Gordon Brown.
There is an argument that the public don’t really want a dull dutiful type in Number 10 but a charming charismatic figure who can convincingly tell them what they want to hear. To that end I do suspect that Starmer’s ‘dullness’ will eventually become a liability rather than an asset.
However I, like you, think he is likely to have a much longer honeymoon than Brown and May did. For one thing, he is coming in as the first PM of a new party in power, which Brown and May were not. Secondly, in replacing Sunak he is not replacing anyone with any tremendous political charisma/skill (Sunak has ‘it’ - superficially - but can’t land the delivery in the same way as Blair and Cameron could), so there is not an immediate comparison to make. Thirdly he is going to get the credit for pretty much anything that goes right in his first 2-3 years in power while he can blame bad news on the Tory hangover - this will sustain him.
I do not ascribe to the view of many on here that the wheels could fall off the Labour bandwagon very early on the basis that the situation they inherit is bad. People predicted that this would happen when the Tories took over from Brown, but Cameron proved remarkably resilient in office. I do think it’s plausible that Starmer fails to get a grip on the situation and eventually after 4 or 5 years loses a majority to a Tory Party who has somehow managed to get its act together. But we are now looking very far into the future and it is extremely uncertain.
I make it four dull uncharismatic PMs with more 'interesting' predecessors: Callaghan, Major, Brown and Sunak. And, of course, they were all former Chancellors. Every now and again the Treasury has to step in and take control.
I'm off work cos I got badly bitten by a child yesterday. Went to NHS walk-in. Cleaned up, test for tetanus returned negative, bloods taken, a course of antibiotics in my hands, and a referral to OH for Hepatitis B test. All done in much less than 30 minutes. I know there are some horror stories, but the good ones ought to be recorded too.
Agreed, need more good news stories about schools where children are eating teachers.
Seriously however hope you recover fully.
Some of us are just lamenting opportunities lost. I had no idea that my teachers were on the menu!
I'm off work cos I got badly bitten by a child yesterday. Went to NHS walk-in. Cleaned up, test for tetanus returned negative, bloods taken, a course of antibiotics in my hands, and a referral to OH for Hepatitis B test. All done in much less than 30 minutes. I know there are some horror stories, but the good ones ought to be recorded too.
Agreed, need more good news stories about schools where children are eating teachers.
Seriously however hope you recover fully.
Some of us are just lamenting opportunities lost. I had no idea that my teachers were on the menu!
You can’t beat a bowl of professoroles for pudding.
Increasingly looks likely that the populist Winston Peters / NZ First will hold the balance of power in NZ’s election on Saturday.
The right bloc (National, Act) look to have faltered this week, while Peters - who is now 78 - has gained momentum.
British advocates of PR should study NZ very closely to understand the possible effects of moving away from FPTP. In the 9 elections since PR was introduced in 1996, Peters has held the balance of power in 3 of them, despite typically sitting at around 5% support.
By definition, the "balance of power" in this sense can only be held by a small party, so it's not a very interesting statistic. (Nobody will say National hold the balance of power because they can go in with the left.)
The Premier League are very lucky that we're now on an international break. They clearly don't want to get involved with what's going on in Israel, but their silence has not gone unnoticed:
Football seldom needs persuading to show compassion in the face of unspeakable tragedy. In the past month alone, each Premier League ground has observed a minute’s silence to honour victims of both the Morocco earthquake and the flooding in Libya. And yet when at least 260 young people were killed in Israel last Saturday, at a music festival billed as a “journey of unity and love”, the calamity passed without comment by the national game. Not a gesture, not an armband, not a word.
On Covid booster entitlement for the under 65s, the guidance says:
"You can book a COVID-19 vaccination if you look after someone, or if you receive a carers [sic] allowance.
This is to reduce your risk of being unable to provide care due to COVID-19."
What about if one has an elderly parent who you visit every week to check they are OK. Does this qualify as a carer?
Self-certified, so at your discretion. I would say yes. You're making regular visits. Part of the purpose of the visit is to check on your parent's welfare, and to take any necessary corrective action. So you would qualify to receive a booster and reduce the risk to them, or the risk that you would not be able to visit them.
Increasingly looks likely that the populist Winston Peters / NZ First will hold the balance of power in NZ’s election on Saturday.
The right bloc (National, Act) look to have faltered this week, while Peters - who is now 78 - has gained momentum.
British advocates of PR should study NZ very closely to understand the possible effects of moving away from FPTP. In the 9 elections since PR was introduced in 1996, Peters has held the balance of power in 3 of them, despite typically sitting at around 5% support.
By definition, the "balance of power" in this sense can only be held by a small party, so it's not a very interesting statistic. (Nobody will say National hold the balance of power because they can go in with the left.)
The point is the in 1/3 of elections, a small populist party has decided whether to support the left bloc or right bloc into power. This is a political point, not a mathematical one.
PR has had some upsides too, but I laugh when people claim that it somehow promises to reform the entire political system.
The death toll from the Hamas attack at the weekend has now reached an atonishing 1200
For comparison, if this was in the UK (scaling for size) that would be 8,400 Brits killed in a single day. Something only equalled in the worst days of World War One - and that was soldiers, this is mainly civilians
If this was the USA it would be 40,000 dead, in a single day, something that has never happened to America, even in wartime, not even at Antietam
It is also the 2nd worst terror attack - anywhere - in history
It was a diesel car that burned Luton to the ground. (LBC)
Only a bit of Luton. If it had burned the whole of Luton to the ground, I'd have personally funded a statue of the diesel banger as a lovely tribute for its selfless act.
It seems the car park did not have a sprinkler system which in itself is astonishing and must surely lead to a review of all such car park's fire safety systems
It's a car fire. In a car park. The car park didn't have sprinklers because it doesn't have to have them. Now, that might change, but are the government going to stump up the cash to get them retro fitted into all multistorey carparks? Calm down, have a cuppa.
'Boring but Stable' reminds me of Theresa May between Cameron's departure and the 2017 election.
May's premature apotheosis was quite extraordinary. One evening as I recall the Number 10 spin team shut up shop for the night - let the Labour party destroy itself, we'll enjoy the show, seemed to be the attitude. In retrospect this seems supremely hubristic as she then went on nearly to lose to Jeremy Corbyn and from that moment her power immediately drained away.
I am taking for granted at this point that Starmer will be Prime Minister after the next election, but it is impossible to tell when the bubble bursts. I presume that his relative popularity will last longer than Theresa May's did. Nevertheless, there are two types of politician: those who are helpless prisoners of events, and those who mistakenly believe they are not helpless prisoners of events.
I think it is a pertinent point that twice in recent political history new PMs succeeding ‘charismatic’ old ones have tried to make a positive of their dull, dutiful manners. Both have had initial success in doing so, before taking a nosedive in popularity. I am of course referring to May and Gordon Brown.
There is an argument that the public don’t really want a dull dutiful type in Number 10 but a charming charismatic figure who can convincingly tell them what they want to hear. To that end I do suspect that Starmer’s ‘dullness’ will eventually become a liability rather than an asset.
However I, like you, think he is likely to have a much longer honeymoon than Brown and May did. For one thing, he is coming in as the first PM of a new party in power, which Brown and May were not. Secondly, in replacing Sunak he is not replacing anyone with any tremendous political charisma/skill (Sunak has ‘it’ - superficially - but can’t land the delivery in the same way as Blair and Cameron could), so there is not an immediate comparison to make. Thirdly he is going to get the credit for pretty much anything that goes right in his first 2-3 years in power while he can blame bad news on the Tory hangover - this will sustain him.
I do not ascribe to the view of many on here that the wheels could fall off the Labour bandwagon very early on the basis that the situation they inherit is bad. People predicted that this would happen when the Tories took over from Brown, but Cameron proved remarkably resilient in office. I do think it’s plausible that Starmer fails to get a grip on the situation and eventually after 4 or 5 years loses a majority to a Tory Party who has somehow managed to get its act together. But we are now looking very far into the future and it is extremely uncertain.
I make it four dull uncharismatic PMs with more 'interesting' predecessors: Callaghan, Major, Brown and Sunak. And, of course, they were all former Chancellors. Every now and again the Treasury has to step in and take control.
Interesting that the four major financial/economic crisies in recent history, namely the Winter of Discontent, the ERM, the 2008 financial crisis and the collapse in living standards over the last year have all happened under former chancellors who had become PMs. And there is some justice to this in at least three of those cases - Callaghan appeased the unions as chancellor, Major lobbied for us to be in the ERM which then spat us out and Brown set up a terrible financial regulatory regime and employed incompetent timeservers like Adair Turner and Callum MacCarthy to lead it.
Sunak's direct responsibility for the fall in living standards over the last year is less obvious.
i) Spurious accuracy. I'm not sure they can establish the carbon footprint of an individual meal to the necessary accuracy
ii) There is only so much data I can absorb during the day. My library (well, one of them) has started putting calorie counts on cakes. That's just wrong.
'Boring but Stable' reminds me of Theresa May between Cameron's departure and the 2017 election.
May's premature apotheosis was quite extraordinary. One evening as I recall the Number 10 spin team shut up shop for the night - let the Labour party destroy itself, we'll enjoy the show, seemed to be the attitude. In retrospect this seems supremely hubristic as she then went on nearly to lose to Jeremy Corbyn and from that moment her power immediately drained away.
I am taking for granted at this point that Starmer will be Prime Minister after the next election, but it is impossible to tell when the bubble bursts. I presume that his relative popularity will last longer than Theresa May's did. Nevertheless, there are two types of politician: those who are helpless prisoners of events, and those who mistakenly believe they are not helpless prisoners of events.
I think it is a pertinent point that twice in recent political history new PMs succeeding ‘charismatic’ old ones have tried to make a positive of their dull, dutiful manners. Both have had initial success in doing so, before taking a nosedive in popularity. I am of course referring to May and Gordon Brown.
There is an argument that the public don’t really want a dull dutiful type in Number 10 but a charming charismatic figure who can convincingly tell them what they want to hear. To that end I do suspect that Starmer’s ‘dullness’ will eventually become a liability rather than an asset.
However I, like you, think he is likely to have a much longer honeymoon than Brown and May did. For one thing, he is coming in as the first PM of a new party in power, which Brown and May were not. Secondly, in replacing Sunak he is not replacing anyone with any tremendous political charisma/skill (Sunak has ‘it’ - superficially - but can’t land the delivery in the same way as Blair and Cameron could), so there is not an immediate comparison to make. Thirdly he is going to get the credit for pretty much anything that goes right in his first 2-3 years in power while he can blame bad news on the Tory hangover - this will sustain him.
I do not ascribe to the view of many on here that the wheels could fall off the Labour bandwagon very early on the basis that the situation they inherit is bad. People predicted that this would happen when the Tories took over from Brown, but Cameron proved remarkably resilient in office. I do think it’s plausible that Starmer fails to get a grip on the situation and eventually after 4 or 5 years loses a majority to a Tory Party who has somehow managed to get its act together. But we are now looking very far into the future and it is extremely uncertain.
I make it four dull uncharismatic PMs with more 'interesting' predecessors: Callaghan, Major, Brown and Sunak. And, of course, they were all former Chancellors. Every now and again the Treasury has to step in and take control.
Interesting that the four major financial/economic crisies in recent history, namely the Winter of Discontent, the ERM the 2008 financial crisis and the collapse in living standards over the last year have all happened under former chancellors who had become PMs. And there is some justice to this in at least three of those cases - Callaghan appeased the unions as chancellor, Major lobbied for us to be in the ERM which then spat us out and Brown set up a terrible financial regulatory regime and employed incompetent timeservers like Adair Turner and Callum MacCarthy to lead it.
Sunak's direct responsibility for the fall in living standards over the last year is less obvious.
Sunak was too generous with the covid support and the stamp duty holiday. They both have some bearing on where we are now.
'Boring but Stable' reminds me of Theresa May between Cameron's departure and the 2017 election.
May's premature apotheosis was quite extraordinary. One evening as I recall the Number 10 spin team shut up shop for the night - let the Labour party destroy itself, we'll enjoy the show, seemed to be the attitude. In retrospect this seems supremely hubristic as she then went on nearly to lose to Jeremy Corbyn and from that moment her power immediately drained away.
I am taking for granted at this point that Starmer will be Prime Minister after the next election, but it is impossible to tell when the bubble bursts. I presume that his relative popularity will last longer than Theresa May's did. Nevertheless, there are two types of politician: those who are helpless prisoners of events, and those who mistakenly believe they are not helpless prisoners of events.
I think it is a pertinent point that twice in recent political history new PMs succeeding ‘charismatic’ old ones have tried to make a positive of their dull, dutiful manners. Both have had initial success in doing so, before taking a nosedive in popularity. I am of course referring to May and Gordon Brown.
There is an argument that the public don’t really want a dull dutiful type in Number 10 but a charming charismatic figure who can convincingly tell them what they want to hear. To that end I do suspect that Starmer’s ‘dullness’ will eventually become a liability rather than an asset.
However I, like you, think he is likely to have a much longer honeymoon than Brown and May did. For one thing, he is coming in as the first PM of a new party in power, which Brown and May were not. Secondly, in replacing Sunak he is not replacing anyone with any tremendous political charisma/skill (Sunak has ‘it’ - superficially - but can’t land the delivery in the same way as Blair and Cameron could), so there is not an immediate comparison to make. Thirdly he is going to get the credit for pretty much anything that goes right in his first 2-3 years in power while he can blame bad news on the Tory hangover - this will sustain him.
I do not ascribe to the view of many on here that the wheels could fall off the Labour bandwagon very early on the basis that the situation they inherit is bad. People predicted that this would happen when the Tories took over from Brown, but Cameron proved remarkably resilient in office. I do think it’s plausible that Starmer fails to get a grip on the situation and eventually after 4 or 5 years loses a majority to a Tory Party who has somehow managed to get its act together. But we are now looking very far into the future and it is extremely uncertain.
I make it four dull uncharismatic PMs with more 'interesting' predecessors: Callaghan, Major, Brown and Sunak. And, of course, they were all former Chancellors. Every now and again the Treasury has to step in and take control.
Interesting that the four major financial/economic crisies in recent history, namely the Winter of Discontent, the ERM, the 2008 financial crisis and the collapse in living standards over the last year have all happened under former chancellors who had become PMs. And there is some justice to this in at least three of those cases - Callaghan appeased the unions as chancellor, Major lobbied for us to be in the ERM which then spat us out and Brown set up a terrible financial regulatory regime and employed incompetent timeservers like Adair Turner and Callum MacCarthy to lead it.
Sunak's direct responsibility for the fall in living standards over the last year is less obvious.
The ERM debacle was only really damaging for Major himself, which is quite funny really.
On Covid booster entitlement for the under 65s, the guidance says:
"You can book a COVID-19 vaccination if you look after someone, or if you receive a carers [sic] allowance.
This is to reduce your risk of being unable to provide care due to COVID-19."
What about if one has an elderly parent who you visit every week to check they are OK. Does this qualify as a carer?
Self-certified, so at your discretion. I would say yes. You're making regular visits. Part of the purpose of the visit is to check on your parent's welfare, and to take any necessary corrective action. So you would qualify to receive a booster and reduce the risk to them, or the risk that you would not be able to visit them.
Thanks for the tip, regularly visit elderly mother in old folks’ home so have now booked a booster or tomorrow… am 64 so not so far from qualifying anyway… Covid is rife here at the moment
The death toll from the Hamas attack at the weekend has now reached an atonishing 1200
For comparison, if this was in the UK (scaling for size) that would be 8,400 Brits killed in a single day. Something only equalled in the worst days of World War One - and that was soldiers, this is mainly civilians
If this was the USA it would be 40,000 dead, in a single day, something that has never happened to America, even in wartime, not even at Antietam
It is also the 2nd worst terror attack - anywhere - in history
I remember us exchanging comments of mutual shock that the number had exceeded 600 as if it was only yesterday. Very possibly because it was. This is an astonishing achievement by Hamas. Deeply evil and wicked but carried out with a precision and efficiency that is quite unexpected.
I read that over 1000 Hamas "soldiers" had been killed already. The intensity of the fighting is remarkable.
Who's side is Saudi Arabia on? I thought they were moving towards normalising relations with Israel? Instead they have normalised with Iran under the facilitation of China. They cut oil production possibly in an effort to help Putin. Their statement after the attacks by Hamas were feeble. Barely had Israel begun to respond before Saudi called an end to normalising relations with Israel. Almost as if they couldn't wait to do so.
Gas prices also spiking after the attack on Finland/Estonia. Cui bono? Are Saudi and Iran really arch enemies?
The gas pipe/data cable incident in the Gulf of Finland will be the subject of a news briefing in Helsinki at 3pm UK time Looks like Russia (my opinion)
This is the Jerusalem correspoindent for the Guardian. She has just tweeted these actual tweets
"Just looked at today's UK front pages and I am horrified by the headlines claiming "40 babies beheaded by Hamas" in Kfar Aza. Yes, many children were murdered. Yes, there were several beheadings in the attack. This claim, however, is unverified and totally irresponsible"
"It's not about the manner in which children were killed. it's about the racist stereotyping of Arabs and conflating all conflicts in the Middle East as the same thing"
So in the end the main problem - of course - is racist stereotyping of Arabs
Of course, when the buffet is the same price for everyone, you need to find inventive ways to stop everyone taking a handful of fillet steak medallions. Ditto the breakfasts, they want everyone to take a spoonful of hummous and a few cornflakes, not the Full English.
'Boring but Stable' reminds me of Theresa May between Cameron's departure and the 2017 election.
May's premature apotheosis was quite extraordinary. One evening as I recall the Number 10 spin team shut up shop for the night - let the Labour party destroy itself, we'll enjoy the show, seemed to be the attitude. In retrospect this seems supremely hubristic as she then went on nearly to lose to Jeremy Corbyn and from that moment her power immediately drained away.
I am taking for granted at this point that Starmer will be Prime Minister after the next election, but it is impossible to tell when the bubble bursts. I presume that his relative popularity will last longer than Theresa May's did. Nevertheless, there are two types of politician: those who are helpless prisoners of events, and those who mistakenly believe they are not helpless prisoners of events.
I think it is a pertinent point that twice in recent political history new PMs succeeding ‘charismatic’ old ones have tried to make a positive of their dull, dutiful manners. Both have had initial success in doing so, before taking a nosedive in popularity. I am of course referring to May and Gordon Brown.
There is an argument that the public don’t really want a dull dutiful type in Number 10 but a charming charismatic figure who can convincingly tell them what they want to hear. To that end I do suspect that Starmer’s ‘dullness’ will eventually become a liability rather than an asset.
However I, like you, think he is likely to have a much longer honeymoon than Brown and May did. For one thing, he is coming in as the first PM of a new party in power, which Brown and May were not. Secondly, in replacing Sunak he is not replacing anyone with any tremendous political charisma/skill (Sunak has ‘it’ - superficially - but can’t land the delivery in the same way as Blair and Cameron could), so there is not an immediate comparison to make. Thirdly he is going to get the credit for pretty much anything that goes right in his first 2-3 years in power while he can blame bad news on the Tory hangover - this will sustain him.
I do not ascribe to the view of many on here that the wheels could fall off the Labour bandwagon very early on the basis that the situation they inherit is bad. People predicted that this would happen when the Tories took over from Brown, but Cameron proved remarkably resilient in office. I do think it’s plausible that Starmer fails to get a grip on the situation and eventually after 4 or 5 years loses a majority to a Tory Party who has somehow managed to get its act together. But we are now looking very far into the future and it is extremely uncertain.
I make it four dull uncharismatic PMs with more 'interesting' predecessors: Callaghan, Major, Brown and Sunak. And, of course, they were all former Chancellors. Every now and again the Treasury has to step in and take control.
Interesting that the four major financial/economic crisies in recent history, namely the Winter of Discontent, the ERM the 2008 financial crisis and the collapse in living standards over the last year have all happened under former chancellors who had become PMs. And there is some justice to this in at least three of those cases - Callaghan appeased the unions as chancellor, Major lobbied for us to be in the ERM which then spat us out and Brown set up a terrible financial regulatory regime and employed incompetent timeservers like Adair Turner and Callum MacCarthy to lead it.
Sunak's direct responsibility for the fall in living standards over the last year is less obvious.
Sunak was too generous with the covid support and the stamp duty holiday. They both have some bearing on where we are now.
I'm no fan of Sunak as Chancellor, and hardly more as Prime Minister, but if those facts have any bearing on the fall in living standards over the last year, it's trivial compared with the global run-up in interest rates caused largely by quantative tightening and the big rise in food and energy prices caused largely by the war in Ukraine. We would have had big falls in living standards regardless of COVID support and stamp duty holidays, as is shown by many European countries having falls as big as ours.
The death toll from the Hamas attack at the weekend has now reached an atonishing 1200
For comparison, if this was in the UK (scaling for size) that would be 8,400 Brits killed in a single day. Something only equalled in the worst days of World War One - and that was soldiers, this is mainly civilians
If this was the USA it would be 40,000 dead, in a single day, something that has never happened to America, even in wartime, not even at Antietam
It is also the 2nd worst terror attack - anywhere - in history
I remember us exchanging comments of mutual shock that the number had exceeded 600 as if it was only yesterday. Very possibly because it was. This is an astonishing achievement by Hamas. Deeply evil and wicked but carried out with a precision and efficiency that is quite unexpected.
I read that over 1000 Hamas "soldiers" had been killed already. The intensity of the fighting is remarkable.
1500 Hamas now, so 2,700 dead in total, so far
This will traumatise Israel for decades - and Gaza, of course. A terrible mutual tragedy will bind them together
The gas pipe/data cable incident in the Gulf of Finland will be the subject of a news briefing in Helsinki at 3pm UK time Looks like Russia (my opinion)
No doubt, though I'm not sure you needed to be Sherlock Holmes, or even Lestrade, to guess that one!
I had my Covid booster this morning, eligible due to age. Mrs Al, far too young to be eligible, accompanied me. She asked if she could be jabbed. They said no, unless you're a carer. She said she cared for me (which she doesn't, in the sense meant). So she got jabbed. They don't seem too bothered about the rules.
Who's side is Saudi Arabia on? I thought they were moving towards normalising relations with Israel? Instead they have normalised with Iran under the facilitation of China. They cut oil production possibly in an effort to help Putin. Their statement after the attacks by Hamas were feeble. Barely had Israel begun to respond before Saudi called an end to normalising relations with Israel. Almost as if they couldn't wait to do so.
Gas prices also spiking after the attack on Finland/Estonia. Cui bono? Are Saudi and Iran really arch enemies?
Maybe just like countries not having 'friends, only interests', the same applies to enemies?
Who's side is Saudi Arabia on? I thought they were moving towards normalising relations with Israel? Instead they have normalised with Iran under the facilitation of China. They cut oil production possibly in an effort to help Putin. Their statement after the attacks by Hamas were feeble. Barely had Israel begun to respond before Saudi called an end to normalising relations with Israel. Almost as if they couldn't wait to do so.
Gas prices also spiking after the attack on Finland/Estonia. Cui bono? Are Saudi and Iran really arch enemies?
Everyone has been talking to everyone in the last few years, in an attempt to prioritise trade over conflict. It’s been brilliant to see, until last Saturday.
Most of it has been classic Sunni/Shia conflict, with Iran and Qatar on one side, and the other Gulf states on the other. It was only a few years ago that Qatar was sanctioned by her neighbours for funding the Iranians fighting in Yemen, but since then we thought that good progress was being made all around.
It’s thought that the forthcoming Saudi-Israel talks might have been a motivation for this week’s attacks on Israel.
This is the Jerusalem correspoindent for the Guardian. She has just tweeted these actual tweets
"Just looked at today's UK front pages and I am horrified by the headlines claiming "40 babies beheaded by Hamas" in Kfar Aza. Yes, many children were murdered. Yes, there were several beheadings in the attack. This claim, however, is unverified and totally irresponsible"
"It's not about the manner in which children were killed. it's about the racist stereotyping of Arabs and conflating all conflicts in the Middle East as the same thing"
So in the end the main problem - of course - is racist stereotyping of Arabs
Thank god it didn't take you long to conclude that the real problem aren't 40 dead children, but racism. Because just killing them instead of beheading them makes the Palestinians looks so much better. You need a brain transplant. Comment on her thread
This is the Jerusalem correspoindent for the Guardian. She has just tweeted these actual tweets
"Just looked at today's UK front pages and I am horrified by the headlines claiming "40 babies beheaded by Hamas" in Kfar Aza. Yes, many children were murdered. Yes, there were several beheadings in the attack. This claim, however, is unverified and totally irresponsible"
"It's not about the manner in which children were killed. it's about the racist stereotyping of Arabs and conflating all conflicts in the Middle East as the same thing"
So in the end the main problem - of course - is racist stereotyping of Arabs
Thank god it didn't take you long to conclude that the real problem aren't 40 dead children, but racism. Because just killing them instead of beheading them makes the Palestinians looks so much better. You need a brain transplant. Comment on her thread
My anger at these people is reaching incendiary levels. The "yeah yeah baby murders BUT RACISM" people
Perhaps, ironically, I need to do an @Anabobazina and look away for the sake of my blood pressure
The gas pipe/data cable incident in the Gulf of Finland will be the subject of a news briefing in Helsinki at 3pm UK time Looks like Russia (my opinion)
No doubt, though I'm not sure you needed to be Sherlock Holmes, or even Lestrade, to guess that one!
True enough, but I didn't want to give the idea that the Finnish/Estonian authorities have definitely come to that conclusion … yet
This is the Jerusalem correspoindent for the Guardian. She has just tweeted these actual tweets
"Just looked at today's UK front pages and I am horrified by the headlines claiming "40 babies beheaded by Hamas" in Kfar Aza. Yes, many children were murdered. Yes, there were several beheadings in the attack. This claim, however, is unverified and totally irresponsible"
"It's not about the manner in which children were killed. it's about the racist stereotyping of Arabs and conflating all conflicts in the Middle East as the same thing"
So in the end the main problem - of course - is racist stereotyping of Arabs
Thank god it didn't take you long to conclude that the real problem aren't 40 dead children, but racism. Because just killing them instead of beheading them makes the Palestinians looks so much better. You need a brain transplant. Comment on her thread
My anger at these people is reaching incendiary levels. The "yeah yeah baby murders BUT RACISM" people
Perhaps, ironically, I need to do an @Anabobazina and look away for the sake of my blood pressure
Who's side is Saudi Arabia on? I thought they were moving towards normalising relations with Israel? Instead they have normalised with Iran under the facilitation of China. They cut oil production possibly in an effort to help Putin. Their statement after the attacks by Hamas were feeble. Barely had Israel begun to respond before Saudi called an end to normalising relations with Israel. Almost as if they couldn't wait to do so.
Gas prices also spiking after the attack on Finland/Estonia. Cui bono? Are Saudi and Iran really arch enemies?
Maybe just like countries not having 'friends, only interests', the same applies to enemies?
The middle east seems to either fall into a Venn diagram with 2 circles - "very rich" or " violent". Bit of overlap in the middle, and the occasional country perhaps outside (Jordan ?)
In today’s more important news, India have been set 273 by Afghanistan, and are about to start their run chase. Plenty of tickets sold for this one.
A good score by Afghanistan but India should get this comfortably.
The home fans will expect nothing less than India to top the table. But of course it's who wins the final that matters! I don't believe we topped the qualifying table in 2019 👍
Historically, yes. Each represents one of the two main branches of Islam and have spent decades jockeying for position to make their branch dominant worldwide. And bear in mind that in a Middle East context, "historically" stretches from the Big Bang to this morning.
The death toll from the Hamas attack at the weekend has now reached an atonishing 1200
For comparison, if this was in the UK (scaling for size) that would be 8,400 Brits killed in a single day. Something only equalled in the worst days of World War One - and that was soldiers, this is mainly civilians
If this was the USA it would be 40,000 dead, in a single day, something that has never happened to America, even in wartime, not even at Antietam
It is also the 2nd worst terror attack - anywhere - in history
This is an astonishing achievement by Hamas.
I think if you go into family houses and aren't fussed about the people you kill you get a lot of BOGOFs and TWOFERs.
I believe the IDF and IAF are doing their bit to even up the stats, relatively speaking.
Starmer will be the third prime minister in a row with a school maths policy.
Real-world maths probably means addition, subtraction, and maybe multiplication and division. A great way to motivate a high-tech economy.
Teaching how to frame a problem so that it can yield to those techniques would be the thing. Not something any old teacher can do beyond the trivial. "Understand football league tables and bank statements" was what I heard on the radio this morning
Starmer will be the third prime minister in a row with a school maths policy.
Real-world maths probably means addition, subtraction, and maybe multiplication and division. A great way to motivate a high-tech economy.
Teaching how to frame a problem so that it can yield to those techniques would be the thing. Not something any old teacher can do beyond the trivial. "Understand football league tables and bank statements" was what I heard on the radio this morning
#1 should be compound interest, and how it relates to savings rates, mortgage rates, and credit card debt.
I am old enough to be a Facebook user. And of a random set of a few hundred friends not one has a flag of Israel imposed upon their profiles of the type that usually appear when such things happen.
I think people (including the Premier League) think the Middle East is too confusing, rightly or wrongly.
Wasn’t there a jock / nerd theory of PMs. Truss (a jock, I think?) kind of screwed up the pattern. Before her, it was
Johnson - jock May - nerd Cameron - jock Brown - nerd Blair - jock Major - nerd Thatcher - jock Callaghan - nerd Wilson - jock Heath - nerd Wilson - jock (again) Home - nerd MacMillan - jock
But Eden was also a jock, so it breaks down here.
That's Harold Wilson, yes? Privileged Oxford Don and President of the Royal Statistical Society? A jock? Okkayyyyy....
Former Grammar school boy who got into Oxford on a scholarship.
Privileged??
It was a glancing nod to his little speech in "The Crown". The actor did a good job with the accent and give his pronunciation of "privileged" a rolling "r", hence "prrrivileged". Ever since then I can't say "Oxford Don" without adding the word "prrrivileged" in front of it.
I am old enough to be a Facebook user. And of a random set of a few hundred friends not one has a flag of Israel imposed upon their profiles of the type that usually appear when such things happen.
I think people (including the Premier League) think the Middle East is too confusing, rightly or wrongly.
Also basic fear. Get THIS one wrong and it can end careers
I am old enough to be a Facebook user. And of a random set of a few hundred friends not one has a flag of Israel imposed upon their profiles of the type that usually appear when such things happen.
I think people (including the Premier League) think the Middle East is too confusing, rightly or wrongly.
I still haven't become a Facebook user. Something to look forward to. 😊
Right then, time to start thinking about the mortgage (as the current deal expires at the end of January).
What's everyone's best guess with regards to interest rates over the next 2 to 3 years...?
The obvious response is that they peak over the winter and start slowly sliding after that, but there’s one hell of a margin in there.
It’s not difficult to either imagine a couple of years of major war and conflict in oil-producing regions causing huge inflation again, but also not difficult to imagine a state of peace
I’d say most of the risk is on the upside for rates. If they’re 5% now they’re almost certainly going to be in a 4%-6% range in two years’ time, but with perhaps a 10% chance of them being 8%
(All numbers are made-up total bollocks, and from the top of my head right now, I am not a financial advisor etc).
I am old enough to be a Facebook user. And of a random set of a few hundred friends not one has a flag of Israel imposed upon their profiles of the type that usually appear when such things happen.
I think people (including the Premier League) think the Middle East is too confusing, rightly or wrongly.
I still haven't become a Facebook user. Something to look forward to. 😊
I recommend watching the YouTubes of the suspended monorail in Japan. Not the new ones, the Chiba/Shonan ones. You have to imagine me down the front muttering "whee!" as it rounds a corner.
I am old enough to be a Facebook user. And of a random set of a few hundred friends not one has a flag of Israel imposed upon their profiles of the type that usually appear when such things happen.
I think people (including the Premier League) think the Middle East is too confusing, rightly or wrongly.
I still haven't become a Facebook user. Something to look forward to. 😊
I am old enough to be a Facebook user. And of a random set of a few hundred friends not one has a flag of Israel imposed upon their profiles of the type that usually appear when such things happen.
I think people (including the Premier League) think the Middle East is too confusing, rightly or wrongly.
I still haven't become a Facebook user. Something to look forward to. 😊
All in good time, grasshopper.
Talking of which, I haven't seen one this millennium
Comments
Black, mix of Earl Grey and English breakfast. Tea bags. No sugar
https://twitter.com/JohnSimpsonNews/status/1711857564227412069
Such filth has no place on a civilized website
As the sun is over the yardarm, I'm surprised you're not going for something stronger than tea.
Went to NHS walk-in. Cleaned up, test for tetanus returned negative, bloods taken, a course of antibiotics in my hands, and a referral to OH for Hepatitis B test.
All done in much less than 30 minutes.
I know there are some horror stories, but the good ones ought to be recorded too.
@lizziedearden
Mr Drabble says there is "no indication of intention to repeal the whole corpus of asylum rights" in the EU Withdrawal Act
The Home Office argues that "EU-derived rights as to asylum on which the claimants rely are plainly within" the Act and therefore no longer in UK law
Perhaps not on PB though.
The problem comes when you need to go onto the dreaded waiting list, or you have a non-‘urgent’ (but still important) health matter that you need looking at, but come up against the “system.”
Seriously however hope you recover fully.
If that happened to me, I would need to pay the bills then fill out a form and send photos of all the bills to my health insurance who pay half of the costs AND I would need to fill out a diffrent and send photos of all the bills to Berlin council who pay the other half of the costs.
https://www.edie.net/hilton-refreshes-menu-options-following-carbon-labelling-trials/
Especially in terms of lack of principles and ability to sell his own Granny to the highest Private Medical giant who want their NHS bucks.
Also many many aggressive tweets and an alleged involvement in an arson case for his opponents to attack
The right bloc (National, Act) look to have faltered this week, while Peters - who is now 78 - has gained momentum.
British advocates of PR should study NZ very closely to understand the possible effects of moving away from FPTP. In the 9 elections since PR was introduced in 1996, Peters has held the balance of power in 3 of them, despite typically sitting at around 5% support.
"You can book a COVID-19 vaccination if you look after someone, or if you receive a carers [sic] allowance.
This is to reduce your risk of being unable to provide care due to COVID-19."
What about if one has an elderly parent who you visit every week to check they are OK. Does this qualify as a carer?
I got one but then I do visit twice daily (no allowance though).
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/10/10/why-football-silent-israel-terror-attacks-fa-premier-league/
Football seldom needs persuading to show compassion in the face of unspeakable tragedy. In the past month alone, each Premier League ground has observed a minute’s silence to honour victims of both the Morocco earthquake and the flooding in Libya. And yet when at least 260 young people were killed in Israel last Saturday, at a music festival billed as a “journey of unity and love”, the calamity passed without comment by the national game. Not a gesture, not an armband, not a word.
Truss (a jock, I think?) kind of screwed up the pattern. Before her, it was
Johnson - jock
May - nerd
Cameron - jock
Brown - nerd
Blair - jock
Major - nerd
Thatcher - jock
Callaghan - nerd
Wilson - jock
Heath - nerd
Wilson - jock (again)
Home - nerd
MacMillan - jock
But Eden was also a jock, so it breaks down here.
PR has had some upsides too, but I laugh when people claim that it somehow promises to reform the entire political system.
The death toll from the Hamas attack at the weekend has now reached an atonishing 1200
For comparison, if this was in the UK (scaling for size) that would be 8,400 Brits killed in a single day. Something only equalled in the worst days of World War One - and that was soldiers, this is mainly civilians
If this was the USA it would be 40,000 dead, in a single day, something that has never happened to America, even in wartime, not even at Antietam
It is also the 2nd worst terror attack - anywhere - in history
Sunak's direct responsibility for the fall in living standards over the last year is less obvious.
Possibly means the Israeli assault will begin tonight, under cover of quite intense darkness
The troops are massed and "ready to execute the mission we have been given" - (IDF)
I read that over 1000 Hamas "soldiers" had been killed already. The intensity of the fighting is remarkable.
Gas prices also spiking after the attack on Finland/Estonia. Cui bono? Are Saudi and Iran really arch enemies?
Looks like Russia (my opinion)
(HOW LONG DO I NEED TO KEEP DOING THIS?)
This is the Jerusalem correspoindent for the Guardian. She has just tweeted these actual tweets
"Just looked at today's UK front pages and I am horrified by the headlines claiming "40 babies beheaded by Hamas" in Kfar Aza. Yes, many children were murdered. Yes, there were several beheadings in the attack. This claim, however, is unverified and totally irresponsible"
https://x.com/mck_beth/status/1712073750785446255?s=20
"It's not about the manner in which children were killed. it's about the racist stereotyping of Arabs and conflating all conflicts in the Middle East as the same thing"
So in the end the main problem - of course - is racist stereotyping of Arabs
This will traumatise Israel for decades - and Gaza, of course. A terrible mutual tragedy will bind them together
Privileged??
Most of it has been classic Sunni/Shia conflict, with Iran and Qatar on one side, and the other Gulf states on the other. It was only a few years ago that Qatar was sanctioned by her neighbours for funding the Iranians fighting in Yemen, but since then we thought that good progress was being made all around.
It’s thought that the forthcoming Saudi-Israel talks might have been a motivation for this week’s attacks on Israel.
Comment on her thread
Perhaps, ironically, I need to do an @Anabobazina and look away for the sake of my blood pressure
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67068351
Starmer will be the third prime minister in a row with a school maths policy.
Unfortunately I became an accountant, and now just bash out 2+2 on a calculator all day long.
https://twitter.com/RICH__UTD/status/1712013766039347369
The home fans will expect nothing less than India to top the table. But of course it's who wins the final that matters! I don't believe we topped the qualifying table in 2019 👍
I believe the IDF and IAF are doing their bit to even up the stats, relatively speaking.
Lesson 1: subsamples....
What's everyone's best guess with regards to interest rates over the next 2 to 3 years...?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/cricket/66854477
https://secure.tattersalls.com/4DCGI/Sale/Live?site=NMT
I am old enough to be a Facebook user. And of a random set of a few hundred friends not one has a flag of Israel imposed upon their profiles of the type that usually appear when such things happen.
I think people (including the Premier League) think the Middle East is too confusing, rightly or wrongly.
It’s not difficult to either imagine a couple of years of major war and conflict in oil-producing regions causing huge inflation again, but also not difficult to imagine a state of peace
I’d say most of the risk is on the upside for rates. If they’re 5% now they’re almost certainly going to be in a 4%-6% range in two years’ time, but with perhaps a 10% chance of them being 8%
(All numbers are made-up total bollocks, and from the top of my head right now, I am not a financial advisor etc).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnLFKaS4C6E