Being a convicted felon has consequences – politicalbetting.com

Cookie said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

Leon said:

148grss said:

Leon said:

148grss said:

Leon said:

148grss said:

algarkirk said:

Listening to Farage this morning on R4 Today, I noticed one tiny thing. He didn't want to dwell at all on the fact that his policy of Zero Net Migration = 500,000+ new arrivals every year (matching the departures). That's 5 million per decade. He minimally acknowledged and moved away immediately.

For the right there are two big issues about inward migration; the numbers causing housing/services problems, and secondly the 'cultural' issues.

Net Zero migration may address the Reform voter's problem with the first, but not the second. Has anyone noticed this? I don't think Farage wants it mentioned. Which of course means no-one in the political domain does.

I mean, it's also because nobody wants to make the argument for solving the first crisis without worrying about immigration - investment. We could invest in better infrastructure, more schools, doctors, houses etc. and still have immigration.

Farage is happy to push on those issues because that is what has been gifted to him by the neoliberal turn. People seem to forget that Corbyn's policies were still quite popular with a large portion of the population - he was just so unpopular that negative polarisation held together a coalition for the Tories. When Johnson said he'd turn on the spending spigot with Levelling Up, the Tories won in Labour heartlands. As long as the state keeps arguing it has no resources to care for average people, people will grow resentful.

Someone like Farage will aim that resentment towards the foreigner, people like Leon towards "wokeness". I would argue the left (correctly) turns that ire on capitalists - as they are the dragons of fable sitting on their hordes of wealth. The immigrant doing what humans have always done, move around the world when they need to, is not in a position of power to affect the poor state of our country. The "woke" who are just asking for historic injustice to be recognised, acknowledged and no longer perpetuated don't hold the levers of power. Those who do have power and influence in our politic are those who are wealthy, who own companies, who demand less regulation etc. etc. They are the ones who have been catered to in the last 30-40 years, and that is the reason for our decline. And no one who benefits from that system is going to stand up and point that out. So Farage is a useful tool - because when he points at shadows and calls them phantoms people don't look at the real causes of the problem.

The 100,000+ white underage English girls raped by racist Muslim grooming gangs might have a claim they were *a tiny bit affected* by migration

The idea that there are 100s of thousands of young girls victimised by immigrants is another right wing fantasy -

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2020/dec/analysis-new-home-office-report-admits-grooming-gangs-are-not-muslim-problem

We know who is actually the most likely perpetrator of sexual assault - someone within the close family or a family friend of the victim, followed by someone with a position of authority in their community (a priest, a teacher, etc.). Again - this is a projection of the right who look at patriarchal family structure as something that must be protected and, unwilling to accept that that structure leads to more sexual assault, says it must be the foreigner, the outsider, the Other who is really to blame. Is that to say there are literally 0 cases of immigrants committing sexual assault or rape? Of course not. But the idea that it is endemic, or even common, is preposterous. It's the same old "got to keep our white women safe" rhetoric of days gone by.

And even if it were true - this would still be an infrastructure problem because the justice system is part of the social infrastructure that has been destroyed by austerity. Do the police take sexual assault or rape seriously? No.

https://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/almost-half-of-women-have-less-trust-in-police-following-sarah-everard-murder/

And then when it comes to getting a court date and a trial, of course, the massive backlog of serious crimes is largely due to massive underfunding by central government

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64586483

Now the likes of you may want to save money by doing away with "lefty lawyers" and "fair trials" and just flog and hang anyone who looks shifty - I personally think it matters to have things like evidence and proof and due process. And those things take resources.

Except that the LABOUR MP for Rotherham thinks it may be as high as a million. And I have a tiny idea she might know more than you. Don’t you?

So 100,000 is actually and tragically conservative

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/child-sex-abuse-gangs-could-5114029

So your citation is one MP in the Mirror from 2015 saying it "could be" as high as a million kids being sexually assaulted by Muslim grooming gangs; what I have cited is a summary of a Home Office report from 2020 that was directly aimed at investigating those claims which shows how that is not the case:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/944206/Group-based_CSE_Paper.pdf

We can also see how some of the issue is straight up victim blaming by the cops, with reports from stories like this where "The inquiry into the Telford abuse scandal, which published its report in 2022, found police dismissive of claims of abuse, with one saying "these girls had chosen to go with, I don't know, 'bad boys'". https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65174096

Again, grooming gangs happen and sexual assault happens and it is awful - but none of this suggests it is a problem predominantly of immigrant populations nor would it be solved by stopping immigration, because if you did stop immigration you'd still have the issue of most people committing sexual assault against girls and women being white British, and the issue of the police not giving a shit because they are institutionally misogynistic.

I also find it very interesting how the man who cries about wokeness all the time is claiming to care about sexual assault of women - is feminism not woke? Was the movement to hold powerful men accountable for their sexual crimes not woke? Or is it just that when you can pin sexual crimes on black and brown skinned people you want to claim you care about women?

1400 girls were raped/abused/tortured in
Rotherham according to the official report. Rotherham has a population of 260,000, about 0.3% of the UK. We know this pattern of rape and grooming has occurred all across the UK - basically wherever it is sought, it is found

300 x 1400 = 420,000

I’ve reduced it by 75% so you don’t have conniptions; you can thank me later

These are arse numbers - these are numbers you pull out of your arse. Because that's the only way to make any of your positions make sense.

And it still doesn't tackle the underlying issue - even in the world where your numbers are correct: immigrants are not the majority of perpetrators. So how do we deal with that? We would need to... increase infrastructure spending on criminal justice, community building, outreach and education (including sex education to kids, as it is the best proven method of kids being able to talk about being assaulted), empowering women and children, etc. etc. all of these things you would call the woke nanny state intervening in the business of the family, no?

Look, you just want to go "I'm out here protecting the innocence of my white women". I know you do. You have to make arse numbers up to try and justify it but really, at the end of the day, we both not what you're saying.

Do you think it's important to look at per capita rates of offending rather than just raw numbers?

It can be, but as was pointed out by one of the summaries and the criticism that this issue is under policed - the demographics who are over represented are also the demographics who are over policed and were indeed targeted specifically for this kind of policing after these allegations. But, again, even if they are over represented in the statistics based on their representation in population it doesn't change the underlying point - the one that started this whole conversation.

Blocking immigrants from coming in the country does not solve the issue - it is just a good scapegoat for the problem. To deal with sexual abuse properly would require campaigning and resources - things that are not provided for under the ideology of cuts cuts cuts to anything, especially if it can be construed as "woke", which I'm sure these things would be.

I thought the whole point of Rotherham, Rochdale etc was that the perpetrators had been under-policed - i.e. largely left to their own devices, and the victims told to go away?

Cookie said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Everyone in Britain should just emigrate. Seriously. Whole place is a shithole now and the only tolerable bits are certain nice parts of london and the inner Hebrides

Just get out. It’s ruined. The lefties ruined it

Join me on my endless travels around the world. There is a lot of world out here and it’s fun!

England is mostly okay outside the crowded south-east.

I thought the only reason the South East was crowded was because it's swamped with people desperate to escape the decaying, crime-ridden, impoverished North.

I don't think I'm being overly parochial to say that the North of England is the most beautiful part not only of England, but of the world. Around 40% of our geography (too keen to make a point to check exact figure) is made up of our four and a half national parks, with a good chunk more being any one of the multiple AONBs.

But I think northerners also have a slightly jaded impression of the South. London forms a disproportionate part of our idea of the south, and the route to London from the North is through the least remarkable bit of the country. Look at this map:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/image_data/file/51423/nat-parks-map-960x640.jpg

Without wanting to deride the countryside around the southern half of the M1 and M6, it's not terribly exciting. But it's most northerners idea of what the south looks like (also a noisy traffic jam across Bromford Viaduct.)

TOPPING said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

You can also use ducks for foie gras.

That’s what happens in sw France . I have tried the pate , and delicious it is with a sweet wine , lots of crusty bread and a nice onion chutney .

It’s quite rich and I wouldn’t lose any sleep if I didn’t have it again but if you eat meat I don’t think you can moralize too much about people eating it.

Bar Boulud at the Madarin Oriental used to do a burger with a layer of foie gras within. It was exceptional.

I dislike animal cruelty and usually buy higher welfare products, but on foie gras I am a massive hypocrite because it’s so damn tasty.

I’ve never eaten the liver cooked only had the pate but I can imagine it would be lovely on a burger. I wouldn’t worry about the hypocrite bit , we’re all guilty of that at times with the things we eat, or where we shop etc .

I think this tends to be the missing bit in political messaging about stuff like climate change. People respond much more to “do your best but no one is perfect”.

The problem is that what people think is their best is nowhere near good enough to be effective. People respond considerably better in terms of actual behaviour when bad stuff is taxed sufficiently to make it an occasional luxury, but good luck getting elected on that platform.

Well yes, exactly. I have this argument with younger relatives all the time. It’s all very well to take a full on “Thunberg” position, but you’ll never get elected; and if you do then you won’t get reelected and it’ll be reversed.

Democracy = pragmatism.

Which means we're probably fucked unless some sort of global eco-dictatorship can be established.

Nah, on that subject we just accept 2-2.5 degrees of warming based on current policies plus improved technology. Which is fine, unless you live in the Maldives or similar places, and we can help them.

We’ve fixed global warming.

Er, no, we really haven't. Thus far we have made virtually no impact whatsoever on the rate of increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and are currently heading for at least 3 degrees of warming. The Maldives are already doomed, but so too are large areas of coastal plains around the world, not to mention those areas that will be made uninhabitable by heat and shifts in weather patterns. None of this will be fixed by imploring people to "do their best".

What is the timing for the demise of the Maldives out of interest.

ToryJim said:

Another Labour candidate jumps out of the race

https://x.com/tomorrowsmps/status/1797952000061284693?s=61

It’s not a good sign if candidates are abandoning the fight whatever the reasons. Suggests that not everything will be plain sailing on the good ship Starmer.

Anabobazina said:

LostPassword said:

148grss said:

LostPassword said:

148grss said:

Eabhal said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Heathener said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

🔴 NEW: Labour will ban foie gras imports if they win the general election, the shadow environment secretary has announced

https://x.com/TelePolitics/status/1797907892743385443

Thank goodness.

Disgusting practice. Absolutely appalling animal cruelty.

Yes, it's another step in the process of civilisation. Once upon a time animal torture was regarded as acceptable, but nowadays people aren't so keen. Long may the trend continue.

Except for deer.

Yeah - I'm a veggie but we do need to cull wild deer in this country. Personally I'd like to see this happen by bringing back predator species, because wolves and bears are cool, but failing that letting people eat deer is reasonable.

Moggies first. The medium-sized cat predators are much less scary and threatening than wolves and bears.

LostPassword said:

148grss said:

Eabhal said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Heathener said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

🔴 NEW: Labour will ban foie gras imports if they win the general election, the shadow environment secretary has announced

https://x.com/TelePolitics/status/1797907892743385443

Thank goodness.

Disgusting practice. Absolutely appalling animal cruelty.

Yes, it's another step in the process of civilisation. Once upon a time animal torture was regarded as acceptable, but nowadays people aren't so keen. Long may the trend continue.

Except for deer.

Yeah - I'm a veggie but we do need to cull wild deer in this country. Personally I'd like to see this happen by bringing back predator species, because wolves and bears are cool, but failing that letting people eat deer is reasonable.

Moggies first. The medium-sized cat predators are much less scary and threatening than wolves and bears.

But I don't think they would predate on the deer enough. We need big predators that would not only cull numbers but change deer behaviour and make them more worried around open spaces and watering holes and such. The issue of deer is not just their numbers, but their grazing habits and the erosion they cause by not really acting in ways they would of when they did have predators. Their numbers alongside this behaviour change is what makes the impact so much worse.

I've read things from people in the know who think that Lynx would do the job.

The way I'd view it use that Lynx would be the best way to start, and sort out issues to do with livestock predation, and confidence-building with farmers. And then it's easier to make the case for other predators later.

The random capitalisation of a species made me think you were talking about deodorant.

rottenborough said:

((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
22m
Told Tory MPs phoning senior Reform officials pleading with them to withdraw candidates in their seats. Meanwhile Red Wall MPs outraged at "wet" Tory candidates being parachuted into safe seats. It's starting to come apart.

https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/1797945342937506035

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Leon said:

wooliedyed said:

rottenborough said:

((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
22m
Told Tory MPs phoning senior Reform officials pleading with them to withdraw candidates in their seats. Meanwhile Red Wall MPs outraged at "wet" Tory candidates being parachuted into safe seats. It's starting to come apart.

https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/1797945342937506035

Fuck me he's an hysterical old twit. Dan Hodges, redefining mewling bed wetter for the 2020s

He’s a journalist looking for a story. Nowt wrong with that

And if his info is even halfway right then that’s fascinating

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

You can also use ducks for foie gras.

That’s what happens in sw France . I have tried the pate , and delicious it is with a sweet wine , lots of crusty bread and a nice onion chutney .

It’s quite rich and I wouldn’t lose any sleep if I didn’t have it again but if you eat meat I don’t think you can moralize too much about people eating it.

Bar Boulud at the Madarin Oriental used to do a burger with a layer of foie gras within. It was exceptional.

I dislike animal cruelty and usually buy higher welfare products, but on foie gras I am a massive hypocrite because it’s so damn tasty.

I’ve never eaten the liver cooked only had the pate but I can imagine it would be lovely on a burger. I wouldn’t worry about the hypocrite bit , we’re all guilty of that at times with the things we eat, or where we shop etc .

I think this tends to be the missing bit in political messaging about stuff like climate change. People respond much more to “do your best but no one is perfect”.

The problem is that what people think is their best is nowhere near good enough to be effective. People respond considerably better in terms of actual behaviour when bad stuff is taxed sufficiently to make it an occasional luxury, but good luck getting elected on that platform.

Well yes, exactly. I have this argument with younger relatives all the time. It’s all very well to take a full on “Thunberg” position, but you’ll never get elected; and if you do then you won’t get reelected and it’ll be reversed.

Democracy = pragmatism.

Which means we're probably fucked unless some sort of global eco-dictatorship can be established.

Nah, on that subject we just accept 2-2.5 degrees of warming based on current policies plus improved technology. Which is fine, unless you live in the Maldives or similar places, and we can help them.

We’ve fixed global warming.

Er, no, we really haven't. Thus far we have made virtually no impact whatsoever on the rate of increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and are currently heading for at least 3 degrees of warming. The Maldives are already doomed, but so too are large areas of coastal plains around the world, not to mention those areas that will be made uninhabitable by heat and shifts in weather patterns. None of this will be fixed by imploring people to "do their best".

TOPPING said:

148grss said:

TOPPING said:

148grss said:

TOPPING said:

148grss said:

LostPassword said:

148grss said:

Eabhal said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Heathener said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

🔴 NEW: Labour will ban foie gras imports if they win the general election, the shadow environment secretary has announced

https://x.com/TelePolitics/status/1797907892743385443

Thank goodness.

Disgusting practice. Absolutely appalling animal cruelty.

Yes, it's another step in the process of civilisation. Once upon a time animal torture was regarded as acceptable, but nowadays people aren't so keen. Long may the trend continue.

Except for deer.

Yeah - I'm a veggie but we do need to cull wild deer in this country. Personally I'd like to see this happen by bringing back predator species, because wolves and bears are cool, but failing that letting people eat deer is reasonable.

Moggies first. The medium-sized cat predators are much less scary and threatening than wolves and bears.

LostPassword said:

148grss said:

Eabhal said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Heathener said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

🔴 NEW: Labour will ban foie gras imports if they win the general election, the shadow environment secretary has announced

https://x.com/TelePolitics/status/1797907892743385443

Thank goodness.

Disgusting practice. Absolutely appalling animal cruelty.

Yes, it's another step in the process of civilisation. Once upon a time animal torture was regarded as acceptable, but nowadays people aren't so keen. Long may the trend continue.

Except for deer.

Yeah - I'm a veggie but we do need to cull wild deer in this country. Personally I'd like to see this happen by bringing back predator species, because wolves and bears are cool, but failing that letting people eat deer is reasonable.

Moggies first. The medium-sized cat predators are much less scary and threatening than wolves and bears.

But I don't think they would predate on the deer enough. We need big predators that would not only cull numbers but change deer behaviour and make them more worried around open spaces and watering holes and such. The issue of deer is not just their numbers, but their grazing habits and the erosion they cause by not really acting in ways they would of when they did have predators. Their numbers alongside this behaviour change is what makes the impact so much worse.

I mean a wolf killing a deer would be a pretty long, drawn out, bloody, and painful affair do you really want to include that one deer rather than a single bullet.

It's not like a pack of hounds killing a fox which was a super efficient means of pest control.

But like I said, this isn't just about culling, it's about changing deer behaviour to be less damaging. Human hunting isn't something that keeps deer on edge and anxious like having natural predators does. Anxiety reduces breeding, reduces congregating in certain spots, makes spooking behaviour more pronounced. Short of sending out people tasked with guns to mow deer down, even if we increase hunting licenses for deer, I don't see human action making enough of a dent.

And the issue with animal suffering and efficiency and such is less to do with the existence of it; nature is, as Darwin noted, cruel and painful and inefficient. But as humans we have created an understanding of morality where we want to reduce unnecessary pain and suffering. To me that includes eating factory farmed meat or the tearing apart of a fox by dogs for the amusement of some toffs. That doesn't preclude me from wanting to bring back extinct predators (to potential benefit of the environment and biodiversity as a whole) if it also helps deal with other man made problems.

If only animals understood irony.

As it was being eaten alive - because that's how it works - the deer could ponder that such a death inflicted upon it was to satisfy your social ethical imperative while dreaming of being killed near-instantly by a pack of hounds or marksman's bullet.

Look, nature tooth and claw. I don't think meat eating is inherently morally wrong as a human - I just think when we can sustain ourselves without harming animals and the method by which we do mass meat farming is contributing to massive deforestation and ecological destruction that it's a bad idea. If you keep chickens in your back garden and decide to eat them when they start getting old, or if you're poor and have no other choice, that's fine.

I'm not an Auditor from the Discworld, demanding that all life stop to preserve order or my idea of what is moral. The natural world is immoral. Humans are able to stand against the pressures of nature in ways basically all other animals cannot, and we have the luxury and capability of developing and acting in moral ways.

And a worthy sentiment. But we can't or choose not to. In the same way as it is absurd to breed and then eat living creatures then it is equally absurd for those who object to eating animals to step on ants.

Taz said:

The Guardian does seem to have little time for the Labour Party. Plenty of articles having a dig.

Sharon Graham of Unite. Critical of Labour who will not rebalance in favour of her demands the workers.

Zero hours contracts are useful for some people. My wife has one and it is great for her.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/will-labour-rebalance-the-country-in-favour-of-working-people-i-don-t-think-so/ar-BB1nB1t4?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=6a53ea6388f94e748c04b7df37122fda&ei=12

FeersumEnjineeya said:

TOPPING said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

You can also use ducks for foie gras.

That’s what happens in sw France . I have tried the pate , and delicious it is with a sweet wine , lots of crusty bread and a nice onion chutney .

It’s quite rich and I wouldn’t lose any sleep if I didn’t have it again but if you eat meat I don’t think you can moralize too much about people eating it.

Bar Boulud at the Madarin Oriental used to do a burger with a layer of foie gras within. It was exceptional.

I dislike animal cruelty and usually buy higher welfare products, but on foie gras I am a massive hypocrite because it’s so damn tasty.

I’ve never eaten the liver cooked only had the pate but I can imagine it would be lovely on a burger. I wouldn’t worry about the hypocrite bit , we’re all guilty of that at times with the things we eat, or where we shop etc .

I think this tends to be the missing bit in political messaging about stuff like climate change. People respond much more to “do your best but no one is perfect”.

The problem is that what people think is their best is nowhere near good enough to be effective. People respond considerably better in terms of actual behaviour when bad stuff is taxed sufficiently to make it an occasional luxury, but good luck getting elected on that platform.

Well yes, exactly. I have this argument with younger relatives all the time. It’s all very well to take a full on “Thunberg” position, but you’ll never get elected; and if you do then you won’t get reelected and it’ll be reversed.

Democracy = pragmatism.

Which means we're probably fucked unless some sort of global eco-dictatorship can be established.

Nah, on that subject we just accept 2-2.5 degrees of warming based on current policies plus improved technology. Which is fine, unless you live in the Maldives or similar places, and we can help them.

We’ve fixed global warming.

Er, no, we really haven't. Thus far we have made virtually no impact whatsoever on the rate of increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and are currently heading for at least 3 degrees of warming. The Maldives are already doomed, but so too are large areas of coastal plains around the world, not to mention those areas that will be made uninhabitable by heat and shifts in weather patterns. None of this will be fixed by imploring people to "do their best".

What is the timing for the demise of the Maldives out of interest.

Uninhabitable by the end of the century, most likely. Possibly a bit longer with major sea defences, but those probably won't be economically viable. In the long run, evacuation is the only realistic option.

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Anabobazina said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Well exactly, and they automatically split the tickets without your needing to research it, which usually saves more than the booking fee. I use nothing else, and I travel by rail a lot.

El_Capitano said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Strongly recommend the TrainSplit app. It doesn't charge you for normal tickets, just a "commission" of 10% of the saving if it finds you a cheap deal with split tickets, and it's super easy to use.

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Well exactly, and they automatically split the tickets without your needing to research it, which usually saves more than the booking fee. I use nothing else, and I travel by rail a lot.

Read the fucking posts. I am getting really annoyed now. I COULD NOT BUY IT ONLINE. IT did not work. I had to go to the stration.

FeersumEnjineeya said:

TOPPING said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

You can also use ducks for foie gras.

That’s what happens in sw France . I have tried the pate , and delicious it is with a sweet wine , lots of crusty bread and a nice onion chutney .

It’s quite rich and I wouldn’t lose any sleep if I didn’t have it again but if you eat meat I don’t think you can moralize too much about people eating it.

Bar Boulud at the Madarin Oriental used to do a burger with a layer of foie gras within. It was exceptional.

I dislike animal cruelty and usually buy higher welfare products, but on foie gras I am a massive hypocrite because it’s so damn tasty.

I’ve never eaten the liver cooked only had the pate but I can imagine it would be lovely on a burger. I wouldn’t worry about the hypocrite bit , we’re all guilty of that at times with the things we eat, or where we shop etc .

I think this tends to be the missing bit in political messaging about stuff like climate change. People respond much more to “do your best but no one is perfect”.

The problem is that what people think is their best is nowhere near good enough to be effective. People respond considerably better in terms of actual behaviour when bad stuff is taxed sufficiently to make it an occasional luxury, but good luck getting elected on that platform.

Well yes, exactly. I have this argument with younger relatives all the time. It’s all very well to take a full on “Thunberg” position, but you’ll never get elected; and if you do then you won’t get reelected and it’ll be reversed.

Democracy = pragmatism.

Which means we're probably fucked unless some sort of global eco-dictatorship can be established.

Nah, on that subject we just accept 2-2.5 degrees of warming based on current policies plus improved technology. Which is fine, unless you live in the Maldives or similar places, and we can help them.

We’ve fixed global warming.

Er, no, we really haven't. Thus far we have made virtually no impact whatsoever on the rate of increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and are currently heading for at least 3 degrees of warming. The Maldives are already doomed, but so too are large areas of coastal plains around the world, not to mention those areas that will be made uninhabitable by heat and shifts in weather patterns. None of this will be fixed by imploring people to "do their best".

What is the timing for the demise of the Maldives out of interest.

Uninhabitable by the end of the century, most likely. Possibly a bit longer with major sea defences, but those probably won't be economically viable. In the long run, evacuation is the only realistic option.

TOPPING said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

TOPPING said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

You can also use ducks for foie gras.

That’s what happens in sw France . I have tried the pate , and delicious it is with a sweet wine , lots of crusty bread and a nice onion chutney .

It’s quite rich and I wouldn’t lose any sleep if I didn’t have it again but if you eat meat I don’t think you can moralize too much about people eating it.

Bar Boulud at the Madarin Oriental used to do a burger with a layer of foie gras within. It was exceptional.

I dislike animal cruelty and usually buy higher welfare products, but on foie gras I am a massive hypocrite because it’s so damn tasty.

I’ve never eaten the liver cooked only had the pate but I can imagine it would be lovely on a burger. I wouldn’t worry about the hypocrite bit , we’re all guilty of that at times with the things we eat, or where we shop etc .

I think this tends to be the missing bit in political messaging about stuff like climate change. People respond much more to “do your best but no one is perfect”.

The problem is that what people think is their best is nowhere near good enough to be effective. People respond considerably better in terms of actual behaviour when bad stuff is taxed sufficiently to make it an occasional luxury, but good luck getting elected on that platform.

Well yes, exactly. I have this argument with younger relatives all the time. It’s all very well to take a full on “Thunberg” position, but you’ll never get elected; and if you do then you won’t get reelected and it’ll be reversed.

Democracy = pragmatism.

Which means we're probably fucked unless some sort of global eco-dictatorship can be established.

Nah, on that subject we just accept 2-2.5 degrees of warming based on current policies plus improved technology. Which is fine, unless you live in the Maldives or similar places, and we can help them.

We’ve fixed global warming.

Er, no, we really haven't. Thus far we have made virtually no impact whatsoever on the rate of increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and are currently heading for at least 3 degrees of warming. The Maldives are already doomed, but so too are large areas of coastal plains around the world, not to mention those areas that will be made uninhabitable by heat and shifts in weather patterns. None of this will be fixed by imploring people to "do their best".

What is the timing for the demise of the Maldives out of interest.

Uninhabitable by the end of the century, most likely. Possibly a bit longer with major sea defences, but those probably won't be economically viable. In the long run, evacuation is the only realistic option.

Seriously? 80years away, possibly, a country, actually many, many tiny blips in the middle of the ocean a metre or three above sea level will apparently be submerged. At today's level of technological knowhow.

I am failing to be motivated. As is most of the rest of the planet and I can understand why.

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

Britain Trump latest...


Tom Peck
@tompeck

He’s gonna win by miles

https://x.com/tompeck/status/1797948238575870365

Christ. The crowds in that last photo

The only other contemporary poltiician who has/had this star quality is Boris

My guess is he will indeed win in Clacton if only coz the locals will want the attention and the lolz

pm215 said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Given there are a ton of other online vendors who don't charge a fee for the same service, it's not a "save time or pay" question, in my view...

148grss said:

TOPPING said:

148grss said:

TOPPING said:

148grss said:

LostPassword said:

148grss said:

Eabhal said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Heathener said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

🔴 NEW: Labour will ban foie gras imports if they win the general election, the shadow environment secretary has announced

https://x.com/TelePolitics/status/1797907892743385443

Thank goodness.

Disgusting practice. Absolutely appalling animal cruelty.

Yes, it's another step in the process of civilisation. Once upon a time animal torture was regarded as acceptable, but nowadays people aren't so keen. Long may the trend continue.

Except for deer.

Yeah - I'm a veggie but we do need to cull wild deer in this country. Personally I'd like to see this happen by bringing back predator species, because wolves and bears are cool, but failing that letting people eat deer is reasonable.

Moggies first. The medium-sized cat predators are much less scary and threatening than wolves and bears.

LostPassword said:

148grss said:

Eabhal said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Heathener said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

🔴 NEW: Labour will ban foie gras imports if they win the general election, the shadow environment secretary has announced

https://x.com/TelePolitics/status/1797907892743385443

Thank goodness.

Disgusting practice. Absolutely appalling animal cruelty.

Yes, it's another step in the process of civilisation. Once upon a time animal torture was regarded as acceptable, but nowadays people aren't so keen. Long may the trend continue.

Except for deer.

Yeah - I'm a veggie but we do need to cull wild deer in this country. Personally I'd like to see this happen by bringing back predator species, because wolves and bears are cool, but failing that letting people eat deer is reasonable.

Moggies first. The medium-sized cat predators are much less scary and threatening than wolves and bears.

But I don't think they would predate on the deer enough. We need big predators that would not only cull numbers but change deer behaviour and make them more worried around open spaces and watering holes and such. The issue of deer is not just their numbers, but their grazing habits and the erosion they cause by not really acting in ways they would of when they did have predators. Their numbers alongside this behaviour change is what makes the impact so much worse.

I mean a wolf killing a deer would be a pretty long, drawn out, bloody, and painful affair do you really want to include that one deer rather than a single bullet.

It's not like a pack of hounds killing a fox which was a super efficient means of pest control.

But like I said, this isn't just about culling, it's about changing deer behaviour to be less damaging. Human hunting isn't something that keeps deer on edge and anxious like having natural predators does. Anxiety reduces breeding, reduces congregating in certain spots, makes spooking behaviour more pronounced. Short of sending out people tasked with guns to mow deer down, even if we increase hunting licenses for deer, I don't see human action making enough of a dent.

And the issue with animal suffering and efficiency and such is less to do with the existence of it; nature is, as Darwin noted, cruel and painful and inefficient. But as humans we have created an understanding of morality where we want to reduce unnecessary pain and suffering. To me that includes eating factory farmed meat or the tearing apart of a fox by dogs for the amusement of some toffs. That doesn't preclude me from wanting to bring back extinct predators (to potential benefit of the environment and biodiversity as a whole) if it also helps deal with other man made problems.

If only animals understood irony.

As it was being eaten alive - because that's how it works - the deer could ponder that such a death inflicted upon it was to satisfy your social ethical imperative while dreaming of being killed near-instantly by a pack of hounds or marksman's bullet.

Look, nature tooth and claw. I don't think meat eating is inherently morally wrong as a human - I just think when we can sustain ourselves without harming animals and the method by which we do mass meat farming is contributing to massive deforestation and ecological destruction that it's a bad idea. If you keep chickens in your back garden and decide to eat them when they start getting old, or if you're poor and have no other choice, that's fine.

I'm not an Auditor from the Discworld, demanding that all life stop to preserve order or my idea of what is moral. The natural world is immoral. Humans are able to stand against the pressures of nature in ways basically all other animals cannot, and we have the luxury and capability of developing and acting in moral ways.

Anabobazina said:

pm215 said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Given there are a ton of other online vendors who don't charge a fee for the same service, it's not a "save time or pay" question, in my view...

Do they automatically send a QR ticket to your Apple Wallet and are perfectly integrated with your watch too, and give real-time updates and basically every other brilliantly coded feature that Trainline has?

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

You can also use ducks for foie gras.

That’s what happens in sw France . I have tried the pate , and delicious it is with a sweet wine , lots of crusty bread and a nice onion chutney .

It’s quite rich and I wouldn’t lose any sleep if I didn’t have it again but if you eat meat I don’t think you can moralize too much about people eating it.

Bar Boulud at the Madarin Oriental used to do a burger with a layer of foie gras within. It was exceptional.

I dislike animal cruelty and usually buy higher welfare products, but on foie gras I am a massive hypocrite because it’s so damn tasty.

I’ve never eaten the liver cooked only had the pate but I can imagine it would be lovely on a burger. I wouldn’t worry about the hypocrite bit , we’re all guilty of that at times with the things we eat, or where we shop etc .

I think this tends to be the missing bit in political messaging about stuff like climate change. People respond much more to “do your best but no one is perfect”.

The problem is that what people think is their best is nowhere near good enough to be effective. People respond considerably better in terms of actual behaviour when bad stuff is taxed sufficiently to make it an occasional luxury, but good luck getting elected on that platform.

Well yes, exactly. I have this argument with younger relatives all the time. It’s all very well to take a full on “Thunberg” position, but you’ll never get elected; and if you do then you won’t get reelected and it’ll be reversed.

Democracy = pragmatism.

Which means we're probably fucked unless some sort of global eco-dictatorship can be established.

Nah, on that subject we just accept 2-2.5 degrees of warming based on current policies plus improved technology. Which is fine, unless you live in the Maldives or similar places, and we can help them.

We’ve fixed global warming.

Er, no, we really haven't. Thus far we have made virtually no impact whatsoever on the rate of increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and are currently heading for at least 3 degrees of warming. The Maldives are already doomed, but so too are large areas of coastal plains around the world, not to mention those areas that will be made uninhabitable by heat and shifts in weather patterns. None of this will be fixed by imploring people to "do their best".

I mean that’s just not true. All sensible projections based on agreed measures get you to 2 or 2.5. Even if it was 3, 3 is fine. We’ve averted the truly catastrophic, and actually I think technology will see us do even better.

The point is that nobody actually expects the agreed measures to be implemented. See for example Sabine Hossenfelder's recent video on the topic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaaJqPCjNr4

This will ultimately result in many metres of sea level rise.

FeersumEnjineeya said:

TOPPING said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

You can also use ducks for foie gras.

That’s what happens in sw France . I have tried the pate , and delicious it is with a sweet wine , lots of crusty bread and a nice onion chutney .

It’s quite rich and I wouldn’t lose any sleep if I didn’t have it again but if you eat meat I don’t think you can moralize too much about people eating it.

Bar Boulud at the Madarin Oriental used to do a burger with a layer of foie gras within. It was exceptional.

I dislike animal cruelty and usually buy higher welfare products, but on foie gras I am a massive hypocrite because it’s so damn tasty.

I’ve never eaten the liver cooked only had the pate but I can imagine it would be lovely on a burger. I wouldn’t worry about the hypocrite bit , we’re all guilty of that at times with the things we eat, or where we shop etc .

I think this tends to be the missing bit in political messaging about stuff like climate change. People respond much more to “do your best but no one is perfect”.

The problem is that what people think is their best is nowhere near good enough to be effective. People respond considerably better in terms of actual behaviour when bad stuff is taxed sufficiently to make it an occasional luxury, but good luck getting elected on that platform.

Well yes, exactly. I have this argument with younger relatives all the time. It’s all very well to take a full on “Thunberg” position, but you’ll never get elected; and if you do then you won’t get reelected and it’ll be reversed.

Democracy = pragmatism.

Which means we're probably fucked unless some sort of global eco-dictatorship can be established.

Nah, on that subject we just accept 2-2.5 degrees of warming based on current policies plus improved technology. Which is fine, unless you live in the Maldives or similar places, and we can help them.

We’ve fixed global warming.

Er, no, we really haven't. Thus far we have made virtually no impact whatsoever on the rate of increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and are currently heading for at least 3 degrees of warming. The Maldives are already doomed, but so too are large areas of coastal plains around the world, not to mention those areas that will be made uninhabitable by heat and shifts in weather patterns. None of this will be fixed by imploring people to "do their best".

What is the timing for the demise of the Maldives out of interest.

Uninhabitable by the end of the century, most likely. Possibly a bit longer with major sea defences, but those probably won't be economically viable. In the long run, evacuation is the only realistic option.

rottenborough said:

Chameleon said:

rottenborough said:

Britain Trump latest...


Tom Peck
@tompeck

He’s gonna win by miles

https://x.com/tompeck/status/1797948238575870365

1 day after announcing candidacy and a very limited left wing vote? It's going to be close. The big risk for the Tories is if candidates defect an hour before nominations close, which I could see happening.

Can you change your nomination papers once they have been submitted (up until the 4pm deadline I mean)?

So a quick rewrite to say Reform at the last minute?

Or do you have to withdraw and resubmit?

ToryJim said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

Britain Trump latest...


Tom Peck
@tompeck

He’s gonna win by miles

https://x.com/tompeck/status/1797948238575870365

Christ. The crowds in that last photo

The only other contemporary poltiician who has/had this star quality is Boris

My guess is he will indeed win in Clacton if only coz the locals will want the attention and the lolz

Just because people (bloated by press) turn up to hear someone doesn’t mean they will turn up to vote for them. If the people of Clacton do elect him they may end up regretting it and quite possibly rather rapidly. I’m not sure he is going to want to deal with the casework, as an MEP he was docked half his salary to recoup irregularities in his expenses. You can easily see him being disciplined by the chair for refusing to retract unparliamentary language. Deep down he doesn’t want to actually win, as it suits him better to lose narrowly and throw a massive tantrum. Bottom line this is a monumental distraction, the election is about the future direction of the country not future opportunities for Farage to burnish his ego.

Anabobazina said:

pm215 said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Given there are a ton of other online vendors who don't charge a fee for the same service, it's not a "save time or pay" question, in my view...

Do they automatically send a QR ticket to your Apple Wallet and are perfectly integrated with your watch too, and give real-time updates and basically every other brilliantly coded feature that Trainline has?

Leon said:

kjh said:

Carnyx said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Well exactly, and they automatically split the tickets without your needing to research it, which usually saves more than the booking fee. I use nothing else, and I travel by rail a lot.

Read the fucking posts. I am getting really annoyed now. I COULD NOT BUY IT ONLINE. IT did not work. I had to go to the stration.

Some folk do develop a certain agnosia. But I've never come across this. Shame Charcot is dead, likewise Oliver Sacks - he could have made an interesting chapter out of PB.

I need to calm down. I like these posters, but it does make me wonder if I am posting in an alien language.

The answer is surely to never take a train journey where you can’t buy an online ticket

I mean even this bus from Moldova to Ukraine IN THE MIDDLE OF A WAR had an easy online ticketing system

TOPPING said:

Anabobazina said:

pm215 said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Given there are a ton of other online vendors who don't charge a fee for the same service, it's not a "save time or pay" question, in my view...

Do they automatically send a QR ticket to your Apple Wallet and are perfectly integrated with your watch too, and give real-time updates and basically every other brilliantly coded feature that Trainline has?

I always go straight to the train companies. Split tickets are easy to calculate just go to Trainline (!) to see where to buy the tickets and then go and buy them directly and they send emails and the tickets are available in the app.

Paying the Trainline fee is not a rational economic act.

williamglenn said:

ToryJim said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

Britain Trump latest...


Tom Peck
@tompeck

He’s gonna win by miles

https://x.com/tompeck/status/1797948238575870365

Christ. The crowds in that last photo

The only other contemporary poltiician who has/had this star quality is Boris

My guess is he will indeed win in Clacton if only coz the locals will want the attention and the lolz

Just because people (bloated by press) turn up to hear someone doesn’t mean they will turn up to vote for them. If the people of Clacton do elect him they may end up regretting it and quite possibly rather rapidly. I’m not sure he is going to want to deal with the casework, as an MEP he was docked half his salary to recoup irregularities in his expenses. You can easily see him being disciplined by the chair for refusing to retract unparliamentary language. Deep down he doesn’t want to actually win, as it suits him better to lose narrowly and throw a massive tantrum. Bottom line this is a monumental distraction, the election is about the future direction of the country not future opportunities for Farage to burnish his ego.

They're not electing a social worker. What's the downside from having an MP who is able to command national attention?

wooliedyed said:

There was a YouGov Wales poll out last night BTW
Lab 45 (+3 since Jan)
Con 18 (-2)
Ref 13
PC 12
LD 4 I think or 5

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

TOPPING said:

148grss said:

TOPPING said:

148grss said:

LostPassword said:

148grss said:

Eabhal said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Heathener said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

🔴 NEW: Labour will ban foie gras imports if they win the general election, the shadow environment secretary has announced

https://x.com/TelePolitics/status/1797907892743385443

Thank goodness.

Disgusting practice. Absolutely appalling animal cruelty.

Yes, it's another step in the process of civilisation. Once upon a time animal torture was regarded as acceptable, but nowadays people aren't so keen. Long may the trend continue.

Except for deer.

Yeah - I'm a veggie but we do need to cull wild deer in this country. Personally I'd like to see this happen by bringing back predator species, because wolves and bears are cool, but failing that letting people eat deer is reasonable.

Moggies first. The medium-sized cat predators are much less scary and threatening than wolves and bears.

LostPassword said:

148grss said:

Eabhal said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Heathener said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

🔴 NEW: Labour will ban foie gras imports if they win the general election, the shadow environment secretary has announced

https://x.com/TelePolitics/status/1797907892743385443

Thank goodness.

Disgusting practice. Absolutely appalling animal cruelty.

Yes, it's another step in the process of civilisation. Once upon a time animal torture was regarded as acceptable, but nowadays people aren't so keen. Long may the trend continue.

Except for deer.

Yeah - I'm a veggie but we do need to cull wild deer in this country. Personally I'd like to see this happen by bringing back predator species, because wolves and bears are cool, but failing that letting people eat deer is reasonable.

Moggies first. The medium-sized cat predators are much less scary and threatening than wolves and bears.

But I don't think they would predate on the deer enough. We need big predators that would not only cull numbers but change deer behaviour and make them more worried around open spaces and watering holes and such. The issue of deer is not just their numbers, but their grazing habits and the erosion they cause by not really acting in ways they would of when they did have predators. Their numbers alongside this behaviour change is what makes the impact so much worse.

I mean a wolf killing a deer would be a pretty long, drawn out, bloody, and painful affair do you really want to include that one deer rather than a single bullet.

It's not like a pack of hounds killing a fox which was a super efficient means of pest control.

But like I said, this isn't just about culling, it's about changing deer behaviour to be less damaging. Human hunting isn't something that keeps deer on edge and anxious like having natural predators does. Anxiety reduces breeding, reduces congregating in certain spots, makes spooking behaviour more pronounced. Short of sending out people tasked with guns to mow deer down, even if we increase hunting licenses for deer, I don't see human action making enough of a dent.

And the issue with animal suffering and efficiency and such is less to do with the existence of it; nature is, as Darwin noted, cruel and painful and inefficient. But as humans we have created an understanding of morality where we want to reduce unnecessary pain and suffering. To me that includes eating factory farmed meat or the tearing apart of a fox by dogs for the amusement of some toffs. That doesn't preclude me from wanting to bring back extinct predators (to potential benefit of the environment and biodiversity as a whole) if it also helps deal with other man made problems.

If only animals understood irony.

As it was being eaten alive - because that's how it works - the deer could ponder that such a death inflicted upon it was to satisfy your social ethical imperative while dreaming of being killed near-instantly by a pack of hounds or marksman's bullet.

Look, nature tooth and claw. I don't think meat eating is inherently morally wrong as a human - I just think when we can sustain ourselves without harming animals and the method by which we do mass meat farming is contributing to massive deforestation and ecological destruction that it's a bad idea. If you keep chickens in your back garden and decide to eat them when they start getting old, or if you're poor and have no other choice, that's fine.

I'm not an Auditor from the Discworld, demanding that all life stop to preserve order or my idea of what is moral. The natural world is immoral. Humans are able to stand against the pressures of nature in ways basically all other animals cannot, and we have the luxury and capability of developing and acting in moral ways.

"The natural world is immoral." - thats an odd phrase. Wouldn't amoral be a better choice? What does a snake know of morals? Or a lion? Or a fish? Morality is a human construct.

TOPPING said:

Anabobazina said:

TOPPING said:

Anabobazina said:

pm215 said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Given there are a ton of other online vendors who don't charge a fee for the same service, it's not a "save time or pay" question, in my view...

Do they automatically send a QR ticket to your Apple Wallet and are perfectly integrated with your watch too, and give real-time updates and basically every other brilliantly coded feature that Trainline has?

I always go straight to the train companies. Split tickets are easy to calculate just go to Trainline (!) to see where to buy the tickets and then go and buy them directly and they send emails and the tickets are available in the app.

Paying the Trainline fee is not a rational economic act.

It is because the cost of the booking fee < the cost of my time.

Fair enough. £300/hr seems a reasonable enough rate to me but each to their own.

Edit: if you are doing different journeys each time. For the same journey five times that would be £1,500/hr which should put you as lead counsel to the PO Inquiry.

PedestrianRock said:

Prospect raised above of Tory candidate defections to Reform.

The point has been rightfully made that the best time to do this if you are a current Tory candidate is surely Friday, so that the Tories don’t have time to nominate another candidate in your place before nominations close.

It also gives Reform a huge boost ahead of the Farage appearance in the 7-way debate on Friday.

Will we see a mass defection? Perhaps not. But we will surely see at least one.

The momentum may pick up if Sunak does poorly if tonight’s debate and some scared Tories get itchy feet.

I think there are still value bets in a big defection this week and proxy bets accordingly.

kjh said:

Leon said:

kjh said:

Carnyx said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Well exactly, and they automatically split the tickets without your needing to research it, which usually saves more than the booking fee. I use nothing else, and I travel by rail a lot.

Read the fucking posts. I am getting really annoyed now. I COULD NOT BUY IT ONLINE. IT did not work. I had to go to the stration.

Some folk do develop a certain agnosia. But I've never come across this. Shame Charcot is dead, likewise Oliver Sacks - he could have made an interesting chapter out of PB.

I need to calm down. I like these posters, but it does make me wonder if I am posting in an alien language.

The answer is surely to never take a train journey where you can’t buy an online ticket

I mean even this bus from Moldova to Ukraine IN THE MIDDLE OF A WAR had an easy online ticketing system

I'm sure you are just trying to wind me up @leon but it should not have been challenging. It was a straightforward journey. It was just a glitch of some sort involving the combinations involved. The ticket could not be bought online nor at the ticket office. But at the ticket office there is a man with a phone who does something about it.

It was just one of those unlucky things that could happen to anyone on any mundane journey. The pricing structure here is just to complicated that the simple combination I had fell through the cracks.

Train is the only option I have because I will be on a bike.

ToryJim said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

Britain Trump latest...


Tom Peck
@tompeck

He’s gonna win by miles

https://x.com/tompeck/status/1797948238575870365

Christ. The crowds in that last photo

The only other contemporary poltiician who has/had this star quality is Boris

My guess is he will indeed win in Clacton if only coz the locals will want the attention and the lolz

Just because people (bloated by press) turn up to hear someone doesn’t mean they will turn up to vote for them. If the people of Clacton do elect him they may end up regretting it and quite possibly rather rapidly. I’m not sure he is going to want to deal with the casework, as an MEP he was docked half his salary to recoup irregularities in his expenses. You can easily see him being disciplined by the chair for refusing to retract unparliamentary language. Deep down he doesn’t want to actually win, as it suits him better to lose narrowly and throw a massive tantrum. Bottom line this is a monumental distraction, the election is about the future direction of the country not future opportunities for Farage to burnish his ego.

El_Capitano said:

Taz said:

ToryJim said:

Another Labour candidate jumps out of the race

https://x.com/tomorrowsmps/status/1797952000061284693?s=61

It’s not a good sign if candidates are abandoning the fight whatever the reasons. Suggests that not everything will be plain sailing on the good ship Starmer.

Paper candidate in an unwinnable seat, Lib Dem Gain I reckon, for Witney.

Witney could have been a stretch target for Labour - they've come second a couple of times and the incumbent Tory is not liked. But the LibDems are throwing a lot at it.

Labour have a couple of really obvious candidates locally - I'm surprised that neither of them stood for the selection.

ToryJim said:

Another Labour candidate jumps out of the race

https://x.com/tomorrowsmps/status/1797952000061284693?s=61

It’s not a good sign if candidates are abandoning the fight whatever the reasons. Suggests that not everything will be plain sailing on the good ship Starmer.

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

FeersumEnjineeya said:

TOPPING said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

biggles said:

nico679 said:

You can also use ducks for foie gras.

That’s what happens in sw France . I have tried the pate , and delicious it is with a sweet wine , lots of crusty bread and a nice onion chutney .

It’s quite rich and I wouldn’t lose any sleep if I didn’t have it again but if you eat meat I don’t think you can moralize too much about people eating it.

Bar Boulud at the Madarin Oriental used to do a burger with a layer of foie gras within. It was exceptional.

I dislike animal cruelty and usually buy higher welfare products, but on foie gras I am a massive hypocrite because it’s so damn tasty.

I’ve never eaten the liver cooked only had the pate but I can imagine it would be lovely on a burger. I wouldn’t worry about the hypocrite bit , we’re all guilty of that at times with the things we eat, or where we shop etc .

I think this tends to be the missing bit in political messaging about stuff like climate change. People respond much more to “do your best but no one is perfect”.

The problem is that what people think is their best is nowhere near good enough to be effective. People respond considerably better in terms of actual behaviour when bad stuff is taxed sufficiently to make it an occasional luxury, but good luck getting elected on that platform.

Well yes, exactly. I have this argument with younger relatives all the time. It’s all very well to take a full on “Thunberg” position, but you’ll never get elected; and if you do then you won’t get reelected and it’ll be reversed.

Democracy = pragmatism.

Which means we're probably fucked unless some sort of global eco-dictatorship can be established.

Nah, on that subject we just accept 2-2.5 degrees of warming based on current policies plus improved technology. Which is fine, unless you live in the Maldives or similar places, and we can help them.

We’ve fixed global warming.

Er, no, we really haven't. Thus far we have made virtually no impact whatsoever on the rate of increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and are currently heading for at least 3 degrees of warming. The Maldives are already doomed, but so too are large areas of coastal plains around the world, not to mention those areas that will be made uninhabitable by heat and shifts in weather patterns. None of this will be fixed by imploring people to "do their best".

I mean that’s just not true. All sensible projections based on agreed measures get you to 2 or 2.5. Even if it was 3, 3 is fine. We’ve averted the truly catastrophic, and actually I think technology will see us do even better.

The point is that nobody actually expects the agreed measures to be implemented. See for example Sabine Hossenfelder's recent video on the topic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaaJqPCjNr4

This will ultimately result in many metres of sea level rise.

Maybe. Sea level has risen 6-8 inches over the past 100 years, hasn't it?

Yes, but the point is that it is accelerating as the temperature rises and the ice melts faster.

We know that the sea level in the last interglacial period was around 6 meters higher than it is today, so it seems likely that this is the kind of rise to expect as the Earth warms again to those sort of temperatures. It takes a long time for that ice to melt, so sea level rise obviously lags behind the temperature rise. Even if we were to achieve net zero today, the sea level would continue rising for centuries to come.

TOPPING said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

kjh said:

Carnyx said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Well exactly, and they automatically split the tickets without your needing to research it, which usually saves more than the booking fee. I use nothing else, and I travel by rail a lot.

Read the fucking posts. I am getting really annoyed now. I COULD NOT BUY IT ONLINE. IT did not work. I had to go to the stration.

Some folk do develop a certain agnosia. But I've never come across this. Shame Charcot is dead, likewise Oliver Sacks - he could have made an interesting chapter out of PB.

I need to calm down. I like these posters, but it does make me wonder if I am posting in an alien language.

The answer is surely to never take a train journey where you can’t buy an online ticket

I mean even this bus from Moldova to Ukraine IN THE MIDDLE OF A WAR had an easy online ticketing system

I'm sure you are just trying to wind me up @leon but it should not have been challenging. It was a straightforward journey. It was just a glitch of some sort involving the combinations involved. The ticket could not be bought online nor at the ticket office. But at the ticket office there is a man with a phone who does something about it.

It was just one of those unlucky things that could happen to anyone on any mundane journey. The pricing structure here is just to complicated that the simple combination I had fell through the cracks.

Train is the only option I have because I will be on a bike.

WHAT WAS THE JOURNEY

Andy_JS said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

I always buy a paper ticket for the tube when I'm in London because it's the only way to avoid being fined if you spend more than about 80 minutes in the system without touching out.

TOPPING said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

kjh said:

Carnyx said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

noneoftheabove said:

kjh said:

Anabobazina said:

kjh said:

Just spent over an hour trying to buy a train ticket at the station (good job it was for tomorrow). I seem to have broken the system. It is not like it was complicated. A to B with 2 senior railcards.

Use the Trainline app – far easier than paper tickets.

Trainline charge and both Journey Planner and Trainline got it wrong as well. None could decide what to charge me. The problem was repeated at the station, but the guy made a very very very long phone call.

All too complicated.

Trainline charged me £2.49 extra fee recently for 2 tickets purchased online. How much do you value an hour of your time?

Well exactly, and they automatically split the tickets without your needing to research it, which usually saves more than the booking fee. I use nothing else, and I travel by rail a lot.

Read the fucking posts. I am getting really annoyed now. I COULD NOT BUY IT ONLINE. IT did not work. I had to go to the stration.

Some folk do develop a certain agnosia. But I've never come across this. Shame Charcot is dead, likewise Oliver Sacks - he could have made an interesting chapter out of PB.

I need to calm down. I like these posters, but it does make me wonder if I am posting in an alien language.

The answer is surely to never take a train journey where you can’t buy an online ticket

I mean even this bus from Moldova to Ukraine IN THE MIDDLE OF A WAR had an easy online ticketing system

I'm sure you are just trying to wind me up @leon but it should not have been challenging. It was a straightforward journey. It was just a glitch of some sort involving the combinations involved. The ticket could not be bought online nor at the ticket office. But at the ticket office there is a man with a phone who does something about it.

It was just one of those unlucky things that could happen to anyone on any mundane journey. The pricing structure here is just to complicated that the simple combination I had fell through the cracks.

Train is the only option I have because I will be on a bike.

WHAT WAS THE JOURNEY