Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
I know I shouldn't make assumptions based on first names but... Phoebe and Anna, eh?
Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), Donald Trump’s vice presidential pick, said in 2021 that Vice President Kamala Harris is one of the “childless cat ladies” who is “miserable” with her life and has no direct stake in America because she is not a mom, the HuffPost reports.
The Repulican lady interviewed on R4 this evening was derisive about that - said she was a single cat lady too.
That kind of comment is likely to go down badly . If Vance thinks trashing women who either choose not to have kids or can’t have them is a vote winner then he really is deluded .
Wasn't it female voters who won it for Biden last time? I know he increased the Democrat share among white men, which was likely important too, but I seem to recall the gender gap was pretty large still.
IIRC, the number of women now reaching the age of 45 without kids is about 25%. More pertinently, the number of these who have chosen not to have kids is about 3%. That we have contrived to arrange society thus is one of history's biggest failures.
A rather horrible cooperation between the Conservative Party (stop paying poor people to have children!) and boomers (give me money, not my children!) led to an outcome neither side wanted. In fairness to them, the extended childhood ushered in by New Labour (everybody must go to University!) didn't help either.
I don't necessarily deny this (though I don't think we should be paying anyone to have children, we should be creating the economic and societal conditions where it is not prohibitively expensive to do so) - but this isn't just a British phenomenon; it appears to be common to the whole of the developed world (and also Russia). It's a problem, but it's a very interesting problem.
That's fair, @Cookie. It is true that the Conservatives did not fix the problem (and arguably made it worse), but it is also true that they did not cause it. I'm going to split my answer into two parts. This is part 1: an AI summary of Zeihan's explanation.
Part 1: Zeihan on Demography: the basics In this episode Peter Zeihan explains the importance of population structures in shaping economies and countries' success.
The traditional pyramid demographic model has a large young population at the bottom and few retirees at the top, leading to inflationary economic activity. However, due to decreased child mortality and increased lifespans, many countries now have a chimney-shaped demographic structure with a balanced distribution of age groups, resulting in controlled inflation and a balanced economy.
He also highlights the emerging trend of an inverted pyramid demographic model, where there are more people in older age groups than younger ones. This leads to a decline in consumption and a surplus of capital, requiring countries to focus on exports. This shift has been observed in Europe and Asia since 2000, impacting global trade relations.
He then categorizes countries based on their demographic structures, from pyramid-shaped (Arab world, sub-Saharan Africa) to chimney-shaped (India, United States) to inverted pyramid-shaped (Germany, Italy). He warns that countries with an aging population and declining birth rates will have problems in the coming decade, as the workforce moves into retirement with insufficient younger generations to support consumption and production.
To address this issue, countries can either increase their birth rates or implement large-scale immigration policies to bolster their populations. However, once a country's demographic structure has inverted, it's difficult to reverse the trend.
He ends by saying that to fix all this you should have started thirty years ago, and in the next episode he discusses Canada as a country that did exactly that through immigration policies.
This is part 2: me picking out the salient points
Part 2: Viewcode's tenpennyworth
Urbanisation. People moved from the country to the cities. In the country you can have a farm and children are a boon because they can work. In the cities children are expensive furniture that break things
Birth control. If you can control your reproductive cycle you can put off having children until it's convenient. But it never is...
Juvenilization of adults. By continually pushing the age of agency up, people are now not starting families until their mid twenties or even thirties or forties. That's too late. This has been exacerbated in the UK by pensionerism as older people treat their grandchildren as children.
Longer life spans. Old people use up resources and must be looked after, which reduces the amount of time and resources you have to make and look after babies.
Hat tip to you, @viewcode , for introducing something I hadn't particularly thought of: your fourth point. The other three are choices, and I recognise the truth of them, but if we truly wanted children we could overcome them. The fourth is an external factor, and is true whether you are taking care of old people at an individual level or at a state level: the more we spend on the old, the less we will have to spend on the young. Therefore more old people almost necessarily leads to fewer young people. We are necessarily being destroyed by the demographic miracle of a century ago.
This factor is why declining birth rates are common everywhere, regardless of local cultural or economic factors. (Perhaps - more research needed - the steepness of the decline is a factor of the steepness of the growth 50-100 years ago? I bet it is. I bet you could find a convincing correlation.)
How do we overcome this? I would suggest the only way to do it is by reclassifying 'old' upwards by however much we've increased the life expectancy by. Life expectancy now 85 rather than 75? Great, retire at 75 rather than 65. Retiring at 75 and dying at 85 is surely a better deal than retiring at 65 and dying at 75. And as a society we get much, much richer as a result. The counter to this is that people will not be fit to work in their 70s, but I don't fully buy that: the average 70 year old today is at least as hale and hearty as the average 60 year old two generations back. Those approaching 50 today (*cough*) are as healthy and fit as those a decade younger used to be. We were discussing yesterday - in the context of Kamala Harris and Kier Starmer - how much younger looking people are now. And I posted this, from 1975: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frUqq4Q8gsg - this is what a 46 year old looked like in 1975:
It'll be politically difficult to do. There'll be an angry pensioner along to tell you how hard they worked for their 25-year long retirement. But as someone for whom retirement is no longer an unimaginably remote landmark on the horizon, I'm the generation who stands to lose out the most - yet it strikes me as the only equitable and affordable solution. The only alternatives are can-kicking ponzi schemes: either extracting people from the third world indefinitely or piling more and more costs onto future generations. I won't be as lucky as my parents generation who in many cases will spend longer retired than they did working and who can spend healthy decades jetting around the world. But I will still undoubtedly be luckier than every single generation that preceded them.
I think that's a slightly extreme example. Most 46 year olds didn't look quite as old as this heavy-drinking (and probably smoking) football fan in 1975.
Dunno, for reasons unclear to me the 1960-70s seem to have been a period of disproportionately aging badly. See footballers who should in theory be examples of youthful athleticism. More than a few Scottish players in there I'm forced to admit.
People in their mid forties in 1975 were born in 1930. A huge proportion of them would have been undernourished in infancy. Then traumatised in their adolescence. Then started working under rationing. It's a wonder they looked so youthful.
I take your point about the 1930s but wasn't rationing the period when Britons had their healthiest diets? These footballers look no healthier than photos of your average WWI conscript, in some cases worse. Part of it possibly is that this period was the first time the working classes as exemplified by professional footballers were extensively publicised, photographed, recorded, televised etc.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Attitudes towards gay people has changed markedly for the better in the past 25 years.
Really? I don't recall 2000 being particularly homophobic. The last 40 years, certainly. But I'd say most of the change in attitudes was 1985-2000. Still, not a gay person so what do I know.
You may be right, my memory might be deceiving me.
2000 probably wasn't homophobic amongst 'civilised adults' but we'd definitely use gay as in insult in school. A friend of mine tried to run away once cause he was hitting on another boy and we had to go off and "catch" him before he did anything stupid.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
I know I shouldn't make assumptions based on first names but... Phoebe and Anna, eh?
I know its amazing....and unsurprisingly with a name like that isn't a working class lass from poor family in smoggy land. Privately educated, privileged background, as are most of those that spend their life doing this.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
Coming soon, the Whole Truth 7.
Perhaps they can add their names to this letter from over 1,200 artists, sportsmen and activists demanding a meeting with the Attorney General over the sentencing.
Poor Cressida's Mom was on LBC yesterday, who give them favourable coverage of course, complaining she will miss her Brothers wedding. Wonder if Mommy can send her a piece of cake with a file in ?
If I were in the Trump camp I'd be slightly concerned that the lead over Harris is only 2% before the campaign has really started. She doesn't seem to be as unpopular as we've been led to believe.
It could go either way I think. Which suggests Trump is overvalued and Harris undervalued. I suspect the values reflect that Trump is a known quantity while Harris largely isn't, despite having been VP for the past four years.
One thing about the Biden announcement is that it has totally blocked the momentum that the Trump campaign was garnering as a result of shooting/convention/Vance. It looked for a bit as if it could have been runaway for the Reps and irrecoverable. But no longer.
It's all now about Kamala, her Veep-choice, and the forthcoming Dem convention. Quite a turnaround.
Her big problem is the WWC. The one thing about Biden, is that he would not have looked out-of-place having a beer with ordinary working Americans. This cannot remotely be said of Harris. Her VP choice needs to address that.
She could go for Biden as VP. A bit like Putin and Medvedev back in the day.
Trump's ineligible for VP in 2028 if he wins in November I think ?
Bear versus man? Depends on the bear. In the US, black bears are the least dangerous, polar bears the most, with grizzly bears in between. (I suspect there are similar differences between other species.)
And mother bears with cubs of all three species should be left strictly alone.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
I love the way this judge just happens to turn up for this particular case. Not what the defendants were hoping for!
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
Coming soon, the Whole Truth 7.
Perhaps they can add their names to this letter from over 1,200 artists, sportsmen and activists demanding a meeting with the Attorney General over the sentencing.
Poor Cressida's Mom was on LBC yesterday, who give them favourable coverage of course, complaining she will miss her Brothers wedding. Wonder if Mommy can send her a piece of cake with a file in ?
It is as if all these people come from privileged well connected backgrounds...one of the things that is rarely talked about with Saint Greta, her parents are rich, were quite famous before Greta teenager temper tantrum Fridays and are extremely well connected.
As I said before, the 5 that have got long prison sentences, they had already been convicted multiple times, including custodial sentences. If normal folk kept turning up in front of a judge and found guilty multiple times, told I don't want to see you again, and then back every few months, you would hope they would now starting to get serious punishment. They aren't people who say went on those student protests, did a load of drugs and got carried away with the mob for once in their life.
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Attitudes towards gay people has changed markedly for the better in the past 25 years.
Really? I don't recall 2000 being particularly homophobic. The last 40 years, certainly. But I'd say most of the change in attitudes was 1985-2000. Still, not a gay person so what do I know.
There was a big change for the better from 1985 to 2000 but its improved much better since.
In 2000 it was considered preposterous to suggest gay people could marry the person they love. And people still (though increasingly rarely) used f*g etc as an insult.
It was only just becoming OK to have people out of the closet. TV shows including gay characters was newsworthy.
Worth noting on Friends as a comparison point. While the comedy has held up well as a whole, some of the LGBT jokes in particular are rather cringe nowadays - and that was modern for its time in even having LGBT characters in it, but they were more often than not the butt of a joke.
Is an instructive list. Some changes, e.g. first out cabinet minister in 1997, but there are a lot of firsts post 2000. Sexuality of e.g. cabinet ministers wouldn't even be noted now, I think.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
I love the way this judge just happens to turn up for this particular case. Not what the defendants were hoping for!
Well if you've got multiple past convictions, eventually they'd turn up for one of them.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
I love the way this judge just happens to turn up for this particular case. Not what the defendants were hoping for!
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
A friend of mine's sister is going to be tried for PCOJ and for a serious offence, not a driving fine. Still not come to court after 4 years.
One trial collapsed as it ran over too long. They allocated too few days for it and the Judge had other commitments. It has also been postponed twice.
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Am I the only person who thinks the Loyd Grossman pre-2003 version of Masterchef was better than the post-2003 one?
Loyd's Masterchef was about who could lay on the best dinner party. Now it is about who is an amateur chef at professional standards. If you want Loyd's version, watch Come Dine With Me.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
Because they’ve been sent to the Crown Court, the magistrates presumably thinking the offence to be above their own pay grade. Unfortunately the CC got horribly backlogged during the pandemic and is still working through cases.
Fingers crossed for two more custodial sentences if convicted. Has anyone ever been done for potentially £100m of damage to anything before, apart from the Lockerbie bombers?
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
I love the way this judge just happens to turn up for this particular case. Not what the defendants were hoping for!
Well if you've got multiple past convictions, eventually they'd turn up for one of them.
Maybe stop breaking the law?
The whole truth 5 had previous multiple convictions and were also on bail at the time of the offence.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
I love the way this judge just happens to turn up for this particular case. Not what the defendants were hoping for!
Well if you've got multiple past convictions, eventually they'd turn up for one of them.
Maybe stop breaking the law?
The whole truth 5 had previous multiple convictions and were also on bail at the time of the offence.
What do they expect ? They are not victims.
This pair are serial offenders too.
Precisely the sort of people who should be behind bars.
Those who have victims and who won't stop committing the crime so aren't being rehabilitated by any prior punishments.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
A friend of mine's sister is on trial for PCOJ and for a serious offence, not a driving fine. Still not come to court after 4 years.
Time to trial is the most broken part of the criminal justice system. There is no point in banging people up years after the offence, because in that gap they seem to have got away with it. Crime might not be consequence-free for perpetrators but it sure looks that way, to them and their peers.
As I have said previous, as the eco-fascists love nothing more than lying down, community services as tackle bags for Premiership rugby clubs. Although now Manu Tuilagi has gone to France it would certainly be a lesser punishment...
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
Because the courts, like everything else, have been massively underfunded. This is how long all cases come to court.
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Cars look incredibly different. Much larger, organic and angular, the LCD/HID headlights are distinct, and the sound is much quieter. New Edge cars from the 2000s look archaic
Mobile phones are incredibly different. Consider the Nokia 8110 used in the Matrix. Compare it to today's Samsung
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
A friend of mine's sister is on trial for PCOJ and for a serious offence, not a driving fine. Still not come to court after 4 years.
Time to trial is the most broken part of the criminal justice system. There is no point in banging people up years after the offence, because in that gap they seem to have got away with it. Crime might not be consequence-free for perpetrators but it sure looks that way, to them and their peers.
That plus 90% of what I call shitty crimes the police don't even get anybody for it. Your odds are pretty damn good you can commit a load of low level crime consistently and it will be years and year before you ever any real consequences.
What I really want to see now is three-way Trump/Harris/Kennedy polling, now that the independent is on the ballot pretty much everywhere.
My suspicion is that a lot of Biden voters prefer Kennedy to Harris, but wouldn’t dare vote Trump. So something like 50/40/10, which in practice gives the former President a landslide.
Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), Donald Trump’s vice presidential pick, said in 2021 that Vice President Kamala Harris is one of the “childless cat ladies” who is “miserable” with her life and has no direct stake in America because she is not a mom, the HuffPost reports.
The Repulican lady interviewed on R4 this evening was derisive about that - said she was a single cat lady too.
That kind of comment is likely to go down badly . If Vance thinks trashing women who either choose not to have kids or can’t have them is a vote winner then he really is deluded .
Wasn't it female voters who won it for Biden last time? I know he increased the Democrat share among white men, which was likely important too, but I seem to recall the gender gap was pretty large still.
IIRC, the number of women now reaching the age of 45 without kids is about 25%. More pertinently, the number of these who have chosen not to have kids is about 3%. That we have contrived to arrange society thus is one of history's biggest failures.
A rather horrible cooperation between the Conservative Party (stop paying poor people to have children!) and boomers (give me money, not my children!) led to an outcome neither side wanted. In fairness to them, the extended childhood ushered in by New Labour (everybody must go to University!) didn't help either.
I don't necessarily deny this (though I don't think we should be paying anyone to have children, we should be creating the economic and societal conditions where it is not prohibitively expensive to do so) - but this isn't just a British phenomenon; it appears to be common to the whole of the developed world (and also Russia). It's a problem, but it's a very interesting problem.
That's fair, @Cookie. It is true that the Conservatives did not fix the problem (and arguably made it worse), but it is also true that they did not cause it. I'm going to split my answer into two parts. This is part 1: an AI summary of Zeihan's explanation.
Part 1: Zeihan on Demography: the basics In this episode Peter Zeihan explains the importance of population structures in shaping economies and countries' success.
The traditional pyramid demographic model has a large young population at the bottom and few retirees at the top, leading to inflationary economic activity. However, due to decreased child mortality and increased lifespans, many countries now have a chimney-shaped demographic structure with a balanced distribution of age groups, resulting in controlled inflation and a balanced economy.
He also highlights the emerging trend of an inverted pyramid demographic model, where there are more people in older age groups than younger ones. This leads to a decline in consumption and a surplus of capital, requiring countries to focus on exports. This shift has been observed in Europe and Asia since 2000, impacting global trade relations.
He then categorizes countries based on their demographic structures, from pyramid-shaped (Arab world, sub-Saharan Africa) to chimney-shaped (India, United States) to inverted pyramid-shaped (Germany, Italy). He warns that countries with an aging population and declining birth rates will have problems in the coming decade, as the workforce moves into retirement with insufficient younger generations to support consumption and production.
To address this issue, countries can either increase their birth rates or implement large-scale immigration policies to bolster their populations. However, once a country's demographic structure has inverted, it's difficult to reverse the trend.
He ends by saying that to fix all this you should have started thirty years ago, and in the next episode he discusses Canada as a country that did exactly that through immigration policies.
This is part 2: me picking out the salient points
Part 2: Viewcode's tenpennyworth
Urbanisation. People moved from the country to the cities. In the country you can have a farm and children are a boon because they can work. In the cities children are expensive furniture that break things
Birth control. If you can control your reproductive cycle you can put off having children until it's convenient. But it never is...
Juvenilization of adults. By continually pushing the age of agency up, people are now not starting families until their mid twenties or even thirties or forties. That's too late. This has been exacerbated in the UK by pensionerism as older people treat their grandchildren as children.
Longer life spans. Old people use up resources and must be looked after, which reduces the amount of time and resources you have to make and look after babies.
Hat tip to you, @viewcode , for introducing something I hadn't particularly thought of: your fourth point. The other three are choices, and I recognise the truth of them, but if we truly wanted children we could overcome them. The fourth is an external factor, and is true whether you are taking care of old people at an individual level or at a state level: the more we spend on the old, the less we will have to spend on the young. Therefore more old people almost necessarily leads to fewer young people. We are necessarily being destroyed by the demographic miracle of a century ago.
This factor is why declining birth rates are common everywhere, regardless of local cultural or economic factors. (Perhaps - more research needed - the steepness of the decline is a factor of the steepness of the growth 50-100 years ago? I bet it is. I bet you could find a convincing correlation.)
How do we overcome this? I would suggest the only way to do it is by reclassifying 'old' upwards by however much we've increased the life expectancy by. Life expectancy now 85 rather than 75? Great, retire at 75 rather than 65. Retiring at 75 and dying at 85 is surely a better deal than retiring at 65 and dying at 75. And as a society we get much, much richer as a result. The counter to this is that people will not be fit to work in their 70s, but I don't fully buy that: the average 70 year old today is at least as hale and hearty as the average 60 year old two generations back. Those approaching 50 today (*cough*) are as healthy and fit as those a decade younger used to be. We were discussing yesterday - in the context of Kamala Harris and Kier Starmer - how much younger looking people are now. And I posted this, from 1975: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frUqq4Q8gsg - this is what a 46 year old looked like in 1975:
It'll be politically difficult to do. There'll be an angry pensioner along to tell you how hard they worked for their 25-year long retirement. But as someone for whom retirement is no longer an unimaginably remote landmark on the horizon, I'm the generation who stands to lose out the most - yet it strikes me as the only equitable and affordable solution. The only alternatives are can-kicking ponzi schemes: either extracting people from the third world indefinitely or piling more and more costs onto future generations. I won't be as lucky as my parents generation who in many cases will spend longer retired than they did working and who can spend healthy decades jetting around the world. But I will still undoubtedly be luckier than every single generation that preceded them.
I looked about 28 into my early 50s. And then suddenly I didn’t
*quietly sobs in l’Aveyron*
I'd wager you still look younger than the 46 year old above.
This is all an on-average, of course. My Dad always looked a good 10 years younger than he was, and still does. I have very little hair now, and that ages me. I suspect I'm going to get a bit jowly in the next few years. But almost all of my 50-ish friends seem capable of remarkable feats - half marathons, lengthy bike rides, football, etc - which you just wouldn't have expected from that demographic 50 years ago. And yes, self-selecting middle-class suburbanite, but that was also true of the 50-year-olds I knew when I was growing up.
The decline in smoking possibly has a lot to do with it.
I don't know if I look younger than that guy, but I definitely look healthier
Because you're right. With the very notable exception of increased weight and obesity, people are generally fitter (giving up smoking is perhaps responsible for people being fitter AND fatter)
My Dad basically gave up serious physical exercise about age 40-45, and it showed. I hike, swim, scuba, ride horses, and drag my luggage around the world many years after that. Ins'allah that continues! And likewise for you
One thing that has gone, tho, is my knees. Think I fucked them up doing mad things in my youth, like dancing on Ecstasy and falling - knee first - onto hard concrete. I can walk 15 miles quite easily, but I can't run more than 100 yards. Hurts my knees
Luckily, that's fixable now.
Re people looking older in past, I reckon there were three big factors: - Long-term smoking. - Working or at least spending more time outside without sun protection. - Poorer air quality.
Are knees fixable now? I do hope so
I've only ever heard horror stories from people who had knee surgery or knee replacement or whatever it is
DYOR but I believe knee replacement has a very good success rate now.
Are they like hip replacements, where the eventual outcome depends significantly on how much effort you put in after the surgery?
Keep moving!
My hip physio said she was really just wasting my time, just carry on doing the stuff I do (walking and cycling) and cut out the running and that's all the physio new hips need. Whereas with knees you need to stick religiously to a very specific set of exercises.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
Because they’ve been sent to the Crown Court, the magistrates presumably thinking the offence to be above their own pay grade. Unfortunately the CC got horribly backlogged during the pandemic and is still working through cases.
Fingers crossed for two more custodial sentences if convicted. Has anyone ever been done for potentially £100m of damage to anything before, apart from the Lockerbie bombers?
I think those that brought down the twin towers were probably well in excess of that. No trial for them though, at least not on this earth. It almost makes you wish that hell was a thing.
Incoming Leon to tell us all about the right wing surge among the TikTokers....
There is an issue with people not believing that young people can be right wing.
Some years ago, I remember having a debate with some historians who couldn't get their heads round the politics of German Empire. They couldn't comprehend *teachers* being enthusiastic militaristic imperialists, in large numbers.
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Cars look incredibly different. Much larger, organic and angular, the LCD/HID headlights are distinct, and the sound is much quieter. New Edge cars from the 2000s look archaic
Mobile phones are incredibly different. Consider the Nokia 8110 used in the Matrix. Compare it to today's Samsung
Is it just me or have recent car design trends in trying to look "space-aged" actually look like what vehicles of the future were portrayed in sci-fi shows from the 70/80s.
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Cars look incredibly different. Much larger, organic and angular, the LCD/HID headlights are distinct, and the sound is much quieter. New Edge cars from the 2000s look archaic
Mobile phones are incredibly different. Consider the Nokia 8110 used in the Matrix. Compare it to today's Samsung
Incoming Leon to tell us all about the right wing surge among the TikTokers....
There is an issue with people not believing that young people can be right wing.
Some years ago, I remember having a debate with some historians who couldn't get their heads round the politics of German Empire. They couldn't comprehend *teachers* being enthusiastic militaristic imperialists, in large numbers.
Trump, Tate, Farage. There is a sizeable portion of mostly young men who are keen on these people. The question that should be asked is why.
What I really want to see now is three-way Trump/Harris/Kennedy polling, now that the independent is on the ballot pretty much everywhere.
My suspicion is that a lot of Biden voters prefer Kennedy to Harris, but wouldn’t dare vote Trump. So something like 50/40/10, which in practice gives the former President a landslide.
Incoming Leon to tell us all about the right wing surge among the TikTokers....
There is an issue with people not believing that young people can be right wing.
Some years ago, I remember having a debate with some historians who couldn't get their heads round the politics of German Empire. They couldn't comprehend *teachers* being enthusiastic militaristic imperialists, in large numbers.
Although pre WW1 Germany is an interesting one as it had been a series of militarised states since the time of Frederick the Great.
"The Prussian monarchy is not a country which has an army, but an army which has a country, in which – as it were – it is just stationed"
Georg Heinrich Berenhorst. Adjutant to Frederick II
Incoming Leon to tell us all about the right wing surge among the TikTokers....
There is an issue with people not believing that young people can be right wing.
Some years ago, I remember having a debate with some historians who couldn't get their heads round the politics of German Empire. They couldn't comprehend *teachers* being enthusiastic militaristic imperialists, in large numbers.
There were a lot of youngsters at the RNC last week, alongside the many usual old crusties. The Trump crowd isn’t the old GOP crowd of 12 years ago. Also quite a number of pretty young ladies working as independent journalists there, presumably all hoping to be the next Megyn Kelly.
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Cars look incredibly different. Much larger, organic and angular, the LCD/HID headlights are distinct, and the sound is much quieter. New Edge cars from the 2000s look archaic
Mobile phones are incredibly different. Consider the Nokia 8110 used in the Matrix. Compare it to today's Samsung
Is it just me or have recent car design trends in trying to look "space-aged" actually look like what vehicles of the future were portrayed in sci-fi shows from the 70/80s.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
Coming soon, the Whole Truth 7.
Perhaps they can add their names to this letter from over 1,200 artists, sportsmen and activists demanding a meeting with the Attorney General over the sentencing.
Poor Cressida's Mom was on LBC yesterday, who give them favourable coverage of course, complaining she will miss her Brothers wedding. Wonder if Mommy can send her a piece of cake with a file in ?
It is as if all these people come from privileged well connected backgrounds...one of the things that is rarely talked about with Saint Greta, her parents are rich, were quite famous before Greta teenager temper tantrum Fridays and are extremely well connected.
As I said before, the 5 that have got long prison sentences, they had already been convicted multiple times, including custodial sentences. If normal folk kept turning up in front of a judge and found guilty multiple times, told I don't want to see you again, and then back every few months, you would hope they would now starting to get serious punishment. They aren't people who say went on those student protests, did a load of drugs and got carried away with the mob for once in their life.
All of which is being ignored. There have been some horrendously bad takes. Verging on fascism according to Philip Pulman, an author. Some have claimed they were jailed for raising awareness on Climate Change, or attending a Zoom Call or peacefully protesting or holding signs.
Mind you Liberty will be meeting with the Govt there is some hope she will roll back some of the Tories laws but, again, this is a crap take. The law to hand did not criminalise peaceful protest. Peaceful protest is still quite legal.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
Because they’ve been sent to the Crown Court, the magistrates presumably thinking the offence to be above their own pay grade. Unfortunately the CC got horribly backlogged during the pandemic and is still working through cases.
Fingers crossed for two more custodial sentences if convicted. Has anyone ever been done for potentially £100m of damage to anything before, apart from the Lockerbie bombers?
Very different offence this one isn't it? Criminal Damage - no idea how much for but probably not very much V Conspiracy to cause a Public Nuisance.
I don't think a lengthy custodial sentence would be justified in this case (depending on how safe the painting was - aiui it was under cover and selected for that reason?).
Incoming Leon to tell us all about the right wing surge among the TikTokers....
There is an issue with people not believing that young people can be right wing.
Some years ago, I remember having a debate with some historians who couldn't get their heads round the politics of German Empire. They couldn't comprehend *teachers* being enthusiastic militaristic imperialists, in large numbers.
Trump, Tate, Farage. There is a sizeable portion of mostly young men who are keen on these people. The question that should be asked is why.
Because left wing “progressive” society continuously tells young men that they are toxic just because they are male. And it openly discriminates against them - especially if they are white
So in the end they think “fuck it, I’ll vote for the pussy grabbing right wingers, everyone else hates me, they don’t”
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
A friend of mine's sister is on trial for PCOJ and for a serious offence, not a driving fine. Still not come to court after 4 years.
Time to trial is the most broken part of the criminal justice system. There is no point in banging people up years after the offence, because in that gap they seem to have got away with it. Crime might not be consequence-free for perpetrators but it sure looks that way, to them and their peers.
Not only that although you are quite right, in this case, she has had this hanging over her for four years and cannot really get on with her life until it is resolved. Same for many others and she maintains her innocence.
The shift of younger males to the hard right has been observed for a while. More interesting is the first signs of young women following - as they realise that mass immigration makes the streets much less safe for them
If I were in the Trump camp I'd be slightly concerned that the lead over Harris is only 2% before the campaign has really started. She doesn't seem to be as unpopular as we've been led to believe.
It could go either way I think. Which suggests Trump is overvalued and Harris undervalued. I suspect the values reflect that Trump is a known quantity while Harris largely isn't, despite having been VP for the past four years.
One thing about the Biden announcement is that it has totally blocked the momentum that the Trump campaign was garnering as a result of shooting/convention/Vance. It looked for a bit as if it could have been runaway for the Reps and irrecoverable. But no longer.
It's all now about Kamala, her Veep-choice, and the forthcoming Dem convention. Quite a turnaround.
Her big problem is the WWC. The one thing about Biden, is that he would not have looked out-of-place having a beer with ordinary working Americans. This cannot remotely be said of Harris. Her VP choice needs to address that.
She could go for Biden as VP. A bit like Putin and Medvedev back in the day.
Trump's ineligible for VP in 2028 if he wins in November I think ?
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Cars look incredibly different. Much larger, organic and angular, the LCD/HID headlights are distinct, and the sound is much quieter. New Edge cars from the 2000s look archaic
Mobile phones are incredibly different. Consider the Nokia 8110 used in the Matrix. Compare it to today's Samsung
Is it just me or have recent car design trends in trying to look "space-aged" actually look like what vehicles of the future were portrayed in sci-fi shows from the 70/80s.
When I was delivering leaflets during the election, I noticed an increased number of houses with EV charging points, and not just new-build houses either.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
A friend of mine's sister is on trial for PCOJ and for a serious offence, not a driving fine. Still not come to court after 4 years.
Time to trial is the most broken part of the criminal justice system. There is no point in banging people up years after the offence, because in that gap they seem to have got away with it. Crime might not be consequence-free for perpetrators but it sure looks that way, to them and their peers.
Not only that although you are quite right, in this case, she has had this hanging over her for four years and cannot really get on with her life until it is resolved. Same for many others and she maintains her innocence.
The process is now the punishment.
My trial next week is a fairly straightforward drugs bust that occurred in May 2021. It really is a disgrace. I am not sure how the system ever recovers from this.
Biden made gains with men, while Trump improved among women, narrowing the gender gap. The gender gap in the 2020 election was narrower than it had been in 2016, both because of gains that Biden made among men and because of gains Trump made among women. In 2020, men were almost evenly divided between Trump and Biden, unlike in 2016 when Trump won men by 11 points.
If I were in the Trump camp I'd be slightly concerned that the lead over Harris is only 2% before the campaign has really started. She doesn't seem to be as unpopular as we've been led to believe.
It could go either way I think. Which suggests Trump is overvalued and Harris undervalued. I suspect the values reflect that Trump is a known quantity while Harris largely isn't, despite having been VP for the past four years.
One thing about the Biden announcement is that it has totally blocked the momentum that the Trump campaign was garnering as a result of shooting/convention/Vance. It looked for a bit as if it could have been runaway for the Reps and irrecoverable. But no longer.
It's all now about Kamala, her Veep-choice, and the forthcoming Dem convention. Quite a turnaround.
Her big problem is the WWC. The one thing about Biden, is that he would not have looked out-of-place having a beer with ordinary working Americans. This cannot remotely be said of Harris. Her VP choice needs to address that.
My view is that with Biden, the only way was down. He was the story, and not in a positive way, and that story was allowing Trump and the Republicans to get away with a lot of stuff.
If Trump said something crazy, then the Republicans and their media friends just needed to say: "Did you see Biden stumble the other day! He's old and past it!"
Moving to Harris might not save the Democrats from a thrashing in November, but there's certainly opportunities to do better, and even win. Under Biden, there was not.
I agree her VP choice is important. I'd quite like Kelly (coz space!), but I don't think that's likely.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
A friend of mine's sister is on trial for PCOJ and for a serious offence, not a driving fine. Still not come to court after 4 years.
Time to trial is the most broken part of the criminal justice system. There is no point in banging people up years after the offence, because in that gap they seem to have got away with it. Crime might not be consequence-free for perpetrators but it sure looks that way, to them and their peers.
Not only that although you are quite right, in this case, she has had this hanging over her for four years and cannot really get on with her life until it is resolved. Same for many others and she maintains her innocence.
The process is now the punishment.
My trial next week is a fairly straightforward drugs bust that occurred in May 2021. It really is a disgrace. I am not sure how the system ever recovers from this.
This screams error in tabulating the results as the poll overall has Trump 49/Harris 47 and Harris leads Trump amongst over 65s by an equally implausible 11 percentage points. In 2022, Democrats had a double digit lead amongst under 35s, and Republicans a double digit lead amongst over 65s.
What has happened here, almost certainly, is Quinnipiac has either switched the pensioner and youngster figures in error, or switched the Harris/Trump figures in error.
But we also have an ageing population. Many of them will age into Tories
We raging trots used to wake up on our 60th birthday as Tories, now we quickly morph into Reformers.
Suella was OK on LBC, she did close down those who disagreed with her but let the like-minded calls run. She was very critical of the current Government's chaotic small boats record.
Shele says Trump will make the World a safer place. She eulogised Trump's Presidency and mocked Biden- Kamala's 3 and a half years of woke chaos.
I had gone to meet my client by the time she got to the future leadership of the Tory Party so I can't comment on that.
Incoming Leon to tell us all about the right wing surge among the TikTokers....
There is an issue with people not believing that young people can be right wing.
Some years ago, I remember having a debate with some historians who couldn't get their heads round the politics of German Empire. They couldn't comprehend *teachers* being enthusiastic militaristic imperialists, in large numbers.
Trump, Tate, Farage. There is a sizeable portion of mostly young men who are keen on these people. The question that should be asked is why.
Because left wing “progressive” society continuously tells young men that they are toxic just because they are male. And it openly discriminates against them - especially if they are white
So in the end they think “fuck it, I’ll vote for the pussy grabbing right wingers, everyone else hates me, they don’t”
With Tate, it is obviously a character and deliberate to farm engagement by inserting outlandish statements into multi-hour ramblings about everything and nothing. And this is all to get people to sign up to online courses, which from what i understand he just outsources to people with some knowledge in the areas and aren't outrageous or outlandish, more overpriced mid advice (which is a grift as old as the hills).
What i have no idea about is, do the kids see through the character and just find it funny / naughty to watch a bloke say verboten stuff or are they really onboard with it.
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Cars look incredibly different. Much larger, organic and angular, the LCD/HID headlights are distinct, and the sound is much quieter. New Edge cars from the 2000s look archaic
Mobile phones are incredibly different. Consider the Nokia 8110 used in the Matrix. Compare it to today's Samsung
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Cars look incredibly different. Much larger, organic and angular, the LCD/HID headlights are distinct, and the sound is much quieter. New Edge cars from the 2000s look archaic
Mobile phones are incredibly different. Consider the Nokia 8110 used in the Matrix. Compare it to today's Samsung
Is it just me or have recent car design trends in trying to look "space-aged" actually look like what vehicles of the future were portrayed in sci-fi shows from the 70/80s.
The new Capri.
Can't imagine Terry McCann or Bodie & Doyle driving around in one
Incoming Leon to tell us all about the right wing surge among the TikTokers....
There is an issue with people not believing that young people can be right wing.
Some years ago, I remember having a debate with some historians who couldn't get their heads round the politics of German Empire. They couldn't comprehend *teachers* being enthusiastic militaristic imperialists, in large numbers.
Trump, Tate, Farage. There is a sizeable portion of mostly young men who are keen on these people. The question that should be asked is why.
Because all three of those shits offer simple answers that blame other people.
Incoming Leon to tell us all about the right wing surge among the TikTokers....
There is an issue with people not believing that young people can be right wing.
Some years ago, I remember having a debate with some historians who couldn't get their heads round the politics of German Empire. They couldn't comprehend *teachers* being enthusiastic militaristic imperialists, in large numbers.
Trump, Tate, Farage. There is a sizeable portion of mostly young men who are keen on these people. The question that should be asked is why.
Because left wing “progressive” society continuously tells young men that they are toxic just because they are male. And it openly discriminates against them - especially if they are white
So in the end they think “fuck it, I’ll vote for the pussy grabbing right wingers, everyone else hates me, they don’t”
It's a bleeding obvious answer and it's amusing how denied it is.
Also those 3 characters are more... fun*. Farage is fags and booze. Tate is fast cars and sex. Trump is, dunno, but winds up people who don't like fags, fast cars, or booze. Oddly for a tee totallor. All of them love guns.
Old fashioned liberals like me need someone like that to attract people to our cause - after all we love that hedonistic shit - but we need an actual party first. Have tried a few and they've all been let downs. Until then there's only the siren call of the right and it really isn't a mystery why some combo of awesome things would appeal to young men.
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Cars look incredibly different. Much larger, organic and angular, the LCD/HID headlights are distinct, and the sound is much quieter. New Edge cars from the 2000s look archaic
Mobile phones are incredibly different. Consider the Nokia 8110 used in the Matrix. Compare it to today's Samsung
Is it just me or have recent car design trends in trying to look "space-aged" actually look like what vehicles of the future were portrayed in sci-fi shows from the 70/80s.
The new Capri.
Can't imagine Terry McCann or Bodie & Doyle driving around in one
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Cars look incredibly different. Much larger, organic and angular, the LCD/HID headlights are distinct, and the sound is much quieter. New Edge cars from the 2000s look archaic
Mobile phones are incredibly different. Consider the Nokia 8110 used in the Matrix. Compare it to today's Samsung
Is it just me or have recent car design trends in trying to look "space-aged" actually look like what vehicles of the future were portrayed in sci-fi shows from the 70/80s.
The new Capri.
Can't imagine Terry McCann or Bodie & Doyle driving around in one
ON topic, the thesis of the threader is predicated on Things Staying Basically the Same
That is almost certainly not going to happen. Consider how the world has changed in the quarter century since 2000. From 9/11 to the smartphone to social media and the pandemic. The rise of China. The rapid DECLINE in birthrates. The return of the red kite. Masterchef
About the only thing that stayed entirely the same in that time is Gareth Southgate being a loser
Now extrapolate forward another quarter century. Change will probably accelerate (it usually does). The young people in the threader might not own their homes - not because of price rises - but because they have become geloid electro-blobs living in deep undersea vats watching on 5D screens as Gareth Southgate loses
Will these people be "Tories"? Green? A kind of humanoid amphibian?
My guess is today's political terms will be laughably dated, irrelevant and arcane, it will be like us looking back to the politics of the 14th century to see if the Lib Dems benefited from the Black Death
Right, I'm quibbling for the sake of it here - but I would argue that it is shocking how little things have changed since 2000. I look out at my suburban street, and it could be any time in the past 25 years. Culturally, we have stood still. Clothes, cars, pop music, film, television - yes, they've changed a bit, but not that much. Imagine travelling back in time to 1999 and stepping outside and having a wander about; turn the radio on; watch a bit of telly. A bit of an 'oh, that's different', but not much. Now imagine being in 1999 and time travelling back to 1974; or being in 1974 and travelling back to 1949; or being in 1949 and travelling back to 1924. And so on. If they tried to make Life on Mars now, it wouldn't work, because 25 years ago is so unremarkably different to today. Yes, tech has changed. Geopolitics has changed. But culture has changed remarkably little compared to any previous 25 year period.
Not commenting on the others, but TV and film have changed immensely in that period. Not only have all people got digital TV with many more channels compared with 2000, but the way it is consumed has gone through a revolution. No longer are there "water cooler" moments. We watch TV on catch up, recordings, and interactive online services. Many films are made for Amazon and Netflix with at most a week or so in the cinemas. Aside from sport, younger people including children barely watch linear TV.
Per OFCOM a couple of years ago, people aged 16-24 watch a third of the linear TV the equivalent generation watched ten years earlier, and 90% of that generation "head straight to streaming, on-demand and social video services" when looking for what to watch. They tend to watch on phones, computers, and the like rather than TVs.
That's true - I'm thinking more of what it actually looks like. A sitcom from 2024 doesn't look that much different to a sitcom from 2000. A sitcom from 2000 looks quite different from a sitcom from 1975. But the tech is certainly different. Technologically different but culturally the same.
Cars look incredibly different. Much larger, organic and angular, the LCD/HID headlights are distinct, and the sound is much quieter. New Edge cars from the 2000s look archaic
Mobile phones are incredibly different. Consider the Nokia 8110 used in the Matrix. Compare it to today's Samsung
Is it just me or have recent car design trends in trying to look "space-aged" actually look like what vehicles of the future were portrayed in sci-fi shows from the 70/80s.
The new Capri.
Can't imagine Terry McCann or Bodie & Doyle driving around in one
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland are on trial at Southwark Crown Court this week after throwing a can of soup over Van Gogh's Sunflowers in 2022. The judge is Judge Hehir, who sentenced the "Whole Truth Five" to 4-5 years in prison last week.
Phoebe has been repeatedly done for her activities already.
If throwing soup at paintings is serious enough to earn a custodial sentence, then why the flip has it taken the best part of two years to come to court?
A friend of mine's sister is on trial for PCOJ and for a serious offence, not a driving fine. Still not come to court after 4 years.
Time to trial is the most broken part of the criminal justice system. There is no point in banging people up years after the offence, because in that gap they seem to have got away with it. Crime might not be consequence-free for perpetrators but it sure looks that way, to them and their peers.
Not only that although you are quite right, in this case, she has had this hanging over her for four years and cannot really get on with her life until it is resolved. Same for many others and she maintains her innocence.
The process is now the punishment.
My trial next week is a fairly straightforward drugs bust that occurred in May 2021. It really is a disgrace. I am not sure how the system ever recovers from this.
Is it all Covid or is there a deeper dysfunction?
The Scottish courts, I can't speak for English courts, have jumped upon the extensions of time that came into effect during Covid as a way of getting all of the old time limits out of the road. I cannot recall when an extension of the time limits was last even opposed, it is pointless to do so. In Scotland the trial should, if the person is on bail, take place within 12 months of the date of the appearance at the Preliminary Hearing. That was increased to 18 months during the Covid crisis (and that legislation is still in effect) but cases are routinely continued beyond that.
We really need to change the mindset. It is unacceptable that complainers have to wait so long and accused persons have their lives on hold in this way. If there is a limit on the number of cases the courts can deal with within an acceptable time I think we should be forced to be more selective in the cases we take to court.
Incoming Leon to tell us all about the right wing surge among the TikTokers....
There is an issue with people not believing that young people can be right wing.
Some years ago, I remember having a debate with some historians who couldn't get their heads round the politics of German Empire. They couldn't comprehend *teachers* being enthusiastic militaristic imperialists, in large numbers.
Trump, Tate, Farage. There is a sizeable portion of mostly young men who are keen on these people. The question that should be asked is why.
Because left wing “progressive” society continuously tells young men that they are toxic just because they are male. And it openly discriminates against them - especially if they are white
So in the end they think “fuck it, I’ll vote for the pussy grabbing right wingers, everyone else hates me, they don’t”
Comments
Part of it possibly is that this period was the first time the working classes as exemplified by professional footballers were extensively publicised, photographed, recorded, televised etc.
Couldn't imagine that happening now.
Perhaps they can add their names to this letter from over 1,200 artists, sportsmen and activists demanding a meeting with the Attorney General over the sentencing.
https://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/celebrity-news/tracey-emin-roger-hallam-archbishop-keir-starmer-philip-pullman-b1172321.html
Poor Cressida's Mom was on LBC yesterday, who give them favourable coverage of course, complaining she will miss her Brothers wedding. Wonder if Mommy can send her a piece of cake with a file in ?
And mother bears with cubs of all three species should be left strictly alone.
And it also depends on the man, obviously.
As I said before, the 5 that have got long prison sentences, they had already been convicted multiple times, including custodial sentences. If normal folk kept turning up in front of a judge and found guilty multiple times, told I don't want to see you again, and then back every few months, you would hope they would now starting to get serious punishment. They aren't people who say went on those student protests, did a load of drugs and got carried away with the mob for once in their life.
Is an instructive list. Some changes, e.g. first out cabinet minister in 1997, but there are a lot of firsts post 2000. Sexuality of e.g. cabinet ministers wouldn't even be noted now, I think.
Maybe stop breaking the law?
https://x.com/Modhabobo/status/1815682802966270151
One trial collapsed as it ran over too long. They allocated too few days for it and the Judge had other commitments. It has also been postponed twice.
Fingers crossed for two more custodial sentences if convicted. Has anyone ever been done for potentially £100m of damage to anything before, apart from the Lockerbie bombers?
What do they expect ? They are not victims.
This pair are serial offenders too.
Those who have victims and who won't stop committing the crime so aren't being rehabilitated by any prior punishments.
General Election Poll - Age 18 - 34
🔴 Trump 58% (+19)
🔵 Harris 39%
Quinnipiac #B - 7/21
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Qq6pEFFQOE
Mobile phones are incredibly different. Consider the Nokia 8110 used in the Matrix. Compare it to today's Samsung
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Edge
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_8110
https://www.argos.co.uk/product/3413034
What I really want to see now is three-way Trump/Harris/Kennedy polling, now that the independent is on the ballot pretty much everywhere.
My suspicion is that a lot of Biden voters prefer Kennedy to Harris, but wouldn’t dare vote Trump. So something like 50/40/10, which in practice gives the former President a landslide.
Its cloudless and sunny and warm but the water and rocks give it a sublime freshness
Some years ago, I remember having a debate with some historians who couldn't get their heads round the politics of German Empire. They couldn't comprehend *teachers* being enthusiastic militaristic imperialists, in large numbers.
The crew of Ukrainian container ship in the Red Sea managed to destroy the Houthi maritime drone with small arms fire.
https://x.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1815704124760928258
Among those under age 30 who voted in 2020 but not in either of the two previous elections, Biden led 59% to 33%
What's the sample size on Trump 58 - Harris 39 - even with a shift to Trump it doesn't look plausible to me.
HarrisX has the gap at 46-44 - which whilst it would be wildly good for Trump isn't in line with 58-39. https://www.harrisx.com/content/hop-july-19-21-2024 see page 33.
"The Prussian monarchy is not a country which has an army, but an army which has a country, in which – as it were – it is just stationed"
Georg Heinrich Berenhorst. Adjutant to Frederick II
Mind you Liberty will be meeting with the Govt there is some hope she will roll back some of the Tories laws but, again, this is a crap take. The law to hand did not criminalise peaceful protest. Peaceful protest is still quite legal.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jul/22/yvette-cooper-could-abandon-law-that-criminalised-peaceful-protests
Very different offence this one isn't it? Criminal Damage - no idea how much for but probably not very much V Conspiracy to cause a Public Nuisance.
I don't think a lengthy custodial sentence would be justified in this case (depending on how safe the painting was - aiui it was under cover and selected for that reason?).
So in the end they think “fuck it, I’ll vote for the pussy grabbing right wingers, everyone else hates me, they don’t”
The process is now the punishment.
Page 13 Under 30 Harris 62 - Trump 30.
Same poll:
Male 57 Trump - Harris 42
Female Harris 52 - Trump 47.
More hotel rooms required.
Biden made gains with men, while Trump improved among women, narrowing the gender gap. The gender gap in the 2020 election was narrower than it had been in 2016, both because of gains that Biden made among men and because of gains Trump made among women. In 2020, men were almost evenly divided between Trump and Biden, unlike in 2016 when Trump won men by 11 points.
If Trump said something crazy, then the Republicans and their media friends just needed to say: "Did you see Biden stumble the other day! He's old and past it!"
Moving to Harris might not save the Democrats from a thrashing in November, but there's certainly opportunities to do better, and even win. Under Biden, there was not.
I agree her VP choice is important. I'd quite like Kelly (coz space!), but I don't think that's likely.
What has happened here, almost certainly, is Quinnipiac has either switched the pensioner and youngster figures in error, or switched the Harris/Trump figures in error.
Suella was OK on LBC, she did close down those who disagreed with her but let the like-minded calls run. She was very critical of the current Government's chaotic small boats record.
Shele says Trump will make the World a safer place. She eulogised Trump's Presidency and mocked Biden- Kamala's 3 and a half years of woke chaos.
I had gone to meet my client by the time she got to the future leadership of the Tory Party so I can't comment on that.
What i have no idea about is, do the kids see through the character and just find it funny / naughty to watch a bloke say verboten stuff or are they really onboard with it.
Can't imagine Terry McCann or Bodie & Doyle driving around in one
https://www.rushlane.com/ford-capri-ev-debuts-with-627km-range-resembles-citroen-basalt-12501059.html
Also those 3 characters are more... fun*. Farage is fags and booze. Tate is fast cars and sex. Trump is, dunno, but winds up people who don't like fags, fast cars, or booze. Oddly for a tee totallor. All of them love guns.
Old fashioned liberals like me need someone like that to attract people to our cause - after all we love that hedonistic shit - but we need an actual party first. Have tried a few and they've all been let downs. Until then there's only the siren call of the right and it really isn't a mystery why some combo of awesome things would appeal to young men.
*Unless you're one of their victims
NEW THREAD
We really need to change the mindset. It is unacceptable that complainers have to wait so long and accused persons have their lives on hold in this way. If there is a limit on the number of cases the courts can deal with within an acceptable time I think we should be forced to be more selective in the cases we take to court.