The pollsters could be missing a Harris surge – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
Who was the last England captain to be dropped from the side altogether mid-series for poor form? Mark Butcher in 1999, but he was only the stand in captain. Cowdrey in 1988 perhaps?0
-
I was very disappointed to discover that Will Shirer's second hand account of Hitler dropping to the floor, foaming at the mouth and chewing on the carpet in response to the Allied declaration of war was based on a misunderstanding of the German idiom teppichfresser.ydoethur said:
The Enabling Act certainly had elements of Trump's lawfare on the 2020 election.algarkirk said:
Germany 1930s comparisons are usually not great. Not to be invoked in discussing, say LD policy on site value rating or tuition fees. Once upon a time we would not have invoked 1930s comparisons about Putin. It is not wrong to do so now. The attempt to overturn the American election process is quite enough to add Trump to the 'possibles' list. His refusal to criticise Putin and equivocation about NATO doesn't help either.TOPPING said:
Another with the nazi comparisons. I don't think it's impossible to criticise Trump without drawing such analogies. Unless your aim is to further entrench the constituency with which he is evidently so popular.algarkirk said:
This is too optimistic. Among the abundance of evidence a couple stand out: Systematic lying and reality distortion of a sort which makes Boris seem quite mainstream; and seeking to overturn an election process. Add to that a personality which should not be let loose anywhere close to real power. I think anyone who does not have 'Germany in the 1930s' feel about this is being unrealistic.TOPPING said:
I think this is more your prejudices than reality. "Being a dictator from day one" is equivalent to some of the wilder claims of anti-Brexiters. It is hyperbole.MarqueeMark said:
1. Weaponsing the Department of Justice to go after anyone who has stood up to him and defended democracy.TOPPING said:As one who doesn't follow the intricacies US elections (tip: one of them is going to win), but doesn't like the PB Guardian-adjacent bien pensant dismissal of Trump supporters, can I ask those who know (ie you lot) what Trump would do in office that would be "frankly very scary" and what he did last time that was "frankly very scary".
2. Being a dictator from day one.
3. Project 2025.
You really should pay more attention to the intricacies.
America remains a democracy and actually decided to vote Trump out last time round and may now decide to vote him back in.
It is the PB/Graun crowd who clutch their pearls at democracy in action that I find objectionable.
But Trump is too erratic to be considered a full Nazi. Even remembering that Hitler was pretty damn erratic, he never babbled about sharks.1 -
it's august, everyone's on holidaynumbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?0 -
I've somehow managed to open a mortgage savings account with no online access, and where I have to go into the branch to arrange a bank transfer when I want to remove the money to pay for a house.Anabobazina said:
Yes, most bank branches have closed because very few people need them or use them. See also the rise of online-only banks who don't have to spend millions a year running high-street premises so very weird PBers can throw pound coins at them over the counter.TOPPING said:
What kind of a faff would it be to try to deposit some coins into a bank account. Aren't they all Costa Coffees now anyway.Tres said:
i have a thing called a bank account that I useTOPPING said:On matters less controversial for PB what on earth do you do with the pound coins you might receive or have accumulated for one reason or another. Effectively dead money unless you make a concerted effort to use them all at once.
Confusing thing was that I opened the account online...0 -
Rishi's legacy. That and utter incompetent govt.numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
The lifetime smoking ban. A policy New Zealand initially advocated and rolled back on when the new govt came in.
Yet we want to enact it. I suspect it will lead to a few problems and the black market will be the beneficiary.
3 -
Opposing it in New Zealand also condones racismTheScreamingEagles said:
Anyone opposed to this policy is pro cancer.numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Are you Liz Truss?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-675744190 -
On topic - if they take the trouble to register then likely they will take the trouble to vote. However, it would be no sort of a surge. Notably there was a very short-lived lift in Rep registrations after the shooting so this would just even that out.
Just note that Harris trails where the Dems were in the last 4 elections at this point. The difference is that unlike 2016 and 2020 she has the mood and the momentum with her. She is also dealing with polls that have been adjusted tpo try to catch shy Trump voters. In 2008 and 2012 when the Dem nominee was non-White the Dems were clearly under-represented in the polls.
US pollsters struggle horribly and the reason is the same reason why UK pollsters have lost their mojo. Turnout - especially differential turnout. Self-reporting of likeliness to vote just does not cut it anymore.
So what has happened. Biden was losing or had lost a lot of the Dem base. They were unhappy with him and not scared enough of Trump. That is why he was going to get beaten badly. Harris has got the Dems back enthused and happy. They will vote for her and they will work for her. That is why we are back, at least, in a 2020 or a 2016 situation. In fact the reproductive freedom issue maybe puts her ahead of that position. We shall see.2 -
Save them up to pay the next dodgy tradesman or taxi driver who wants paid in cash to avoid the tax.TOPPING said:
What kind of a faff would it be to try to deposit some coins into a bank account. Aren't they all Costa Coffees now anyway.Tres said:
i have a thing called a bank account that I useTOPPING said:On matters less controversial for PB what on earth do you do with the pound coins you might receive or have accumulated for one reason or another. Effectively dead money unless you make a concerted effort to use them all at once.
0 -
Since smoking costs the NHS several billion a year, and we are all concerned about the cost of the NHS, to curb a habit that hardly anyone wants to have once they become established in it seems a thoroughly rational step to take.numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
It's a bit difficult to complain about Mr Starmer's applying restrictions as some sort of negative narrative, when the previous lot were committed to implementing a total ban on selling them identified by age group - a kind of smoking apartheid.
Not that that will stop the Telegrunt and the rest of that tendency groping around for mud to sling tactically, of course.
The name of the game is to continue to reduce and eventually stop smoking, and that is a desirable objective. The UK has done fairly well in reducing smoking so far - why not continue?
Do we have polls on this - both the Rishi Sunk version, and the Keir Starmer version, based on full information?
0 -
Big typhoon in Japan.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c80eje2r20rt
Over a meter of rain expected, and winds up to 150mph.0 -
Test -If you make a comment it shows at the top until you refresh then it is at the bottom and have to scroll for ages to get there -Is there a keyboard shortcut ? Asking for a friend.0
-
Should have been put on the rug for that.Unpopular said:
I was very disappointed to discover that Will Shirer's second hand account of Hitler dropping to the floor, foaming at the mouth and chewing on the carpet in response to the Allied declaration of war was based on a misunderstanding of the German idiom teppichfresser.ydoethur said:
The Enabling Act certainly had elements of Trump's lawfare on the 2020 election.algarkirk said:
Germany 1930s comparisons are usually not great. Not to be invoked in discussing, say LD policy on site value rating or tuition fees. Once upon a time we would not have invoked 1930s comparisons about Putin. It is not wrong to do so now. The attempt to overturn the American election process is quite enough to add Trump to the 'possibles' list. His refusal to criticise Putin and equivocation about NATO doesn't help either.TOPPING said:
Another with the nazi comparisons. I don't think it's impossible to criticise Trump without drawing such analogies. Unless your aim is to further entrench the constituency with which he is evidently so popular.algarkirk said:
This is too optimistic. Among the abundance of evidence a couple stand out: Systematic lying and reality distortion of a sort which makes Boris seem quite mainstream; and seeking to overturn an election process. Add to that a personality which should not be let loose anywhere close to real power. I think anyone who does not have 'Germany in the 1930s' feel about this is being unrealistic.TOPPING said:
I think this is more your prejudices than reality. "Being a dictator from day one" is equivalent to some of the wilder claims of anti-Brexiters. It is hyperbole.MarqueeMark said:
1. Weaponsing the Department of Justice to go after anyone who has stood up to him and defended democracy.TOPPING said:As one who doesn't follow the intricacies US elections (tip: one of them is going to win), but doesn't like the PB Guardian-adjacent bien pensant dismissal of Trump supporters, can I ask those who know (ie you lot) what Trump would do in office that would be "frankly very scary" and what he did last time that was "frankly very scary".
2. Being a dictator from day one.
3. Project 2025.
You really should pay more attention to the intricacies.
America remains a democracy and actually decided to vote Trump out last time round and may now decide to vote him back in.
It is the PB/Graun crowd who clutch their pearls at democracy in action that I find objectionable.
But Trump is too erratic to be considered a full Nazi. Even remembering that Hitler was pretty damn erratic, he never babbled about sharks.0 -
Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.0 -
Think we've had this before:rcs1000 said:
Although, for balance, we should also look at 2022 polling versus actual results. Because my memory is that the Democrats outperformed then. (My memory could, of course, be wrong.)kamski said:
"We know that the push polling, especially on the GOP side, is muddying the waters and giving far more evenly matched results than the probable reality"Cicero said:I must admit that my reaction to the headline was "No Shit".
We know that the push polling, especially on the GOP side, is muddying the waters and giving far more evenly matched results than the probable reality, so the polls showing a tight race or a Trump lead are not necessarily reliable. We know that the ghost of Roe v Wade is haunting the Republican campaign. We know that as a result Harris has attracted large numbers of female votes to the Blue column. We know that she has fired up the base to a dramatic degree and the convention, far from being a 1968 disaster, was a total triumph. We know that Harris is raising historically large amounts of money very quickly. We know that Harris has made a good VP pick and that Trump... hasn´t. We know that Trump has never won the popular vote. Trump is still trying to win the 2020 fight, but the style is just looking tired and dated, as is he.
Yet the fear of 2016, like the fear of 2019 in the recent UK general election, is leading people to fear that Trump can still snatch a victory. I think even with all the corruption and malpractice that the convicted felon can orchestrate it will not be enough to overcome a very large vote for Harris. I think she could be headed for a landslide,
No we don't, but if you have evidence of this I'd be very happy to see it.
Also feel free to calculate a polling average excluding "GOP push polling", I doubt it will be any different to most of the established polling averages from Silver Bulletin, 538 etc.
You can argue, as the header does, that there are reasons to believe the polling might be underestimating Harris's lead. OTOH you can look at the last 2 times Trump was on the ballot and question whether pollsters have done enough to fix whatever went wrong with their polling in 2016 and 2020 - especially in critical states like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.
eg for 2020 comparing the final 538 polling average with the actual result:
Wisconsin 538 average: Biden +8.4%, result Biden +0.6%
Michigan 538 average: Biden +7.9%, result: Biden +2.8%
Pennsylvania 538 average: Biden +4.7%, result: Biden +1.2%
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/2022-election-polling-accuracy/
"Let’s give a big round of applause to the pollsters. Measuring public opinion is, in many ways, harder than ever — and yet, the polling industry just had one of its most successful election cycles in U.S. history. Despite a loud chorus of naysayers claiming that the polls were either underestimating Democratic support or biased yet again against Republicans, the polls were more accurate in 2022 than in any cycle since at least 1998, with almost no bias toward either party."
Also it's plausible underestimating Trump only happens when Trump himself is on the ballot.0 -
Good afternoonMarqueeMark said:
Go to the seaside for the day. Put them in the pokies - and the 2p's into the coin pushers. Hours of fun.TOPPING said:
What kind of a faff would it be to try to deposit some coins into a bank account. Aren't they all Costa Coffees now anyway.Tres said:
i have a thing called a bank account that I useTOPPING said:On matters less controversial for PB what on earth do you do with the pound coins you might receive or have accumulated for one reason or another. Effectively dead money unless you make a concerted effort to use them all at once.
On a wet bank holiday weekend.
There are many charities who do street collections or outside supermarkets with cash collection tins
Indeed our local RNLI is outside Asda regularly and with a vested interest, every little helps to keep my son and his colleagues safely at sea rescuing lives0 -
The place to deposit lots of coins is in one of those payment drawers in a self-service point at the supermarket. Some places even have a container not a slot.Fairliered said:
Save them up to pay the next dodgy tradesman or taxi driver who wants paid in cash to avoid the tax.TOPPING said:
What kind of a faff would it be to try to deposit some coins into a bank account. Aren't they all Costa Coffees now anyway.Tres said:
i have a thing called a bank account that I useTOPPING said:On matters less controversial for PB what on earth do you do with the pound coins you might receive or have accumulated for one reason or another. Effectively dead money unless you make a concerted effort to use them all at once.
Just don't do what I did once and put so many in that it clogs up the whole machine.0 -
Interesting decision.
South Korea’s climate law violates rights of future generations, court rules
Absence of legally binding targets for greenhouse gas reductions from 2031-49 deemed unconstitutional
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/29/south-korea-court-climate-law-violates-rights-future-generations0 -
Bob Willis in 1984?ydoethur said:Who was the last England captain to be dropped from the side altogether mid-series for poor form? Mark Butcher in 1999, but he was only the stand in captain. Cowdrey in 1988 perhaps?
0 -
Willis wasn't captain in 1984, Gower was.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bob Willis in 1984?ydoethur said:Who was the last England captain to be dropped from the side altogether mid-series for poor form? Mark Butcher in 1999, but he was only the stand in captain. Cowdrey in 1988 perhaps?
If we disallow Cowdrey it would surely be one of Emburey or Gatting.
(Yes, I know there was an official reason for sacking Gatting.)0 -
You still have to waste your time going to a bloody bank branch. Most people have better things to do. Hence why an increasing number of us reject cash – it's just a completely pointless waste of time.Tres said:
minimal tbh - i just stick it in the coin sorter thingy and it credits my account. No need to even speak to a fellow human being if you're feeling grumpyTOPPING said:
What kind of a faff would it be to try to deposit some coins into a bank account. Aren't they all Costa Coffees now anyway.Tres said:
i have a thing called a bank account that I useTOPPING said:On matters less controversial for PB what on earth do you do with the pound coins you might receive or have accumulated for one reason or another. Effectively dead money unless you make a concerted effort to use them all at once.
0 -
-
Indeed.Pulpstar said:
It's not going to affect me any which way, being a non smoker who doesn't currently frequent pub gardens but there's a distinct touch of authoritarianism & puritanism about the new Gov't (Not that the previous one were brilliant) wafting through the air.numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
I doubt its deeply held beliefs - I don't see much evidence for any of that in Labour policy - but more just being utterly cowed by Whitehall, who seem to enjoy creeping levels of controls over people's lives.....1 -
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/0 -
Just a couple of months ago this site's most prolific poster was teling us that only Biden could win, because in the opinion poll hypotheticals, Trump had a big lead over Harris, but was about even against Biden.ThomasNashe said:
It’s just becoming more and more obvious, isn’t it? The notion that it’s going to be ‘on a knife-edge’ is increasingly ridiculous.Cicero said:I must admit that my reaction to the headline was "No Shit".
We know that the push polling, especially on the GOP side, is muddying the waters and giving far more evenly matched results than the probable reality, so the polls showing a tight race or a Trump lead are not necessarily reliable. We know that the ghost of Roe v Wade is haunting the Republican campaign. We know that as a result Harris has attracted large numbers of female votes to the Blue column. We know that she has fired up the base to a dramatic degree and the convention, far from being a 1968 disaster, was a total triumph. We know that Harris is raising historically large amounts of money very quickly. We know that Harris has made a good VP pick and that Trump... hasn´t. We know that Trump has never won the popular vote. Trump is still trying to win the 2020 fight, but the style is just looking tired and dated, as is he.
Yet the fear of 2016, like the fear of 2019 in the recent UK general election, is leading people to fear that Trump can still snatch a victory. I think even with all the corruption and malpractice that the convicted felon can orchestrate it will not be enough to overcome a very large vote for Harris. I think she could be headed for a landslide,0 -
IIRC increasing tax had led to vastly increase smuggling of tobacco. Nearly all rolling tobacco consumed hasn't had duty paid.Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.
In addition, better cancer treatment means that lung cancer victims live longer and end up having more, expensive, treatment.0 -
England 3 down.0
-
There is also the matter of medic time and treatment resources taken up, which could be used elsewhere.MattW said:
Since smoking costs the NHS several billion a year, and we are all concerned about the cost of the NHS, to curb a habit that hardly anyone wants to have once they become established in it seems a thoroughly rational step to take.numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
It's a bit difficult to complain about Mr Starmer's applying restrictions as some sort of negative narrative, when the previous lot were committed to implementing a total ban on selling them identified by age group - a kind of smoking apartheid.
Not that that will stop the Telegrunt and the rest of that tendency groping around for mud to sling tactically, of course.
The name of the game is to continue to reduce and eventually stop smoking, and that is a desirable objective. The UK has done fairly well in reducing smoking so far - why not continue?
Do we have polls on this - both the Rishi Sunk version, and the Keir Starmer version, based on full information?0 -
I stopped smoking 21 years ago when my daughter had her first child and threatened me with a ban of holding her if I cotinued smokingTheScreamingEagles said:
Anyone opposed to this policy is pro cancer.numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Are you Liz Truss?
Stopping was the hardest thing I have ever done, but as my practice nurse said last year it was an excellent decision and has helped me to survive my copd issues
I cannot stand the smell of cigarette smoke and in Wales it is already banned from hospitals and their grounds
I am underwhelmed by Starmer but on this I do support him0 -
I don’t actually have a problem with the government seeking to, over time, phase out smoking. I’m an ex smoker myself, and I have little love of the habit.MattW said:
Since smoking costs the NHS several billion a year, and we are all concerned about the cost of the NHS, to curb a habit that hardly anyone wants to have once they become established in it seems a thoroughly rational step to take.numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
It's a bit difficult to complain about Mr Starmer's applying restrictions as some sort of negative narrative, when the previous lot were committed to implementing a total ban on selling them identified by age group - a kind of smoking apartheid.
Not that that will stop the Telegrunt and the rest of that tendency groping around for mud to sling tactically, of course.
The name of the game is to continue to reduce and eventually stop smoking, and that is a desirable objective. The UK has done fairly well in reducing smoking so far - why not continue?
Do we have polls on this - both the Rishi Sunk version, and the Keir Starmer version, based on full information?
There is however a proportionate and measured way of doing so. In some ways, the phased-in banning proposed by age, whilst I fear unworkable, is a smart one. A big bang approach of banning in outdoor areas for all strikes me as being on the wrong side of this approach, because it once again causes problems for our struggling hospitality industry that they could really do without at the moment.
I am also rather cynical that banning it in more places is going to actually prevent take up. It will just mean people are more likely to stay at home.2 -
London is not the rest of the UK.Anabobazina said:
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/4 -
That is easy, try Llanfairpwllgwyngyll !!!MattW said:
I'm sure @Big_G_NorthWales can tell us all how to pronounce "Ffynnongroew", since it is on the way to .a. aiui ... Clan-did-know. We used to say Fif-un-grew.Mexicanpete said:....
I spent my teenage years in Cradley (Herefordshire) pronounced Cradley. Sometimes I work in Cradley ( Dudley MBC) pronounced craydley.ydoethur said:
Consider yourself lucky you don't have to explain why Hednesford and Blithefield are pronounced Hensford and Bliffeld.Fishing said:
... unlike every English county, which seems to have at least 75 such:Nigelb said:
Every state in the US must give at least one town a pronunciation that is inexplicable and specifically designed to easily identify outsidersMattW said:2nd. Thank-you for the header.
FPT:
There's a hamlet in Derbyshire called New York - just like the one in Ukraine. And one in Nidderdale. And one in East Lindsay.Nigelb said:As it's a JD Vance thread, here's TwitterX on town name pronunciations in Ohio.
There’s a town in Ohio called “Versailles” and it’s pronounced by the locals, and all Ohioans, as “Ver-sails” and if you try to pronounce it like you should (with the French accent), people look at you like you’re crazy.
https://x.com/EudaimoniaEsq/status/1828560881808220191
Houston: “How-stun”
Russia: “Roo-shee”
Bellefountaine - "Bell Fountain"
Genoa - "Juh Noah"
Leipsic - "Lip sick"
https://x.com/politicalmath/status/1828568040377651535
- Gloucester, pronounced Gloster
- Leicester, pronounced Lester
- Alnwick, pronounced Annick
- Chiswick, pronounced Chisick
- Ulgham pronounced Uffham
- Happisburgh pronounced Haysburra
etc etc etc etc
We're definitely inside the glasshouse on this one.
Near where I live is a hamlet called Broughton (pronounced brufton) not to be confused with Broughton ( ex- Clwyd) pronounced brawton.
Just wait for the confusion when PBers discover Welsh place names.
I used to go through it 2 or 3 times a year, since my grandparents retired from Sheffield to Prestatyn Beach Road, near the Pink Hotel, which became the Yellow Hotel, and is now the Beige Hotel.0 -
Finding everything else is Too Hard To Do?numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Give it a few weeks and Starmer will appreciate that the last Government actually weren't doing too bad a job, all things considered...0 -
Shagging the barmaid?ydoethur said:
Willis wasn't captain in 1984, Gower was.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bob Willis in 1984?ydoethur said:Who was the last England captain to be dropped from the side altogether mid-series for poor form? Mark Butcher in 1999, but he was only the stand in captain. Cowdrey in 1988 perhaps?
If we disallow Cowdrey it would surely be one of Emburey or Gatting.
(Yes, I know there was an official reason for sacking Gatting.)
I only got into cricket in 1990 as an eleven year old.0 -
heaven forfend you lose the time to pursue your hobbies such as ranting about cash to a bunch of bemused people on a political betting websiteAnabobazina said:
You still have to waste your time going to a bloody bank branch. Most people have better things to do. Hence why an increasing number of us reject cash – it's just a completely pointless waste of time.Tres said:
minimal tbh - i just stick it in the coin sorter thingy and it credits my account. No need to even speak to a fellow human being if you're feeling grumpyTOPPING said:
What kind of a faff would it be to try to deposit some coins into a bank account. Aren't they all Costa Coffees now anyway.Tres said:
i have a thing called a bank account that I useTOPPING said:On matters less controversial for PB what on earth do you do with the pound coins you might receive or have accumulated for one reason or another. Effectively dead money unless you make a concerted effort to use them all at once.
0 -
The standard tactic of a Labour government.MarqueeMark said:
Finding everything else is Too Hard To Do?numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Give it a few weeks and Starmer will appreciate that the last Government actually weren't doing too bad a job, all things considered...
If in doubt, ban something.
Or even if not in doubt.3 -
Thousands of elderly people are defrauded of their life savings every year in ways which would not be possible if they stuck with physical cash and paper cheques. Bullying them into the brave new world seems counterproductive from that pov.Anabobazina said:
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/2 -
That's a classic economics fallacy. It would be much better if those smokers were spending money, paying tax and reaping the positive effects of some other item (running shoes or bicycles, for example).Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.0 -
Did you miss the last Tory government looking to ban smoking outright within a generation?Cookie said:
The standard tactic of a Labour government.MarqueeMark said:
Finding everything else is Too Hard To Do?numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Give it a few weeks and Starmer will appreciate that the last Government actually weren't doing too bad a job, all things considered...
If in doubt, ban something.
Or even if not in doubt.0 -
That I believe is generally regarded as an excuse for something his lousy captaincy and woeful batting would have rendered necessary anyway.TheScreamingEagles said:
Shagging the barmaid?ydoethur said:
Willis wasn't captain in 1984, Gower was.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bob Willis in 1984?ydoethur said:Who was the last England captain to be dropped from the side altogether mid-series for poor form? Mark Butcher in 1999, but he was only the stand in captain. Cowdrey in 1988 perhaps?
If we disallow Cowdrey it would surely be one of Emburey or Gatting.
(Yes, I know there was an official reason for sacking Gatting.)
I only got into cricket in 1990 as an eleven year old.
And I'm sure a man of his penetration was not fooled.0 -
I'm assuming this "it wasn't an armed insurrection" is @TOPPING stirring a little, since the introduction to the recommended programme says:TOPPING said:
Weak. It wasn't an armed insurrection. It was a bunch of no-hopers (there's a clue in there) protesting against government. Pretty inefficiently and badly managed by the security forces. None of them expected to find themselves indoors that day.TheScreamingEagles said:
The encouragement of the armed insurrection that nearly led to the lynching of his Vice President for starters.TOPPING said:As one who doesn't follow the intricacies US elections (tip: one of them is going to win), but doesn't like the PB Guardian-adjacent bien pensant dismissal of Trump supporters, can I ask those who know (ie you lot) what Trump would do in office that would be "frankly very scary" and what he did last time that was "frankly very scary".
He waited hours to respond.
That’s for starters.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010tff is pretty good about it.
Just like Otis Ferry storming the HoC but more American.
In this immersive, character-driven account, protesters, rioters, police officers and members of the US Congress and Senate recount their experiences in startling detail. Frontline police officers reveal how they engaged in bloody hand-to-hand combat with thousands of rioters armed with tasers, sledgehammers, baseball bats and knives, while some from among the rioters explain how they broke through the police lines.
And here is an extract from the details of charges laid:
Approximately 510 defendants have been charged with assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers or employees, including approximately 133 individuals who have been charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer.
...
127 defendants have been charged with entering a restricted area with a dangerous or deadly weapon.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/39-months-since-the-jan-6-attack-on-the-capitol
An armed insurrection is exactly what it was.
3 -
And look how badly they did!TheScreamingEagles said:
Did you miss the last Tory government looking to ban smoking outright within a generation?Cookie said:
The standard tactic of a Labour government.MarqueeMark said:
Finding everything else is Too Hard To Do?numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Give it a few weeks and Starmer will appreciate that the last Government actually weren't doing too bad a job, all things considered...
If in doubt, ban something.
Or even if not in doubt.0 -
I’m distinctly underwhelmed so far. I hoped that we would see some boldness being introduced into policy making and questions starting to be asked about how we tackle the structural issues in our institutions.MarqueeMark said:
Finding everything else is Too Hard To Do?numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Give it a few weeks and Starmer will appreciate that the last Government actually weren't doing too bad a job, all things considered...
Instead we seem to be getting New Labour tinkering authoritarianism on steroids.
I thought it would take a few years at least for Labour to default to talking about these kinds of things, but nope, they’ve decided to concentrate their energy on it already. A bad sign.2 -
2008 polls didn't underrepresent Dems. If anything, polls overestimated Obama's lead over McCainClutch_Brompton said:On topic - if they take the trouble to register then likely they will take the trouble to vote. However, it would be no sort of a surge. Notably there was a very short-lived lift in Rep registrations after the shooting so this would just even that out.
Just note that Harris trails where the Dems were in the last 4 elections at this point. The difference is that unlike 2016 and 2020 she has the mood and the momentum with her. She is also dealing with polls that have been adjusted tpo try to catch shy Trump voters. In 2008 and 2012 when the Dem nominee was non-White the Dems were clearly under-represented in the polls.
US pollsters struggle horribly and the reason is the same reason why UK pollsters have lost their mojo. Turnout - especially differential turnout. Self-reporting of likeliness to vote just does not cut it anymore.
So what has happened. Biden was losing or had lost a lot of the Dem base. They were unhappy with him and not scared enough of Trump. That is why he was going to get beaten badly. Harris has got the Dems back enthused and happy. They will vote for her and they will work for her. That is why we are back, at least, in a 2020 or a 2016 situation. In fact the reproductive freedom issue maybe puts her ahead of that position. We shall see.0 -
They certainly would blame the Tories if the Tory leader encouraged Tommy Robinson's crowd to go and storm the HoC.Sandpit said:
He’s the American version of Tommy Robinson. No-one in the UK would blame the Tories if they held a rally where they called for a peaceful protest, but a few Tommys turned up and started a fight.kamski said:
As a PB thickie I just trying to understand what you meant by a 'disaffected, marginalised community'. The first person on a list of those convicted after January 6th is a guy called Henry Tarrio - a one-time chairman of the Proud Boys.TOPPING said:
It was political expression (as were the 2011 riots, as were the Hartlepool riots) of a disaffected, marginalised community.TheScreamingEagles said:
I am sure you would have excused the Beer Hall Putsch.TOPPING said:
It's America ffs. How many people die or are injured in a normal day in Ohio vs Hartlepool.TheScreamingEagles said:
How many people died or were injured when Otis Ferry and his friends invaded the Commons?TOPPING said:
Weak. It wasn't an armed insurrection. It was a bunch of no-hopers (there's a clue in there) protesting against government. Pretty inefficiently and badly managed by the security forces. None of them expected to find themselves indoors that day.TheScreamingEagles said:
The encouragement of the armed insurrection that nearly led to the lynching of his Vice President for starters.TOPPING said:As one who doesn't follow the intricacies US elections (tip: one of them is going to win), but doesn't like the PB Guardian-adjacent bien pensant dismissal of Trump supporters, can I ask those who know (ie you lot) what Trump would do in office that would be "frankly very scary" and what he did last time that was "frankly very scary".
He waited hours to respond.
That’s for starters.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010tff is pretty good about it.
Just like Otis Ferry storming the HoC but more American.
The last place I would expect that concept to be understood is on PB and the last people I would expect to understand it are well paid lawyers working in the financial services industry in the UK who were bought houses by their parents at an early age.
This is what Wikipedia has to say:
"In 2004, when he was 20 years old, Tarrio was convicted of theft. He was sentenced to community service and three years of probation and was ordered to pay restitution. After 2004, Tarrio relocated to a small town in North Florida to run a poultry farm. He later returned to Miami. He has also founded a security equipment installation firm and another firm providing GPS tracking for companies.
In 2012, Tarrio was indicted for his role in a scheme to rebrand and resell stolen diabetic test strips. After being charged, Tarrio cooperated with investigators, helping them prosecute more than a dozen others. In 2013, Tarrio was sentenced to 30 months (of which he served 16) in federal prison.
Between 2012 and 2014 Tarrio was an informant to both federal and local law enforcement; in a 2014 federal court hearing, Tarrio's lawyer said that Tarrio had been a "prolific" cooperator who had assisted the government in the investigation and prosecution of more than twelve people in cases involving anabolic steroids, gambling, and human smuggling; had helped identify three "grow houses" where marijuana was cultivated; and had repeatedly worked undercover to aid in investigations. Tarrio denied working undercover or cooperating with prosecutions, but the court transcript contradicted the denial, and the former federal prosecutor in the proceeding against Tarrio confirmed that he cooperated. Tarrio's role as an informant was first made public in January 2021, after Reuters obtained the court records and interviewed investigators and lawyers involved in the case."
I suppose failed criminals turned informants are members of a 'disaffected, marginalised community' so you're right.2 -
Emerson College has released its battleground state polls.
https://www.270towin.com/polls/latest-2024-presidential-election-polls/
https://emersoncollegepolling.com/august-2024-swing-state-polls-toss-up-presidential-election-in-swing-states.
New Emerson College Polling/The Hill swing state surveys find a tight race between Vice President Kamala Harris and former president Donald Trump. Harris has a slight edge over Trump in Michigan (50% to 47%), Georgia (49% to 48%), and Nevada (49% to 48%). The candidates are tied in Pennsylvania (48% to 48%). In Wisconsin and North Carolina, Trump has a one-point edge over Harris (49% to 48%), and Trump leads by three in Arizona (50% to 47%).0 -
English Airmen stationed at RAF Pembrey during the war and in the years after struggled to pronounce nearby Llanelli, so they called it "Slash". I have no idea why.MattW said:
I'm sure @Big_G_NorthWales can tell us all how to pronounce "Ffynnongroew", since it is on the way to .a. aiui ... Clan-did-know. We used to say Fif-un-grew.Mexicanpete said:....
I spent my teenage years in Cradley (Herefordshire) pronounced Cradley. Sometimes I work in Cradley ( Dudley MBC) pronounced craydley.ydoethur said:
Consider yourself lucky you don't have to explain why Hednesford and Blithefield are pronounced Hensford and Bliffeld.Fishing said:
... unlike every English county, which seems to have at least 75 such:Nigelb said:
Every state in the US must give at least one town a pronunciation that is inexplicable and specifically designed to easily identify outsidersMattW said:2nd. Thank-you for the header.
FPT:
There's a hamlet in Derbyshire called New York - just like the one in Ukraine. And one in Nidderdale. And one in East Lindsay.Nigelb said:As it's a JD Vance thread, here's TwitterX on town name pronunciations in Ohio.
There’s a town in Ohio called “Versailles” and it’s pronounced by the locals, and all Ohioans, as “Ver-sails” and if you try to pronounce it like you should (with the French accent), people look at you like you’re crazy.
https://x.com/EudaimoniaEsq/status/1828560881808220191
Houston: “How-stun”
Russia: “Roo-shee”
Bellefountaine - "Bell Fountain"
Genoa - "Juh Noah"
Leipsic - "Lip sick"
https://x.com/politicalmath/status/1828568040377651535
- Gloucester, pronounced Gloster
- Leicester, pronounced Lester
- Alnwick, pronounced Annick
- Chiswick, pronounced Chisick
- Ulgham pronounced Uffham
- Happisburgh pronounced Haysburra
etc etc etc etc
We're definitely inside the glasshouse on this one.
Near where I live is a hamlet called Broughton (pronounced brufton) not to be confused with Broughton ( ex- Clwyd) pronounced brawton.
Just wait for the confusion when PBers discover Welsh place names.
I used to go through it 2 or 3 times a year, since my grandparents retired from Sheffield to Prestatyn Beach Road, near the Pink Hotel, which became the Yellow Hotel, and is now the Beige Hotel.0 -
Example number 97 that manifestos are worthless. What Labour said about their policy prescription for smoking just a few weeks ago:
That starts with smoking. Labour will ensure the next generation can never legally buy cigarettes and ensure all hospitals integrate ‘opt out’ smoking cessation interventions into routine care. Labour will ban vapes from being branded and advertised to appeal to children to stop the next generation from becoming hooked on nicotine.
Why am I not surprised they want to extend the smoking ban to include many outdoor public places but neglected to mention this during the campaign? Cynicism will be still more deeply engrained after 5 years of this lot.0 -
I also don't think it's true any more.Eabhal said:
That's a classic economics fallacy. It would be much better if those smokers were spending money, paying tax and reaping the positive effects of some other item (running shoes or bicycles, for example).Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.
It used to be the case that taxes on smoking paid for the entire NHS, in the 1980s when more people smoked and costs were lower, but not now.
Tax receipts from smoking last year: £8.8 billion.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/284329/tobacco-duty-united-kingdom-hmrc-tax-receipts/
NHS Budget for England alone last year: £168.8 billion
https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/our-2023-24-business-plan/
I very much doubt if smoking related cancers and other illnesses only cost 5% of NHS budget.0 -
Other governments have done this.
Will Rachel Reeves flog off our Bitcoin, or some of it.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-07-19/britain-has-a-5-billion-bitcoin-stash-reeves-can-unleash-it0 -
Nowt to do with smoking but that bloody Truss woman.Mortimer said:
And look how badly they did!TheScreamingEagles said:
Did you miss the last Tory government looking to ban smoking outright within a generation?Cookie said:
The standard tactic of a Labour government.MarqueeMark said:
Finding everything else is Too Hard To Do?numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Give it a few weeks and Starmer will appreciate that the last Government actually weren't doing too bad a job, all things considered...
If in doubt, ban something.
Or even if not in doubt.0 -
I had that on a mug when I was 8Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is easy, try Llanfairpwllgwyngyll !!!MattW said:
I'm sure @Big_G_NorthWales can tell us all how to pronounce "Ffynnongroew", since it is on the way to .a. aiui ... Clan-did-know. We used to say Fif-un-grew.Mexicanpete said:....
I spent my teenage years in Cradley (Herefordshire) pronounced Cradley. Sometimes I work in Cradley ( Dudley MBC) pronounced craydley.ydoethur said:
Consider yourself lucky you don't have to explain why Hednesford and Blithefield are pronounced Hensford and Bliffeld.Fishing said:
... unlike every English county, which seems to have at least 75 such:Nigelb said:
Every state in the US must give at least one town a pronunciation that is inexplicable and specifically designed to easily identify outsidersMattW said:2nd. Thank-you for the header.
FPT:
There's a hamlet in Derbyshire called New York - just like the one in Ukraine. And one in Nidderdale. And one in East Lindsay.Nigelb said:As it's a JD Vance thread, here's TwitterX on town name pronunciations in Ohio.
There’s a town in Ohio called “Versailles” and it’s pronounced by the locals, and all Ohioans, as “Ver-sails” and if you try to pronounce it like you should (with the French accent), people look at you like you’re crazy.
https://x.com/EudaimoniaEsq/status/1828560881808220191
Houston: “How-stun”
Russia: “Roo-shee”
Bellefountaine - "Bell Fountain"
Genoa - "Juh Noah"
Leipsic - "Lip sick"
https://x.com/politicalmath/status/1828568040377651535
- Gloucester, pronounced Gloster
- Leicester, pronounced Lester
- Alnwick, pronounced Annick
- Chiswick, pronounced Chisick
- Ulgham pronounced Uffham
- Happisburgh pronounced Haysburra
etc etc etc etc
We're definitely inside the glasshouse on this one.
Near where I live is a hamlet called Broughton (pronounced brufton) not to be confused with Broughton ( ex- Clwyd) pronounced brawton.
Just wait for the confusion when PBers discover Welsh place names.
I used to go through it 2 or 3 times a year, since my grandparents retired from Sheffield to Prestatyn Beach Road, near the Pink Hotel, which became the Yellow Hotel, and is now the Beige Hotel.
. 0 -
"Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily" does not mean millions do not use cash.Anabobazina said:
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/1 -
The existing policy has reduced the % of people smoking from 20% in 2011 to 13% in 2021, so it's mainly about continuing that - we'll see what they do now. *numbertwelve said:
I don’t actually have a problem with the government seeking to, over time, phase out smoking. I’m an ex smoker myself, and I have little love of the habit.MattW said:
Since smoking costs the NHS several billion a year, and we are all concerned about the cost of the NHS, to curb a habit that hardly anyone wants to have once they become established in it seems a thoroughly rational step to take.numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
It's a bit difficult to complain about Mr Starmer's applying restrictions as some sort of negative narrative, when the previous lot were committed to implementing a total ban on selling them identified by age group - a kind of smoking apartheid.
Not that that will stop the Telegrunt and the rest of that tendency groping around for mud to sling tactically, of course.
The name of the game is to continue to reduce and eventually stop smoking, and that is a desirable objective. The UK has done fairly well in reducing smoking so far - why not continue?
Do we have polls on this - both the Rishi Sunk version, and the Keir Starmer version, based on full information?
There is however a proportionate and measured way of doing so. In some ways, the phased-in banning proposed by age, whilst I fear unworkable, is a smart one. A big bang approach of banning in outdoor areas for all strikes me as being on the wrong side of this approach, because it once again causes problems for our struggling hospitality industry that they could really do without at the moment.
I am also rather cynical that banning it in more places is going to actually prevent take up. It will just mean people are more likely to stay at home.
Coming from a mining area, I have seen a *lot* of people going downhill then losing many years of life from lung problems, and I think strong policies are justified under a public health mandate. It's really about prevention over lack-of-cure.
* https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-khan-review-making-smoking-obsolete/making-smoking-obsolete-summary
That report has polling with half (46%) (in 2022) thinking the Govt is not doing enough to prevent smoking. That is up form 29% in 2009. It's a majority if the 20% don't knows are excluded.0 -
-
Ah, sod them, they will just have to adapteristdoof said:
"Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily" does not mean millions do not use cash.Anabobazina said:
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/0 -
We finally have a cashless society in Staffs after 40 years.eristdoof said:
"Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily" does not mean millions do not use cash.Anabobazina said:
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/
Shame that bugger Williamson has replaced him.4 -
Smokers die early, and tend to save the NHS money because of that.ydoethur said:
I also don't think it's true any more.Eabhal said:
That's a classic economics fallacy. It would be much better if those smokers were spending money, paying tax and reaping the positive effects of some other item (running shoes or bicycles, for example).Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.
It used to be the case that taxes on smoking paid for the entire NHS, in the 1980s when more people smoked and costs were lower, but not now.
Tax receipts from smoking last year: £8.8 billion.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/284329/tobacco-duty-united-kingdom-hmrc-tax-receipts/
NHS Budget for England alone last year: £168.8 billion
https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/our-2023-24-business-plan/
I very much doubt if smoking related cancers and other illnesses only cost 5% of NHS budget.
(All cancer treatment accounts for around 5.6% of the NHS budget, I think.)
Obesity is the really expensive one.0 -
Are you saying Lloyd is a foolish tosser?Northern_Al said:0 -
Hospitality venues also spent millions, collectively in the billions, adapting their businesses to the original indoor smoking ban.numbertwelve said:
I don’t actually have a problem with the government seeking to, over time, phase out smoking. I’m an ex smoker myself, and I have little love of the habit.MattW said:
Since smoking costs the NHS several billion a year, and we are all concerned about the cost of the NHS, to curb a habit that hardly anyone wants to have once they become established in it seems a thoroughly rational step to take.numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
It's a bit difficult to complain about Mr Starmer's applying restrictions as some sort of negative narrative, when the previous lot were committed to implementing a total ban on selling them identified by age group - a kind of smoking apartheid.
Not that that will stop the Telegrunt and the rest of that tendency groping around for mud to sling tactically, of course.
The name of the game is to continue to reduce and eventually stop smoking, and that is a desirable objective. The UK has done fairly well in reducing smoking so far - why not continue?
Do we have polls on this - both the Rishi Sunk version, and the Keir Starmer version, based on full information?
There is however a proportionate and measured way of doing so. In some ways, the phased-in banning proposed by age, whilst I fear unworkable, is a smart one. A big bang approach of banning in outdoor areas for all strikes me as being on the wrong side of this approach, because it once again causes problems for our struggling hospitality industry that they could really do without at the moment.
I am also rather cynical that banning it in more places is going to actually prevent take up. It will just mean people are more likely to stay at home.
While the original indoor ban was justifiable on the grounds of second-hand smoke to staff and other customers, albeit with some poor implementation such as mandating churches put up no smoking signs, extending a ban to outdoor areas makes little sense other than as a further example of creeping authoritarianism from the government and civil service.1 -
Just as well that Trump called for a peaceful demonstration then, as opposed to storming the Capitol.eristdoof said:
They certainly would blame the Tories if the Tory leader encouraged Tommy Robinson's crowd to go and storm the HoC.Sandpit said:
He’s the American version of Tommy Robinson. No-one in the UK would blame the Tories if they held a rally where they called for a peaceful protest, but a few Tommys turned up and started a fight.kamski said:
As a PB thickie I just trying to understand what you meant by a 'disaffected, marginalised community'. The first person on a list of those convicted after January 6th is a guy called Henry Tarrio - a one-time chairman of the Proud Boys.TOPPING said:
It was political expression (as were the 2011 riots, as were the Hartlepool riots) of a disaffected, marginalised community.TheScreamingEagles said:
I am sure you would have excused the Beer Hall Putsch.TOPPING said:
It's America ffs. How many people die or are injured in a normal day in Ohio vs Hartlepool.TheScreamingEagles said:
How many people died or were injured when Otis Ferry and his friends invaded the Commons?TOPPING said:
Weak. It wasn't an armed insurrection. It was a bunch of no-hopers (there's a clue in there) protesting against government. Pretty inefficiently and badly managed by the security forces. None of them expected to find themselves indoors that day.TheScreamingEagles said:
The encouragement of the armed insurrection that nearly led to the lynching of his Vice President for starters.TOPPING said:As one who doesn't follow the intricacies US elections (tip: one of them is going to win), but doesn't like the PB Guardian-adjacent bien pensant dismissal of Trump supporters, can I ask those who know (ie you lot) what Trump would do in office that would be "frankly very scary" and what he did last time that was "frankly very scary".
He waited hours to respond.
That’s for starters.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010tff is pretty good about it.
Just like Otis Ferry storming the HoC but more American.
The last place I would expect that concept to be understood is on PB and the last people I would expect to understand it are well paid lawyers working in the financial services industry in the UK who were bought houses by their parents at an early age.
This is what Wikipedia has to say:
"In 2004, when he was 20 years old, Tarrio was convicted of theft. He was sentenced to community service and three years of probation and was ordered to pay restitution. After 2004, Tarrio relocated to a small town in North Florida to run a poultry farm. He later returned to Miami. He has also founded a security equipment installation firm and another firm providing GPS tracking for companies.
In 2012, Tarrio was indicted for his role in a scheme to rebrand and resell stolen diabetic test strips. After being charged, Tarrio cooperated with investigators, helping them prosecute more than a dozen others. In 2013, Tarrio was sentenced to 30 months (of which he served 16) in federal prison.
Between 2012 and 2014 Tarrio was an informant to both federal and local law enforcement; in a 2014 federal court hearing, Tarrio's lawyer said that Tarrio had been a "prolific" cooperator who had assisted the government in the investigation and prosecution of more than twelve people in cases involving anabolic steroids, gambling, and human smuggling; had helped identify three "grow houses" where marijuana was cultivated; and had repeatedly worked undercover to aid in investigations. Tarrio denied working undercover or cooperating with prosecutions, but the court transcript contradicted the denial, and the former federal prosecutor in the proceeding against Tarrio confirmed that he cooperated. Tarrio's role as an informant was first made public in January 2021, after Reuters obtained the court records and interviewed investigators and lawyers involved in the case."
I suppose failed criminals turned informants are members of a 'disaffected, marginalised community' so you're right.0 -
But it saves the country a lot of money if they don't get old.Eabhal said:
That's a classic economics fallacy. It would be much better if those smokers were spending money, paying tax and reaping the positive effects of some other item (running shoes or bicycles, for example).Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.0 -
Which was equally depressing.TheScreamingEagles said:
Did you miss the last Tory government looking to ban smoking outright within a generation?Cookie said:
The standard tactic of a Labour government.MarqueeMark said:
Finding everything else is Too Hard To Do?numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Give it a few weeks and Starmer will appreciate that the last Government actually weren't doing too bad a job, all things considered...
If in doubt, ban something.
Or even if not in doubt.3 -
Bit more complicated than that - a large proportion of costs come in the final 12 months of life, whenever those are, so life expectancy is less important than you might think for most people.Nigelb said:
Smokers die early, and tend to save the NHS money because of that.ydoethur said:
I also don't think it's true any more.Eabhal said:
That's a classic economics fallacy. It would be much better if those smokers were spending money, paying tax and reaping the positive effects of some other item (running shoes or bicycles, for example).Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.
It used to be the case that taxes on smoking paid for the entire NHS, in the 1980s when more people smoked and costs were lower, but not now.
Tax receipts from smoking last year: £8.8 billion.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/284329/tobacco-duty-united-kingdom-hmrc-tax-receipts/
NHS Budget for England alone last year: £168.8 billion
https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/our-2023-24-business-plan/
I very much doubt if smoking related cancers and other illnesses only cost 5% of NHS budget.
(All cancer treatment accounts for around 5.6% of the NHS budget, I think.)
Obesity is the really expensive one.
It's healthy life expectancy that's important, so if smokers die 5 years earlier but start getting lots of conditions 15 years before non-smokers do, the net effect is worse. This is also why people with obesity cost so much, suffering with with minor but expensive conditions for decades.1 -
We might be at a tipping point where it's a positive for some pubs - I refuse to sit in a beer garden if I'll be downwind from a smoker. Ruins my pint.Sandpit said:
Hospitality venues also spent millions, collectively in the billions, adapting their businesses to the original indoor smoking ban.numbertwelve said:
I don’t actually have a problem with the government seeking to, over time, phase out smoking. I’m an ex smoker myself, and I have little love of the habit.MattW said:
Since smoking costs the NHS several billion a year, and we are all concerned about the cost of the NHS, to curb a habit that hardly anyone wants to have once they become established in it seems a thoroughly rational step to take.numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
It's a bit difficult to complain about Mr Starmer's applying restrictions as some sort of negative narrative, when the previous lot were committed to implementing a total ban on selling them identified by age group - a kind of smoking apartheid.
Not that that will stop the Telegrunt and the rest of that tendency groping around for mud to sling tactically, of course.
The name of the game is to continue to reduce and eventually stop smoking, and that is a desirable objective. The UK has done fairly well in reducing smoking so far - why not continue?
Do we have polls on this - both the Rishi Sunk version, and the Keir Starmer version, based on full information?
There is however a proportionate and measured way of doing so. In some ways, the phased-in banning proposed by age, whilst I fear unworkable, is a smart one. A big bang approach of banning in outdoor areas for all strikes me as being on the wrong side of this approach, because it once again causes problems for our struggling hospitality industry that they could really do without at the moment.
I am also rather cynical that banning it in more places is going to actually prevent take up. It will just mean people are more likely to stay at home.
While the original indoor ban was justifiable on the grounds of second-hand smoke to staff and other customers, albeit with some poor implementation such as mandating churches put up no smoking signs, extending a ban to outdoor areas makes little sense other than as a further example of creeping authoritarianism from the government and civil service.0 -
That's a little like claiming the attempted torching of the Holiday Inn Express in Rotherham was largely peaceful.Sandpit said:
Just as well that Trump called for a peaceful demonstration then, as opposed to storming the Capitol.eristdoof said:
They certainly would blame the Tories if the Tory leader encouraged Tommy Robinson's crowd to go and storm the HoC.Sandpit said:
He’s the American version of Tommy Robinson. No-one in the UK would blame the Tories if they held a rally where they called for a peaceful protest, but a few Tommys turned up and started a fight.kamski said:
As a PB thickie I just trying to understand what you meant by a 'disaffected, marginalised community'. The first person on a list of those convicted after January 6th is a guy called Henry Tarrio - a one-time chairman of the Proud Boys.TOPPING said:
It was political expression (as were the 2011 riots, as were the Hartlepool riots) of a disaffected, marginalised community.TheScreamingEagles said:
I am sure you would have excused the Beer Hall Putsch.TOPPING said:
It's America ffs. How many people die or are injured in a normal day in Ohio vs Hartlepool.TheScreamingEagles said:
How many people died or were injured when Otis Ferry and his friends invaded the Commons?TOPPING said:
Weak. It wasn't an armed insurrection. It was a bunch of no-hopers (there's a clue in there) protesting against government. Pretty inefficiently and badly managed by the security forces. None of them expected to find themselves indoors that day.TheScreamingEagles said:
The encouragement of the armed insurrection that nearly led to the lynching of his Vice President for starters.TOPPING said:As one who doesn't follow the intricacies US elections (tip: one of them is going to win), but doesn't like the PB Guardian-adjacent bien pensant dismissal of Trump supporters, can I ask those who know (ie you lot) what Trump would do in office that would be "frankly very scary" and what he did last time that was "frankly very scary".
He waited hours to respond.
That’s for starters.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010tff is pretty good about it.
Just like Otis Ferry storming the HoC but more American.
The last place I would expect that concept to be understood is on PB and the last people I would expect to understand it are well paid lawyers working in the financial services industry in the UK who were bought houses by their parents at an early age.
This is what Wikipedia has to say:
"In 2004, when he was 20 years old, Tarrio was convicted of theft. He was sentenced to community service and three years of probation and was ordered to pay restitution. After 2004, Tarrio relocated to a small town in North Florida to run a poultry farm. He later returned to Miami. He has also founded a security equipment installation firm and another firm providing GPS tracking for companies.
In 2012, Tarrio was indicted for his role in a scheme to rebrand and resell stolen diabetic test strips. After being charged, Tarrio cooperated with investigators, helping them prosecute more than a dozen others. In 2013, Tarrio was sentenced to 30 months (of which he served 16) in federal prison.
Between 2012 and 2014 Tarrio was an informant to both federal and local law enforcement; in a 2014 federal court hearing, Tarrio's lawyer said that Tarrio had been a "prolific" cooperator who had assisted the government in the investigation and prosecution of more than twelve people in cases involving anabolic steroids, gambling, and human smuggling; had helped identify three "grow houses" where marijuana was cultivated; and had repeatedly worked undercover to aid in investigations. Tarrio denied working undercover or cooperating with prosecutions, but the court transcript contradicted the denial, and the former federal prosecutor in the proceeding against Tarrio confirmed that he cooperated. Tarrio's role as an informant was first made public in January 2021, after Reuters obtained the court records and interviewed investigators and lawyers involved in the case."
I suppose failed criminals turned informants are members of a 'disaffected, marginalised community' so you're right.0 -
No. Old healthy people don't cost the NHS anywhere near as much as younger* unhealthy people do. The perfect patient is someone running and cycling into their 80s who drops dead of a heart attack.tlg86 said:
But it saves the country a lot of money if they don't get old.Eabhal said:
That's a classic economics fallacy. It would be much better if those smokers were spending money, paying tax and reaping the positive effects of some other item (running shoes or bicycles, for example).Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.
*Talking 50s/60s.0 -
I love the irony of "hard-won"...numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?1 -
He didn't plan the violence but he did watch it on tv for several hours rather than intervene to try and stop it. And the violence was in tandem with the attempt (which he did plan) to pressure Pence to not certify. There had previously been the blatant intimidation of officials in Georgia to 'find' him some extra votes. There were a host of vexatious legal challenges.rcs1000 said:
I agree the armed insurrection stuff is weak sauce.TOPPING said:
I have no doubt he wanted people to get out on the streets. I don't think anyone, least of all those who participated, expected it to get so far out of hand.Theuniondivvie said:
Encouraged a bout of violent 'sightseeing' at the seat of government when he lost?TOPPING said:As one who doesn't follow the intricacies US elections (tip: one of them is going to win), but doesn't like the PB Guardian-adjacent bien pensant dismissal of Trump supporters, can I ask those who know (ie you lot) what Trump would do in office that would be "frankly very scary" and what he did last time that was "frankly very scary".
The fake electors, on the other hand, was deliberate policy to overturn a democratic election.
All of this comprised a calculated campaign (for which the pitch was rolled well in advance) to smear the result of the election (if he lost) as being false/fraudulent. There can be no doubt about this. He tried to stay in power despite having been voted out. It's a scandal that he can stand again let alone be in with a fair chance (market 50%, me 33%) of winning.2 -
Correct, it’s an integral part of the UK, just like Merseyside is not the rest of the UK but is an integral part of it, just like Yorkshire and the Lake District are not the rest of the UK but are integral parts of it. Not really sure what point you are trying to make really.Taz said:
London is not the rest of the UK.Anabobazina said:
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/0 -
I would keep cash, I wouldn’t ban it.Taz said:
Ah, sod them, they will just have to adapteristdoof said:
"Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily" does not mean millions do not use cash.Anabobazina said:
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/
But it is pointless and eventually will probably die out as fewer and fewer people use it.0 -
One of the problems with electronic payments is that quite often you don't bother to check the amount you're paying, out of laziness. You just touch your card on the reader, etc, and assume it's right. With cash you always know that you've paid the right amount, based on what you've given and what change you've got back.Anabobazina said:
I would keep cash, I wouldn’t ban it.Taz said:
Ah, sod them, they will just have to adapteristdoof said:
"Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily" does not mean millions do not use cash.Anabobazina said:
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/
But it is pointless and eventually will probably die out as fewer and fewer people use it.0 -
My apologies to everyone as I have been very rude about the energy levels of the ex-President of the USA. However, finally Mr Trump seems enthused in this video. As curated for history by the gentlemen of the Bulwark. Treat yourself and enjoy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLnkVAXCKao0 -
No, it’s like saying it was Nigel Farage’s fault.Mexicanpete said:
That's a little like claiming the attempted torching of the Holiday Inn Express in Rotherham was largely peaceful.Sandpit said:
Just as well that Trump called for a peaceful demonstration then, as opposed to storming the Capitol.eristdoof said:
They certainly would blame the Tories if the Tory leader encouraged Tommy Robinson's crowd to go and storm the HoC.Sandpit said:
He’s the American version of Tommy Robinson. No-one in the UK would blame the Tories if they held a rally where they called for a peaceful protest, but a few Tommys turned up and started a fight.kamski said:
As a PB thickie I just trying to understand what you meant by a 'disaffected, marginalised community'. The first person on a list of those convicted after January 6th is a guy called Henry Tarrio - a one-time chairman of the Proud Boys.TOPPING said:
It was political expression (as were the 2011 riots, as were the Hartlepool riots) of a disaffected, marginalised community.TheScreamingEagles said:
I am sure you would have excused the Beer Hall Putsch.TOPPING said:
It's America ffs. How many people die or are injured in a normal day in Ohio vs Hartlepool.TheScreamingEagles said:
How many people died or were injured when Otis Ferry and his friends invaded the Commons?TOPPING said:
Weak. It wasn't an armed insurrection. It was a bunch of no-hopers (there's a clue in there) protesting against government. Pretty inefficiently and badly managed by the security forces. None of them expected to find themselves indoors that day.TheScreamingEagles said:
The encouragement of the armed insurrection that nearly led to the lynching of his Vice President for starters.TOPPING said:As one who doesn't follow the intricacies US elections (tip: one of them is going to win), but doesn't like the PB Guardian-adjacent bien pensant dismissal of Trump supporters, can I ask those who know (ie you lot) what Trump would do in office that would be "frankly very scary" and what he did last time that was "frankly very scary".
He waited hours to respond.
That’s for starters.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010tff is pretty good about it.
Just like Otis Ferry storming the HoC but more American.
The last place I would expect that concept to be understood is on PB and the last people I would expect to understand it are well paid lawyers working in the financial services industry in the UK who were bought houses by their parents at an early age.
This is what Wikipedia has to say:
"In 2004, when he was 20 years old, Tarrio was convicted of theft. He was sentenced to community service and three years of probation and was ordered to pay restitution. After 2004, Tarrio relocated to a small town in North Florida to run a poultry farm. He later returned to Miami. He has also founded a security equipment installation firm and another firm providing GPS tracking for companies.
In 2012, Tarrio was indicted for his role in a scheme to rebrand and resell stolen diabetic test strips. After being charged, Tarrio cooperated with investigators, helping them prosecute more than a dozen others. In 2013, Tarrio was sentenced to 30 months (of which he served 16) in federal prison.
Between 2012 and 2014 Tarrio was an informant to both federal and local law enforcement; in a 2014 federal court hearing, Tarrio's lawyer said that Tarrio had been a "prolific" cooperator who had assisted the government in the investigation and prosecution of more than twelve people in cases involving anabolic steroids, gambling, and human smuggling; had helped identify three "grow houses" where marijuana was cultivated; and had repeatedly worked undercover to aid in investigations. Tarrio denied working undercover or cooperating with prosecutions, but the court transcript contradicted the denial, and the former federal prosecutor in the proceeding against Tarrio confirmed that he cooperated. Tarrio's role as an informant was first made public in January 2021, after Reuters obtained the court records and interviewed investigators and lawyers involved in the case."
I suppose failed criminals turned informants are members of a 'disaffected, marginalised community' so you're right.0 -
The question is not why the Conservatives did it, it's why are Labour keen to continue it. The answer is that it's an imposition on people the Govt don't like that can be spun for their own good whilst costing nothing. In a debt-laden low-growth country the only electorally-popular option left is to ban thingsTheScreamingEagles said:
Did you miss the last Tory government looking to ban smoking outright within a generation?Cookie said:
The standard tactic of a Labour government.MarqueeMark said:
Finding everything else is Too Hard To Do?numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Give it a few weeks and Starmer will appreciate that the last Government actually weren't doing too bad a job, all things considered...
If in doubt, ban something.
Or even if not in doubt.0 -
We should also ban sponsored parachute jumping, since one in nine results in an injury requiring hospital treatment, and the average cost of this to the NHS is greater than nine times the average amount raised for charity.tlg86 said:
But it saves the country a lot of money if they don't get old.Eabhal said:
That's a classic economics fallacy. It would be much better if those smokers were spending money, paying tax and reaping the positive effects of some other item (running shoes or bicycles, for example).Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.0 -
I'd be interested in how people assess the election on the following formulation (the numbers being where I am):
Harris landslide 10%
Harris comfortable 30%
Harris just 25%
Trump just 25%
Trump comfortable 5%
Trump landslide 5%0 -
It was wholly and 100% the fault of the people who set it alight. I assume those people will be spending twenty years in jail.Sandpit said:
No, it’s like saying it was Nigel Farage’s fault.Mexicanpete said:
That's a little like claiming the attempted torching of the Holiday Inn Express in Rotherham was largely peaceful.Sandpit said:
Just as well that Trump called for a peaceful demonstration then, as opposed to storming the Capitol.eristdoof said:
They certainly would blame the Tories if the Tory leader encouraged Tommy Robinson's crowd to go and storm the HoC.Sandpit said:
He’s the American version of Tommy Robinson. No-one in the UK would blame the Tories if they held a rally where they called for a peaceful protest, but a few Tommys turned up and started a fight.kamski said:
As a PB thickie I just trying to understand what you meant by a 'disaffected, marginalised community'. The first person on a list of those convicted after January 6th is a guy called Henry Tarrio - a one-time chairman of the Proud Boys.TOPPING said:
It was political expression (as were the 2011 riots, as were the Hartlepool riots) of a disaffected, marginalised community.TheScreamingEagles said:
I am sure you would have excused the Beer Hall Putsch.TOPPING said:
It's America ffs. How many people die or are injured in a normal day in Ohio vs Hartlepool.TheScreamingEagles said:
How many people died or were injured when Otis Ferry and his friends invaded the Commons?TOPPING said:
Weak. It wasn't an armed insurrection. It was a bunch of no-hopers (there's a clue in there) protesting against government. Pretty inefficiently and badly managed by the security forces. None of them expected to find themselves indoors that day.TheScreamingEagles said:
The encouragement of the armed insurrection that nearly led to the lynching of his Vice President for starters.TOPPING said:As one who doesn't follow the intricacies US elections (tip: one of them is going to win), but doesn't like the PB Guardian-adjacent bien pensant dismissal of Trump supporters, can I ask those who know (ie you lot) what Trump would do in office that would be "frankly very scary" and what he did last time that was "frankly very scary".
He waited hours to respond.
That’s for starters.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010tff is pretty good about it.
Just like Otis Ferry storming the HoC but more American.
The last place I would expect that concept to be understood is on PB and the last people I would expect to understand it are well paid lawyers working in the financial services industry in the UK who were bought houses by their parents at an early age.
This is what Wikipedia has to say:
"In 2004, when he was 20 years old, Tarrio was convicted of theft. He was sentenced to community service and three years of probation and was ordered to pay restitution. After 2004, Tarrio relocated to a small town in North Florida to run a poultry farm. He later returned to Miami. He has also founded a security equipment installation firm and another firm providing GPS tracking for companies.
In 2012, Tarrio was indicted for his role in a scheme to rebrand and resell stolen diabetic test strips. After being charged, Tarrio cooperated with investigators, helping them prosecute more than a dozen others. In 2013, Tarrio was sentenced to 30 months (of which he served 16) in federal prison.
Between 2012 and 2014 Tarrio was an informant to both federal and local law enforcement; in a 2014 federal court hearing, Tarrio's lawyer said that Tarrio had been a "prolific" cooperator who had assisted the government in the investigation and prosecution of more than twelve people in cases involving anabolic steroids, gambling, and human smuggling; had helped identify three "grow houses" where marijuana was cultivated; and had repeatedly worked undercover to aid in investigations. Tarrio denied working undercover or cooperating with prosecutions, but the court transcript contradicted the denial, and the former federal prosecutor in the proceeding against Tarrio confirmed that he cooperated. Tarrio's role as an informant was first made public in January 2021, after Reuters obtained the court records and interviewed investigators and lawyers involved in the case."
I suppose failed criminals turned informants are members of a 'disaffected, marginalised community' so you're right.0 -
You keep going on about the London bus network. You keep just referencing London.Anabobazina said:
Correct, it’s an integral part of the UK, just like Merseyside is not the rest of the UK but is an integral part of it, just like Yorkshire and the Lake District are not the rest of the UK but are integral parts of it. Not really sure what point you are trying to make really.Taz said:
London is not the rest of the UK.Anabobazina said:
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/0 -
It's much better straight from the sourceClutch_Brompton said:My apologies to everyone as I have been very rude about the energy levels of the ex-President of the USA. However, finally Mr Trump seems enthused in this video. As curated for history by the gentlemen of the Bulwark. Treat yourself and enjoy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLnkVAXCKao
https://collecttrumpcards.com/0 -
But Trump did none of those things.Foxy said:
Carrying a noose, assaulting guards, smashing up the Capitol building threatening a Republican VP with lynching.rcs1000 said:
I agree the armed insurrection stuff is weak sauce.TOPPING said:
I have no doubt he wanted people to get out on the streets. I don't think anyone, least of all those who participated, expected it to get so far out of hand.Theuniondivvie said:
Encouraged a bout of violent 'sightseeing' at the seat of government when he lost?TOPPING said:As one who doesn't follow the intricacies US elections (tip: one of them is going to win), but doesn't like the PB Guardian-adjacent bien pensant dismissal of Trump supporters, can I ask those who know (ie you lot) what Trump would do in office that would be "frankly very scary" and what he did last time that was "frankly very scary".
The fake electors, on the other hand, was deliberate policy to overturn a democratic election.
Nothing to see here, just a normal day in MAGA land.
Now, the things he did created the atmosphere for that to happen. And his words were incendiary. But he did not lead an armed insurrection.
He did for sure, though, organize slates of Fake Electors with the express intention of overthrowing an election. He should be in jail for that.0 -
Once we get paternalistic well funded lobbyists to actively campaign against it to save rNHS then we probably will see a ban proposed.IanB2 said:
We should also ban sponsored parachute jumping, since one in nine results in an injury requiring hospital treatment, and the average cost of this to the NHS is greater than nine times the average amount raised for charity.tlg86 said:
But it saves the country a lot of money if they don't get old.Eabhal said:
That's a classic economics fallacy. It would be much better if those smokers were spending money, paying tax and reaping the positive effects of some other item (running shoes or bicycles, for example).Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.0 -
This is a powerful little abortion video from the Project Lincoln guys:
https://x.com/ProfMMurray/status/18284881483364189880 -
Taking the piss ?Mexicanpete said:
English Airmen stationed at RAF Pembrey during the war and in the years after struggled to pronounce nearby Llanelli, so they called it "Slash". I have no idea why.MattW said:
I'm sure @Big_G_NorthWales can tell us all how to pronounce "Ffynnongroew", since it is on the way to .a. aiui ... Clan-did-know. We used to say Fif-un-grew.Mexicanpete said:....
I spent my teenage years in Cradley (Herefordshire) pronounced Cradley. Sometimes I work in Cradley ( Dudley MBC) pronounced craydley.ydoethur said:
Consider yourself lucky you don't have to explain why Hednesford and Blithefield are pronounced Hensford and Bliffeld.Fishing said:
... unlike every English county, which seems to have at least 75 such:Nigelb said:
Every state in the US must give at least one town a pronunciation that is inexplicable and specifically designed to easily identify outsidersMattW said:2nd. Thank-you for the header.
FPT:
There's a hamlet in Derbyshire called New York - just like the one in Ukraine. And one in Nidderdale. And one in East Lindsay.Nigelb said:As it's a JD Vance thread, here's TwitterX on town name pronunciations in Ohio.
There’s a town in Ohio called “Versailles” and it’s pronounced by the locals, and all Ohioans, as “Ver-sails” and if you try to pronounce it like you should (with the French accent), people look at you like you’re crazy.
https://x.com/EudaimoniaEsq/status/1828560881808220191
Houston: “How-stun”
Russia: “Roo-shee”
Bellefountaine - "Bell Fountain"
Genoa - "Juh Noah"
Leipsic - "Lip sick"
https://x.com/politicalmath/status/1828568040377651535
- Gloucester, pronounced Gloster
- Leicester, pronounced Lester
- Alnwick, pronounced Annick
- Chiswick, pronounced Chisick
- Ulgham pronounced Uffham
- Happisburgh pronounced Haysburra
etc etc etc etc
We're definitely inside the glasshouse on this one.
Near where I live is a hamlet called Broughton (pronounced brufton) not to be confused with Broughton ( ex- Clwyd) pronounced brawton.
Just wait for the confusion when PBers discover Welsh place names.
I used to go through it 2 or 3 times a year, since my grandparents retired from Sheffield to Prestatyn Beach Road, near the Pink Hotel, which became the Yellow Hotel, and is now the Beige Hotel.1 -
I rarely use it. I just think it fair to allow people who want to to use it. But if a business wants to not accept cash it would not stop me going thereAnabobazina said:
I would keep cash, I wouldn’t ban it.Taz said:
Ah, sod them, they will just have to adapteristdoof said:
"Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily" does not mean millions do not use cash.Anabobazina said:
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/
But it is pointless and eventually will probably die out as fewer and fewer people use it.
Many hip and trendy craft beer places I have been to do not take cash.
@Theuniondivvie mentioned people who begged for money in the street the other day. Reminded me of my visit to York recently where a couple of buskers had a contactless card reader to collect donations. I suspect it will become more widespread.1 -
Starmer/Sunak reduce the number of cancer sufferers by banning smoking. Truss reduces the number of cancer sufferers by (allegedly, according to Anthony Sheldon) banning cancer treatments.TheScreamingEagles said:
Nowt to do with smoking but that bloody Truss woman.Mortimer said:
And look how badly they did!TheScreamingEagles said:
Did you miss the last Tory government looking to ban smoking outright within a generation?Cookie said:
The standard tactic of a Labour government.MarqueeMark said:
Finding everything else is Too Hard To Do?numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Give it a few weeks and Starmer will appreciate that the last Government actually weren't doing too bad a job, all things considered...
If in doubt, ban something.
Or even if not in doubt.
0 -
How many people do you think run and cycle into their 80s and drop dead of a heart attack?Eabhal said:
No. Old healthy people don't cost the NHS anywhere near as much as younger* unhealthy people do. The perfect patient is someone running and cycling into their 80s who drops dead of a heart attack.tlg86 said:
But it saves the country a lot of money if they don't get old.Eabhal said:
That's a classic economics fallacy. It would be much better if those smokers were spending money, paying tax and reaping the positive effects of some other item (running shoes or bicycles, for example).Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.
*Talking 50s/60s.0 -
SKS = Tory sleeper agent!rottenborough said:This outside smoking ban will finish the pub trade off finally.
For once I find I am agreeing with Farage.
Labour seemed determined to destroy their poll lead as fast as possible it seems to me.
0 -
UK rail minister got engineer sacked for raising safety concerns
Peter Hendy threatened to withhold public contracts while seeking disciplinary action.
The U.K. government’s new transport minister got an award-winning railway engineer sacked for speaking to the media about safety concerns at one of Britain’s busiest stations, POLITICO can reveal.
In his previous role running government-owned infrastructure manager Network Rail, Peter Hendy threatened to withhold public contracts from the man’s employer while urging disciplinary action — and asked officials to “deal with him.”
Hendy was angered after the engineer, Gareth Dennis, told a journalist that overcrowding at London’s Euston station was “unsafe” because it could result in a crush — despite concern also having been voiced by the official rail regulator.
A letter from Hendy to the engineer’s employer SYSTRA, obtained by POLITICO under freedom of information laws, warned that “finding a potential supplier criticising a possible client reflects adversely on your likelihood of doing business with us or our supply chain.”
The email to the transport consultancy said that “the allegation that Network Rail is running an unsafe operation is a serious one” and added: “Employees here know that what they say in the media reflects on their employment, and I should like confirmation that your employees understand that too.”
https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-rail-minister-peter-hendy-fired-gareth-dennis-engineer-safety-concerns-trains-london-euston-station/1 -
Hold my beer (and burger).Nigelb said:
Smokers die early, and tend to save the NHS money because of that.ydoethur said:
I also don't think it's true any more.Eabhal said:
That's a classic economics fallacy. It would be much better if those smokers were spending money, paying tax and reaping the positive effects of some other item (running shoes or bicycles, for example).Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.
It used to be the case that taxes on smoking paid for the entire NHS, in the 1980s when more people smoked and costs were lower, but not now.
Tax receipts from smoking last year: £8.8 billion.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/284329/tobacco-duty-united-kingdom-hmrc-tax-receipts/
NHS Budget for England alone last year: £168.8 billion
https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/our-2023-24-business-plan/
I very much doubt if smoking related cancers and other illnesses only cost 5% of NHS budget.
(All cancer treatment accounts for around 5.6% of the NHS budget, I think.)
Obesity is the really expensive one.0 -
Remember folks, that there’s always someone having a worse day than you.
Safety car driver at Monza just binned it while practising for the F1 meeting this weekend.
https://x.com/fourrnorris/status/18291357711748997572 -
Smoking is on its way out in the UK and all of this is just to help it through the door. Accelerate its final demise by a few years. That's worth it imo. It's an awful drug, unique amongst its peers in having no upside whatsoever. It ruins your health, spoils your looks, empties your wallet in the direction of multinational companies, makes you stink, and you don't even get a high. I'm a lifelong smoker and I'd support just about every banning measure short of 'in own home' or 'middle of a field'.Eabhal said:
No. Old healthy people don't cost the NHS anywhere near as much as younger* unhealthy people do. The perfect patient is someone running and cycling into their 80s who drops dead of a heart attack.tlg86 said:
But it saves the country a lot of money if they don't get old.Eabhal said:
That's a classic economics fallacy. It would be much better if those smokers were spending money, paying tax and reaping the positive effects of some other item (running shoes or bicycles, for example).Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Smoking income (from tax) exceeds the costs of treatment. If everyone stops smoking then it creates a shortfall in funding. At least, that was the case when I was at school, but I find it hard to believe the situation has changed since.
*Talking 50s/60s.0 -
Seldon!Mexicanpete said:
Starmer/Sunak reduce the number of cancer sufferers by banning smoking. Truss reduces the number of cancer sufferers by (allegedly, according to Anthony Sheldon) banning cancer treatments.TheScreamingEagles said:
Nowt to do with smoking but that bloody Truss woman.Mortimer said:
And look how badly they did!TheScreamingEagles said:
Did you miss the last Tory government looking to ban smoking outright within a generation?Cookie said:
The standard tactic of a Labour government.MarqueeMark said:
Finding everything else is Too Hard To Do?numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
Give it a few weeks and Starmer will appreciate that the last Government actually weren't doing too bad a job, all things considered...
If in doubt, ban something.
Or even if not in doubt.0 -
It's the first and clearest example of an area going 100% cashless on buses without any real problems.Taz said:
You keep going on about the London bus network. You keep just referencing London.Anabobazina said:
Correct, it’s an integral part of the UK, just like Merseyside is not the rest of the UK but is an integral part of it, just like Yorkshire and the Lake District are not the rest of the UK but are integral parts of it. Not really sure what point you are trying to make really.Taz said:
London is not the rest of the UK.Anabobazina said:
Millions of poor and elderly people use cashless daily, not least on the London bus network – which has been cashless for years. You very rapidly get used to it. People adapt. And then wonder why they ever bothered with an antiquated system of plastic slips and shards of pointless metal!Taz said:The effect of a cashless society will impact the poorest and the elderly the most.
PB may have a fair few of the latter but has little knowledge of the former.
https://www.moneyexpert.com/news/move-cashless-society-will-disproportionately-affect-pensioners-poorest-uk/
All the big operators nationwide now say they accept contactless on all their buses.
If you think we can't extrapolate from the London express to nationwide, what is the relevant difference between inside and outside the M25 that means cashless works fine (with definite advantages) inside, but wouldn't work outside?0 -
I’ll offer 90p in the £ for as many as you have to sellAnabobazina said:
I'm sure the many weirdo cash-fetishists on here will buy them off you for £1 in proper electronic money (if they can work out how to use a banking app, which admittedly is very doubtful!)TOPPING said:On matters less controversial for PB what on earth do you do with the pound coins you might receive or have accumulated for one reason or another. Effectively dead money unless you make a concerted effort to use them all at once.
1 -
I would swap Harris landslide and comfortable. I would also put Trump landslide less than 1%. But it depends on definitions.kinabalu said:I'd be interested in how people assess the election on the following formulation (the numbers being where I am):
Harris landslide 10%
Harris comfortable 30%
Harris just 25%
Trump just 25%
Trump comfortable 5%
Trump landslide 5%
My thinking is that Trump support is base only with little ability to expand. So unlikely to strike bigly. Whereas Harris has the chance to win over the young, independents, Latinos etc. with an enthusied core so might have a large tail of states falling together as the probabilities are highly correlated.1 -
It would have been quite peaceful if the immigrants had quietly burnt and the police quietly ignored it.Mexicanpete said:
That's a little like claiming the attempted torching of the Holiday Inn Express in Rotherham was largely peaceful.Sandpit said:
Just as well that Trump called for a peaceful demonstration then, as opposed to storming the Capitol.eristdoof said:
They certainly would blame the Tories if the Tory leader encouraged Tommy Robinson's crowd to go and storm the HoC.Sandpit said:
He’s the American version of Tommy Robinson. No-one in the UK would blame the Tories if they held a rally where they called for a peaceful protest, but a few Tommys turned up and started a fight.kamski said:
As a PB thickie I just trying to understand what you meant by a 'disaffected, marginalised community'. The first person on a list of those convicted after January 6th is a guy called Henry Tarrio - a one-time chairman of the Proud Boys.TOPPING said:
It was political expression (as were the 2011 riots, as were the Hartlepool riots) of a disaffected, marginalised community.TheScreamingEagles said:
I am sure you would have excused the Beer Hall Putsch.TOPPING said:
It's America ffs. How many people die or are injured in a normal day in Ohio vs Hartlepool.TheScreamingEagles said:
How many people died or were injured when Otis Ferry and his friends invaded the Commons?TOPPING said:
Weak. It wasn't an armed insurrection. It was a bunch of no-hopers (there's a clue in there) protesting against government. Pretty inefficiently and badly managed by the security forces. None of them expected to find themselves indoors that day.TheScreamingEagles said:
The encouragement of the armed insurrection that nearly led to the lynching of his Vice President for starters.TOPPING said:As one who doesn't follow the intricacies US elections (tip: one of them is going to win), but doesn't like the PB Guardian-adjacent bien pensant dismissal of Trump supporters, can I ask those who know (ie you lot) what Trump would do in office that would be "frankly very scary" and what he did last time that was "frankly very scary".
He waited hours to respond.
That’s for starters.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010tff is pretty good about it.
Just like Otis Ferry storming the HoC but more American.
The last place I would expect that concept to be understood is on PB and the last people I would expect to understand it are well paid lawyers working in the financial services industry in the UK who were bought houses by their parents at an early age.
This is what Wikipedia has to say:
"In 2004, when he was 20 years old, Tarrio was convicted of theft. He was sentenced to community service and three years of probation and was ordered to pay restitution. After 2004, Tarrio relocated to a small town in North Florida to run a poultry farm. He later returned to Miami. He has also founded a security equipment installation firm and another firm providing GPS tracking for companies.
In 2012, Tarrio was indicted for his role in a scheme to rebrand and resell stolen diabetic test strips. After being charged, Tarrio cooperated with investigators, helping them prosecute more than a dozen others. In 2013, Tarrio was sentenced to 30 months (of which he served 16) in federal prison.
Between 2012 and 2014 Tarrio was an informant to both federal and local law enforcement; in a 2014 federal court hearing, Tarrio's lawyer said that Tarrio had been a "prolific" cooperator who had assisted the government in the investigation and prosecution of more than twelve people in cases involving anabolic steroids, gambling, and human smuggling; had helped identify three "grow houses" where marijuana was cultivated; and had repeatedly worked undercover to aid in investigations. Tarrio denied working undercover or cooperating with prosecutions, but the court transcript contradicted the denial, and the former federal prosecutor in the proceeding against Tarrio confirmed that he cooperated. Tarrio's role as an informant was first made public in January 2021, after Reuters obtained the court records and interviewed investigators and lawyers involved in the case."
I suppose failed criminals turned informants are members of a 'disaffected, marginalised community' so you're right.
Darn those meddling forces of law and order, eh?0 -
Rather than banning smoking, Starmer should turn his attention to banning all discussion of 'cash' on PB, for the greater good.3
-
I'm curious as to whether we will get legalised Mary Jane, but it will be legal or illegal to smoke it?Eabhal said:
We might be at a tipping point where it's a positive for some pubs - I refuse to sit in a beer garden if I'll be downwind from a smoker. Ruins my pint.Sandpit said:
Hospitality venues also spent millions, collectively in the billions, adapting their businesses to the original indoor smoking ban.numbertwelve said:
I don’t actually have a problem with the government seeking to, over time, phase out smoking. I’m an ex smoker myself, and I have little love of the habit.MattW said:
Since smoking costs the NHS several billion a year, and we are all concerned about the cost of the NHS, to curb a habit that hardly anyone wants to have once they become established in it seems a thoroughly rational step to take.numbertwelve said:Starmer seems to confirm the reports they’re looking at tightening the smoking ban.
Is anyone else getting increasingly bemused that, despite the state of the country, the government is deciding to spend its hard-won political capital on issues like this?
It's a bit difficult to complain about Mr Starmer's applying restrictions as some sort of negative narrative, when the previous lot were committed to implementing a total ban on selling them identified by age group - a kind of smoking apartheid.
Not that that will stop the Telegrunt and the rest of that tendency groping around for mud to sling tactically, of course.
The name of the game is to continue to reduce and eventually stop smoking, and that is a desirable objective. The UK has done fairly well in reducing smoking so far - why not continue?
Do we have polls on this - both the Rishi Sunk version, and the Keir Starmer version, based on full information?
There is however a proportionate and measured way of doing so. In some ways, the phased-in banning proposed by age, whilst I fear unworkable, is a smart one. A big bang approach of banning in outdoor areas for all strikes me as being on the wrong side of this approach, because it once again causes problems for our struggling hospitality industry that they could really do without at the moment.
I am also rather cynical that banning it in more places is going to actually prevent take up. It will just mean people are more likely to stay at home.
While the original indoor ban was justifiable on the grounds of second-hand smoke to staff and other customers, albeit with some poor implementation such as mandating churches put up no smoking signs, extending a ban to outdoor areas makes little sense other than as a further example of creeping authoritarianism from the government and civil service.0
