I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
Church's shoes are an absolute bargain, when you consider that they will refresh them for a very reasonable sum. Some of my pairs are 15 years old, and look as good as new.
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
If you go to the M&S Outlet at Cheshire Oaks (other brands and locations are available) you could get that full wardrobe for about two zeros fewer on your price tag.
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
If you go to the M&S Outlet at Cheshire Oaks (other brands and locations are available) you could get that full wardrobe for about two zeros fewer on your price tag.
Happy to help.
The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that’d still be keeping his feet dry in ten years’ time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
(Practchett blatantly stole the example from Dorothy L Sayers' Murder Must Advertise, but he also put it better)
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
If you go to the M&S Outlet at Cheshire Oaks (other brands and locations are available) you could get that full wardrobe for about two zeros fewer on your price tag.
Happy to help.
The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that’d still be keeping his feet dry in ten years’ time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
(Practchett blatantly stole the example from Dorothy L Sayers' Murder Must Advertise, but he also put it better)
While that is true of many things, I do not believe it holds true of suits. I have never had a pair of trousers last 300 wears. (I havr fairly thick thighs and they wear out where they rub together.)
Just listened to the Sky paper review and Zoe Williams of the Guardian is simply not holding back on attacking Starmer and even the cabinet on their freebies and hypocrisy
I really find it surreal that the Guardian seem to be leading the attack on a labour government and forcefully
Just listened to the Sky paper review and Zoe Williams of the Guardian is simply not holding back on attacking Starmer and even the cabinet on their freebies and hypocrisy
I really find it surreal that the Guardian seem to be leading the attack on a labour government and forcefully
Why ?
Join the dots. Someone is feeling very wronged, and it is personal
Who, here, would begrudge the First Lord of the Treasury 100 pairs of silk-cashmere socks at £450 a pair? Fair dos, he has a hard job, this is just petty quibbling now. Fair dos
It's the politics of envy.
We saw it when Sunak used his own money to buy expensive fashion choices.
You mean he has more money than sense?
More politics of envy.
Indeed.It’s refreshing that we have a PM and First Lady that look smart on the world stage.
Labour donor gives a clothing allowance to Labour politicians. So what?
I thought "there is no money left"...
You do realise that Labour’s donations aren’t taxpayers’ money? I mean if you don’t realise that then you are no different to most PBers and 70% of Joe Public TBF.
I believe that you work in finance
You will understand there is a reason why compliance bans gifts from people who may benefit from your decisions
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
If you go to the M&S Outlet at Cheshire Oaks (other brands and locations are available) you could get that full wardrobe for about two zeros fewer on your price tag.
Happy to help.
The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that’d still be keeping his feet dry in ten years’ time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
(Practchett blatantly stole the example from Dorothy L Sayers' Murder Must Advertise, but he also put it better)
Which is why I suggested M&S and not Primark.
There's only so much durability that comes from quality and M&S is reasonable quality not cheap tat.
Buy from Primark and things can fall very rapidly, that is disposable.
Spending £32k on "basics" is because you can because money is no object, not because its a wise investment.
I mean who here hasn’t gone into primark for some essentials, bought a couple of pairs of socks, maybe a hoodie, then 400 tee shirts and then seventy three million three thousand two hundred and eight bobble hats, and suddenly realised you’ve overshot your limited £32,000 budget of free money given you by a man who wants nothing in return for it and also insists on you using his penthouse all the time which you then pretend is your own home during lockdown on TV
That could happen to anyone. Fair dos
I don't think I've spent 10% of that on clothes/shoes in my entire life.
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
Church's shoes are an absolute bargain, when you consider that they will refresh them for a very reasonable sum. Some of my pairs are 15 years old, and look as good as new.
"Some" of my pairs? I know I have developed this theme before but a real man needs three pairs of shoes: - work/wedding - not work - gardening (Though you can add on as many specialist shoes for specific sports that you need.)
Admittedly, this is a standard I fail to live up to. But not by much. Dr. Martens serve most purposes. (But even these wear oit morr quickly than you'd expect.)
I'm amused by his "the rest of us" as if he were an Amazon warehouseman or a supermarket checkout worker. Rather than a KC.
Though for this purpose, Jolyon is more like us than he is like them. The gap from a millionaire to a billionaire is proportionately the same as the gap from a millionaire to a thousandaire.
(Various things follow from this. One is that, if you want to financially motivate people who already have a lot of money, you need a simply enormous sum of cash to do it. I don't know if anyone has done the experiments, but I suspect it's more exponential than linear.
The other is lifestylegate, if we can call it that. No question that the Starmers are very comfortably off in the grand scheme of things. But let's say they are in the 1 percent; there are bits of the expectation of Prime Ministers that are more the 0.1 percent. Boris had much the same problem, made worse by his shambolic private life.
None of this goes against the observation that JM is a pompous nitwit a lot of the time.)
Just listened to the Sky paper review and Zoe Williams of the Guardian is simply not holding back on attacking Starmer and even the cabinet on their freebies and hypocrisy
I really find it surreal that the Guardian seem to be leading the attack on a labour government and forcefully
Why ?
Join the dots. Someone is feeling very wronged, and it is personal
This is a slow motion assassination
Corbynites dream of ousting Starmer, like the Livingstone coup against Andrew McIntosh at the GLC in 1981?
Starmer has been given THIRTY TWO THOUSAND POUNDS to spend on... clothes
Is that even possible? Once you've got two Savile Row suits and two pairs of Lobbs, you've still got about £20k left
If you have 5 suits (10 trousers) the rotation pattern means they individually last 12-14 years. Which makes them good value
Double trousers is a must.
I am so out of the loop I don't even know what 'double trousers' are. Is this a public school thing?
From the context, my inference is nothing more complicated than 'wearing two pairs of trousers at once'.
Such extravagance. I'm beginning to feel like I'm an extra on the set of Sir Henry at Rawlinson End who comes to a sticky end due to... the trouser thing.
Just listened to the Sky paper review and Zoe Williams of the Guardian is simply not holding back on attacking Starmer and even the cabinet on their freebies and hypocrisy
I really find it surreal that the Guardian seem to be leading the attack on a labour government and forcefully
Why ?
Join the dots. Someone is feeling very wronged, and it is personal
This is a slow motion assassination
Corbynites dream of ousting Starmer, like the Livingstone coup against Andrew McIntosh at the GLC in 1981?
Or they all send their children to private school?
Or the prefer it when their parents use their winter fuel allowance to spend January somewere hot and abroad?
Or it's a proxy for the internal war about trans at Guardian Towers? I forget who is on which side on that one.
Or it's just lefties doing what they do, which is fighting people who should be allies but disagree with them.
Idaho Statesman (via Seattle Times) - Does Trump want to turn ‘giant faucet’ to send Columbia River water to CA? What he said
The Columbia River could be the answer to California’s water problems, former President Donald Trump seemed to say at a news conference near Los Angeles.
“I’m going to give you more water than almost anyone has,” he said. There would be plenty of water for lawns at big houses in Los Angeles and Beverly Hills, for farmers and to dampen the hills where forest fires burn, he said.
He started talking about water when he was asked a question about California wildfires raging nearby, an hour into a press conference at one of his golf courses earlier this month.
“You have millions of gallons of water pouring down from the Northwest, the snow caps and Canada,” he said.
All it would take is turning “essentially a very large faucet,” he said.
“It takes one day to turn it, it’s massive,” he said. “It’s as big as a wall, as that building right there behind you.” . . . .
. . . Canadian news media were not impressed.
The Columbia River flows from Canada south into Washington, where it is joined by water from the Snake River in Eastern Washington near the Tri-Cities to flow into the Pacific Ocean.
The Toronto Star said Trump’s promise “touches on deep-seated anxieties about our southern neighbors muscling their way into our water supply.”
Canada and the United States currently are finalizing a proposal to modernize the 1964 Columbia River Treaty, which has governed hydropower operations and management of flood risks on both sides of the international border. . . .
SSI - The notion of diverting water from the Columbia River to feed the thirst of California agriculture and development is an old one. AND a surefire way to piss off folks across the Pacific Northwest on both sides of the international border.
Am hoping that Trump's latest BS is broadcast freely among MAGA-minded farmers & others in eastern Washington, whose indivual livelihoods and regional economy are based on irrigation by water from the . . . wait for it . . . Columbia River.
I am not a geographer so I am rather confused how this would hurt the Canadians.
If water flows downstream then how does diverting the water downstream affect what happens upstream? Surely its already flowed down before its affected so what difference does it make?
Sure I'm missing something but could someone please explain that? Water isn't flowing upstream into the Canadian Rockies, its flowing down from there.
Because water usage is governed by agreement
Let’s say that the Colorado river is drained dry by Californian lawns. As a result Colorado complains.
Do you think that the President would put pressure on Canada to extract less water themselves?
Idaho Statesman (via Seattle Times) - Does Trump want to turn ‘giant faucet’ to send Columbia River water to CA? What he said
The Columbia River could be the answer to California’s water problems, former President Donald Trump seemed to say at a news conference near Los Angeles.
“I’m going to give you more water than almost anyone has,” he said. There would be plenty of water for lawns at big houses in Los Angeles and Beverly Hills, for farmers and to dampen the hills where forest fires burn, he said.
He started talking about water when he was asked a question about California wildfires raging nearby, an hour into a press conference at one of his golf courses earlier this month.
“You have millions of gallons of water pouring down from the Northwest, the snow caps and Canada,” he said.
All it would take is turning “essentially a very large faucet,” he said.
“It takes one day to turn it, it’s massive,” he said. “It’s as big as a wall, as that building right there behind you.” . . . .
. . . Canadian news media were not impressed.
The Columbia River flows from Canada south into Washington, where it is joined by water from the Snake River in Eastern Washington near the Tri-Cities to flow into the Pacific Ocean.
The Toronto Star said Trump’s promise “touches on deep-seated anxieties about our southern neighbors muscling their way into our water supply.”
Canada and the United States currently are finalizing a proposal to modernize the 1964 Columbia River Treaty, which has governed hydropower operations and management of flood risks on both sides of the international border. . . .
SSI - The notion of diverting water from the Columbia River to feed the thirst of California agriculture and development is an old one. AND a surefire way to piss off folks across the Pacific Northwest on both sides of the international border.
Am hoping that Trump's latest BS is broadcast freely among MAGA-minded farmers & others in eastern Washington, whose indivual livelihoods and regional economy are based on irrigation by water from the . . . wait for it . . . Columbia River.
I am not a geographer so I am rather confused how this would hurt the Canadians.
If water flows downstream then how does diverting the water downstream affect what happens upstream? Surely its already flowed down before its affected so what difference does it make?
Sure I'm missing something but could someone please explain that? Water isn't flowing upstream into the Canadian Rockies, its flowing down from there.
Because water usage is governed by agreement
Let’s say that the Colorado river is drained dry by Californian lawns. As a result Colorado complains.
Do you think that the President would put pressure on Canada to extract less water themselves?
But Canada's upstream so they get first dibs on the water before it flows downstream don't they?
So isn't it in America's best interests to maintain the agreement, more than Canada's? If America breaks the agreement then nothing stops Canada taking whatever water they want and whatever's left will flow down to California.
I can understand why Colorado will be pissed off if this happens far more than Canada.
I mean who here hasn’t gone into primark for some essentials, bought a couple of pairs of socks, maybe a hoodie, then 400 tee shirts and then seventy three million three thousand two hundred and eight bobble hats, and suddenly realised you’ve overshot your limited £32,000 budget of free money given you by a man who wants nothing in return for it and also insists on you using his penthouse all the time which you then pretend is your own home during lockdown on TV
That could happen to anyone. Fair dos
Two points. One is that primark is not really the best place for bobble hats. I recommend a particular very provincial northern Christmas bazaar where ladies who knit them for seafarers (it's the seafaring equivalent of knitting blanket squares for randomers, or soft toys for Great Ormond Street) sell their surplus in a good cause. I buy several at a time in order to fund the (excellent non seafaring) cause of the bazaar, and then throw them away. All parties satisfied.
If you are in mid pacific and spot a Bangladeshi seafarer wearing a bobble hat with a unicorn knitted into it, you will know where it came from. I sometimes idly wonder what seafarer support organisations do with several million of them.
Secondly, the freebie stuff when combined with the WFA thing just resonates slightly with that memorable sound of corks popping and tinkling glasses drowning out the lonelier sound of the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral. And our beloved queen looking like every widow in Covid times and being loyal and exemplary and brave. Which did for Boris and co. It won't quite do.
There is a tribe in northern Guinea Bissau that wears red bobble hats. Bizarre but true. Seen them myself.
I reckon I could source 73,003,208 bobble hats there at a GREAT price. Third poorest country on Earth. Must be able to gouge them on price, surely?
I mean who here hasn’t gone into primark for some essentials, bought a couple of pairs of socks, maybe a hoodie, then 400 tee shirts and then seventy three million three thousand two hundred and eight bobble hats, and suddenly realised you’ve overshot your limited £32,000 budget of free money given you by a man who wants nothing in return for it and also insists on you using his penthouse all the time which you then pretend is your own home during lockdown on TV
That could happen to anyone. Fair dos
Two points. One is that primark is not really the best place for bobble hats. I recommend a particular very provincial northern Christmas bazaar where ladies who knit them for seafarers (it's the seafaring equivalent of knitting blanket squares for randomers, or soft toys for Great Ormond Street) sell their surplus in a good cause. I buy several at a time in order to fund the (excellent non seafaring) cause of the bazaar, and then throw them away. All parties satisfied.
If you are in mid pacific and spot a Bangladeshi seafarer wearing a bobble hat with a unicorn knitted into it, you will know where it came from. I sometimes idly wonder what seafarer support organisations do with several million of them.
Secondly, the freebie stuff when combined with the WFA thing just resonates slightly with that memorable sound of corks popping and tinkling glasses drowning out the lonelier sound of the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral. And our beloved queen looking like every widow in Covid times and being loyal and exemplary and brave. Which did for Boris and co. It won't quite do.
There is a tribe in northern Guinea Bissau that wears red bobble hats. Bizarre but true. Seen them myself.
I reckon I could source 73,003,208 bobble hats there at a GREAT price.
Just listened to the Sky paper review and Zoe Williams of the Guardian is simply not holding back on attacking Starmer and even the cabinet on their freebies and hypocrisy
I really find it surreal that the Guardian seem to be leading the attack on a labour government and forcefully
Why ?
It is interesting.
I see Mr Forensic Lawyer messed up his paperwork again.
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
If you go to the M&S Outlet at Cheshire Oaks (other brands and locations are available) you could get that full wardrobe for about two zeros fewer on your price tag.
Happy to help.
The M&S Suit section usually have a personal shopper (look at the badges), so if you can gain the attention of one they can help you choose the best fitting one. They come in from less than £200
Clarks shoe shops are common and can supply you with footwear for any occasion. If you want to push the boat out, go to Timpsons they will tell you which brands can be easily repaired and then get a pair. Again, much less than £200.
I mean who here hasn’t gone into primark for some essentials, bought a couple of pairs of socks, maybe a hoodie, then 400 tee shirts and then seventy three million three thousand two hundred and eight bobble hats, and suddenly realised you’ve overshot your limited £32,000 budget of free money given you by a man who wants nothing in return for it and also insists on you using his penthouse all the time which you then pretend is your own home during lockdown on TV
That could happen to anyone. Fair dos
Two points. One is that primark is not really the best place for bobble hats. I recommend a particular very provincial northern Christmas bazaar where ladies who knit them for seafarers (it's the seafaring equivalent of knitting blanket squares for randomers, or soft toys for Great Ormond Street) sell their surplus in a good cause. I buy several at a time in order to fund the (excellent non seafaring) cause of the bazaar, and then throw them away. All parties satisfied.
If you are in mid pacific and spot a Bangladeshi seafarer wearing a bobble hat with a unicorn knitted into it, you will know where it came from. I sometimes idly wonder what seafarer support organisations do with several million of them.
Secondly, the freebie stuff when combined with the WFA thing just resonates slightly with that memorable sound of corks popping and tinkling glasses drowning out the lonelier sound of the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral. And our beloved queen looking like every widow in Covid times and being loyal and exemplary and brave. Which did for Boris and co. It won't quite do.
There is a tribe in northern Guinea Bissau that wears red bobble hats. Bizarre but true. Seen them myself.
I reckon I could source 73,003,208 bobble hats there at a GREAT price. Third poorest country on Earth. Must be able to gouge them on price, surely?
Image of former President Kumba Yala of Guinea Bissau, modelling said red bobble hat:
Just listened to the Sky paper review and Zoe Williams of the Guardian is simply not holding back on attacking Starmer and even the cabinet on their freebies and hypocrisy
I really find it surreal that the Guardian seem to be leading the attack on a labour government and forcefully
Why ?
It is interesting.
I see Mr Forensic Lawyer messed up his paperwork again.
The SNP have officially written to the Westminster Standards Commissioner and the Independent Adviser on Minister's interests urging them to launch an investigation into gifts and hospitality provided by Lord Waheed Alli to Sir Keir Starmer and other top Labour ministers
In the letter MP Brendan O' Hara suggested that Labour’s freebies and donations scandal have become Sir Keir’s version of the expenses scandal
I thought this was inevitable from someone sooner or later
Starmer has been given THIRTY TWO THOUSAND POUNDS to spend on... clothes
Is that even possible? Once you've got two Savile Row suits and two pairs of Lobbs, you've still got about £20k left
If you have 5 suits (10 trousers) the rotation pattern means they individually last 12-14 years. Which makes them good value
Double trousers is a must.
I am so out of the loop I don't even know what 'double trousers' are. Is this a public school thing?
When you buy a suit for work, in the city, the suit jacket usually ends up on the back of chair/hanger at the start of the day.
So the trousers wear out faster than the jacket.
So many suits at the higher end, come with the option of more than one pair of trousers.
I went to the most extreme on this - had a suit made with 5 pairs of trousers. Between that and other suits, I was able to wear a different pair of trousers each day for two weeks.
The result is that suits I bought a decade ago are still sharp.
Mind you, work went smart casual. So they are all in moth proof dust jackets now, deep in the wardrobe.
Do we think hezabollah might have a leak problem? Israels seems to always know where the senior people are.
Mossad's successes in Palestine seem to rely on a bunch of Palestinians who really, really hate Hamas. Which is understandable given little much Hamas appear to care for the Palestinian people, but still remarkably brave. I wonder if the same is true in Lebanon with Hezbollah.
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
You may refresh your understanding of the price of churches! Loake 1880s are 5 for 1500 these days.
Churches are owned by Prada, with all the marketing might and pricing nous that ensures.
Cheaney and Trickers are points of value.
Yes. My one clothing indulgence is Jermyn Street shoes. You can skimp on everything else, and I seldom need a suit, but shoes? Yes
Great shoes are now easily north of £400. Ouch
Fun fact. Terence Stamp was not a lavish man, but his one extravagance was hand-made shoes. And he had a lot.
Then he made Prescilla, Queen of the Desert. The budget was tiny. He spent the shoot with his feet crammed into ill-fitting camp footwear.
And at the end of filming, none of his hand-made shoes would fit.
He told me that story himself. Over dinner. In Cannes.
Nice one!
I have an excellent Cannes story, too. We are past the lagershed....
Remember a famous husky voiced TV presenter of yore. now of a certain age, but in her 20s dazzlingly beautiful. Really really stunning, 9/10? Yes, her
I joined her in Cannes many years ago - when she was about 27 - where she was presenting for TV, interviewing the stars. I had nothing much to do but loaf around her luxe suite. But then she got some spare time and we went for a trip to the little islands off Cannes, where..... I fucked her from behind over an altar in a disused monastery (she was quite sub)
Two hours after THAT I saw her on live TV, not a hair out of place, innocent and freshly made-up, you would never have guessed. Ah, Sigh
She dumped me for George Clooney. Another true story. It made being dumped a bit easier to bear
Do we think hezabollah might have a leak problem? Israels seems to always know where the senior people are.
The Israelis have hummint in every opponent organisation. Always have.
They are fucking geniuses at that. And it adds to the fear of them - and paranoia among their enemies.
Sure....but Hezabollah have been losing top people faster than OpenAI....9 days and if they got the Grand Wizard, that is literally the top 3 levels of command gone.
My biggest extravagance was a Valentino coat I bought in 1980. I was a student and it cost £199. Once I tried it on, I had to buy it. Even though I couldn't remotely afford it.
Fast forward 44 years. I still wear that coat. It still makes me look a million dollars. It hasn't worn. It hasn't dated.
Couple of years ago I was getting off the train at Totnes in said coat and a hat I have had damn near as long. A distinguished Indian gentleman was getting off at Totnes. He looked me up and down. "Love the hat. But - oh, that coat!"
Just listened to the Sky paper review and Zoe Williams of the Guardian is simply not holding back on attacking Starmer and even the cabinet on their freebies and hypocrisy
I really find it surreal that the Guardian seem to be leading the attack on a labour government and forcefully
Just listened to the Sky paper review and Zoe Williams of the Guardian is simply not holding back on attacking Starmer and even the cabinet on their freebies and hypocrisy
I really find it surreal that the Guardian seem to be leading the attack on a labour government and forcefully
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
You may refresh your understanding of the price of churches! Loake 1880s are 5 for 1500 these days.
Churches are owned by Prada, with all the marketing might and pricing nous that ensures.
Cheaney and Trickers are points of value.
Yes. My one clothing indulgence is Jermyn Street shoes. You can skimp on everything else, and I seldom need a suit, but shoes? Yes
Great shoes are now easily north of £400. Ouch
Fun fact. Terence Stamp was not a lavish man, but his one extravagance was hand-made shoes. And he had a lot.
Then he made Prescilla, Queen of the Desert. The budget was tiny. He spent the shoot with his feet crammed into ill-fitting camp footwear.
And at the end of filming, none of his hand-made shoes would fit.
He told me that story himself. Over dinner. In Cannes.
Nice one!
I have an excellent Cannes story, too. We are past the lagershed....
Remember a famous husky voiced TV presenter of yore. now of a certain age, but in her 20s dazzlingly beautiful. Really really stunning, 9/10? Yes, her
I joined her in Cannes many years ago - when she was about 27 - where she was presenting for TV, interviewing the stars. I had nothing much to do but loaf around her luxe suite. But then she got some spare time and we went for a trip to the little islands off Cannes, where..... I fucked her from behind over an altar in a disused monastery (she was quite sub)
Two hours after THAT I saw her on live TV, not a hair out of place, innocent and freshly made-up, you would never have guessed. Ah, Sigh
She dumped me for George Clooney. Another true story. It made being dumped a bit easier to bear
Starmer has been given THIRTY TWO THOUSAND POUNDS to spend on... clothes
Is that even possible? Once you've got two Savile Row suits and two pairs of Lobbs, you've still got about £20k left
If you have 5 suits (10 trousers) the rotation pattern means they individually last 12-14 years. Which makes them good value
Double trousers is a must.
I am so out of the loop I don't even know what 'double trousers' are. Is this a public school thing?
When you buy a suit for work, in the city, the suit jacket usually ends up on the back of chair/hanger at the start of the day.
So the trousers wear out faster than the jacket.
So many suits at the higher end, come with the option of more than one pair of trousers.
I went to the most extreme on this - had a suit made with 5 pairs of trousers. Between that and other suits, I was able to wear a different pair of trousers each day for two weeks.
The result is that suits I bought a decade ago are still sharp.
Mind you, work went smart casual. So they are all in moth proof dust jackets now, deep in the wardrobe.
And that, gentlemen, is the Whig theory of history for work clothes.
My biggest extravagance was a Valentino coat I bought in 1980. I was a student and it cost £199. Once I tried it on, I had to buy it. Even though I couldn't remotely afford it.
Fast forward 44 years. I still wear that coat. It still makes me look a million dollars. It hasn't worn. It hasn't dated.
Couple of years ago I was getting off the train at Totnes in said coat and a hat I have had damn near as long. A distinguished Indian gentleman was getting off at Totnes. He looked me up and down. "Love the hat. But - oh, that coat!"
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
You may refresh your understanding of the price of churches! Loake 1880s are 5 for 1500 these days.
Churches are owned by Prada, with all the marketing might and pricing nous that ensures.
Cheaney and Trickers are points of value.
Yes. My one clothing indulgence is Jermyn Street shoes. You can skimp on everything else, and I seldom need a suit, but shoes? Yes
Great shoes are now easily north of £400. Ouch
Fun fact. Terence Stamp was not a lavish man, but his one extravagance was hand-made shoes. And he had a lot.
Then he made Prescilla, Queen of the Desert. The budget was tiny. He spent the shoot with his feet crammed into ill-fitting camp footwear.
And at the end of filming, none of his hand-made shoes would fit.
He told me that story himself. Over dinner. In Cannes.
Nice one!
I have an excellent Cannes story, too. We are past the lagershed....
Remember a famous husky voiced TV presenter of yore. now of a certain age, but in her 20s dazzlingly beautiful. Really really stunning, 9/10? Yes, her
I joined her in Cannes many years ago - when she was about 27 - where she was presenting for TV, interviewing the stars. I had nothing much to do but loaf around her luxe suite. But then she got some spare time and we went for a trip to the little islands off Cannes, where..... I fucked her from behind over an altar in a disused monastery (she was quite sub)
Two hours after THAT I saw her on live TV, not a hair out of place, innocent and freshly made-up, you would never have guessed. Ah, Sigh
She dumped me for George Clooney. Another true story. It made being dumped a bit easier to bear
Bravo! A life well lived...
It is quite the story. Going in the memoirs
I am trying to work out where it was (the memory only occasionally returns, I have a lot of anecdotes). It must have been one of these two islands
One has a functioning monastery, but this place was a semi-ruin, otherwise it would have been impossible to lift up her skimpy dress and fuck her over the altar, practically speaking. But I remember we were quick, rough and urgent, so people were nearby...... So maybe it is the OTHER island?
Maybe there is a plaque there, now. I should go check
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
You may refresh your understanding of the price of churches! Loake 1880s are 5 for 1500 these days.
Churches are owned by Prada, with all the marketing might and pricing nous that ensures.
Cheaney and Trickers are points of value.
Yes. My one clothing indulgence is Jermyn Street shoes. You can skimp on everything else, and I seldom need a suit, but shoes? Yes
Great shoes are now easily north of £400. Ouch
Fun fact. Terence Stamp was not a lavish man, but his one extravagance was hand-made shoes. And he had a lot.
Then he made Prescilla, Queen of the Desert. The budget was tiny. He spent the shoot with his feet crammed into ill-fitting camp footwear.
And at the end of filming, none of his hand-made shoes would fit.
He told me that story himself. Over dinner. In Cannes.
Nice one!
I have an excellent Cannes story, too. We are past the lagershed....
Remember a famous husky voiced TV presenter of yore. now of a certain age, but in her 20s dazzlingly beautiful. Really really stunning, 9/10? Yes, her
I joined her in Cannes many years ago - when she was about 27 - where she was presenting for TV, interviewing the stars. I had nothing much to do but loaf around her luxe suite. But then she got some spare time and we went for a trip to the little islands off Cannes, where..... I fucked her from behind over an altar in a disused monastery (she was quite sub)
Two hours after THAT I saw her on live TV, not a hair out of place, innocent and freshly made-up, you would never have guessed. Ah, Sigh
She dumped me for George Clooney. Another true story. It made being dumped a bit easier to bear
Bravo! A life well lived...
It is quite the story. Going in the memoirs
I am trying to work out where it was (the memory only occasionally returns, I have a lot of anecdotes). It must have been one of these two islands
One has a functioning monastery, but this place was a semi-ruin, otherwise it would have been impossible to lift up her skimpy dress and fuck her over the altar, practically speaking. But I remember we were quick, rough and urgent, so people were nearby...... So maybe it is the OTHER island?
Maybe there is a plaque there, now. I should go check
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
You may refresh your understanding of the price of churches! Loake 1880s are 5 for 1500 these days.
Churches are owned by Prada, with all the marketing might and pricing nous that ensures.
Cheaney and Trickers are points of value.
Yes. My one clothing indulgence is Jermyn Street shoes. You can skimp on everything else, and I seldom need a suit, but shoes? Yes
Great shoes are now easily north of £400. Ouch
Fun fact. Terence Stamp was not a lavish man, but his one extravagance was hand-made shoes. And he had a lot.
Then he made Prescilla, Queen of the Desert. The budget was tiny. He spent the shoot with his feet crammed into ill-fitting camp footwear.
And at the end of filming, none of his hand-made shoes would fit.
He told me that story himself. Over dinner. In Cannes.
Nice one!
I have an excellent Cannes story, too. We are past the lagershed....
Remember a famous husky voiced TV presenter of yore. now of a certain age, but in her 20s dazzlingly beautiful. Really really stunning, 9/10? Yes, her
I joined her in Cannes many years ago - when she was about 27 - where she was presenting for TV, interviewing the stars. I had nothing much to do but loaf around her luxe suite. But then she got some spare time and we went for a trip to the little islands off Cannes, where..... I fucked her from behind over an altar in a disused monastery (she was quite sub)
Two hours after THAT I saw her on live TV, not a hair out of place, innocent and freshly made-up, you would never have guessed. Ah, Sigh
She dumped me for George Clooney. Another true story. It made being dumped a bit easier to bear
I must have Slow Processing Disorder because I am finding it hard to work out how Sir Sheer Wanker spent £32,000 on clothes
5 x suits, 10 trousers = £25,000 5 pairs of Churches = £1,500 10 shirts = £1,500 1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
You may refresh your understanding of the price of churches! Loake 1880s are 5 for 1500 these days.
Churches are owned by Prada, with all the marketing might and pricing nous that ensures.
Cheaney and Trickers are points of value.
Yes. My one clothing indulgence is Jermyn Street shoes. You can skimp on everything else, and I seldom need a suit, but shoes? Yes
Great shoes are now easily north of £400. Ouch
Fun fact. Terence Stamp was not a lavish man, but his one extravagance was hand-made shoes. And he had a lot.
Then he made Prescilla, Queen of the Desert. The budget was tiny. He spent the shoot with his feet crammed into ill-fitting camp footwear.
And at the end of filming, none of his hand-made shoes would fit.
He told me that story himself. Over dinner. In Cannes.
Nice one!
I have an excellent Cannes story, too. We are past the lagershed....
Remember a famous husky voiced TV presenter of yore. now of a certain age, but in her 20s dazzlingly beautiful. Really really stunning, 9/10? Yes, her
I joined her in Cannes many years ago - when she was about 27 - where she was presenting for TV, interviewing the stars. I had nothing much to do but loaf around her luxe suite. But then she got some spare time and we went for a trip to the little islands off Cannes, where..... I fucked her from behind over an altar in a disused monastery (she was quite sub)
Two hours after THAT I saw her on live TV, not a hair out of place, innocent and freshly made-up, you would never have guessed. Ah, Sigh
She dumped me for George Clooney. Another true story. It made being dumped a bit easier to bear
Bravo! A life well lived...
It is quite the story. Going in the memoirs
I am trying to work out where it was (the memory only occasionally returns, I have a lot of anecdotes). It must have been one of these two islands
One has a functioning monastery, but this place was a semi-ruin, otherwise it would have been impossible to lift up her skimpy dress and fuck her over the altar, practically speaking. But I remember we were quick, rough and urgent, so people were nearby...... So maybe it is the OTHER island?
Maybe there is a plaque there, now. I should go check
A blue one, presumably.
I might offer tours. "Unusual places where I fucked really hot women". There are a few standouts - a famous mountain in Bavaria, behind some bins in Palermo, on a sacred cliff in Oman - but it could be construed as a tad narcissistic or in bad taste? Need feedback
My biggest extravagance was a Valentino coat I bought in 1980. I was a student and it cost £199. Once I tried it on, I had to buy it. Even though I couldn't remotely afford it.
Fast forward 44 years. I still wear that coat. It still makes me look a million dollars. It hasn't worn. It hasn't dated.
Couple of years ago I was getting off the train at Totnes in said coat and a hat I have had damn near as long. A distinguished Indian gentleman was getting off at Totnes. He looked me up and down. "Love the hat. But - oh, that coat!"
Do we think hezabollah might have a leak problem? Israels seems to always know where the senior people are.
The Israelis have hummint in every opponent organisation. Always have.
They are fucking geniuses at that. And it adds to the fear of them - and paranoia among their enemies.
The obvious question is do Hezbullah have anyone in Israeli intelligence? Probably not. That's the difference.
One of the interesting advantages Mossad has many Jews moved to Israel come from very disparate backgrounds, so they can easily embed themselves in many other countries / cultures, and the fact they moved to Israel in the first place makes it highly likely they are fully onboard the zionist project.
Asheville was seriously bad this morning; the raging wind had woken me early, and after breakfast as soon as service started (kudos to the hotel staff who all made it in), I had a stick or twist decision. Stick was tempting, with whole tree branches flying down the main street, but seeing that the forecast was for worse still to come, chose twist. In town, trees littered the streets, most of the traffic lights were out, and some hotel guests who had unwisely used the lift were trapped inside.
Ninety miles east, the near-hurricane conditions subsided into just ordinary, terrible, weather, but it took three hours to do those ninety miles. The lifetime worst conditions in which I have ever driven. Huge admiration for all the NC fire crews out there trying to clear multiple tree falls from the I40, while new trees were still coming down, with the road littered with cars that had failed such a stern test. Fortunately my hire car, although not robust by US standards, is almost new, and got me through. All the while, both my mobile and the car radio were being overridden with government all-channel warnings: three for Tornadoes, four for floods, two for high winds. Remarkable that they can transmit all that through your phone, in such circumstances.
Sadly, poor Asheville faces a catastrophe once all that water comes down from the mountains into the town; they are expecting a one-in-a-thousand year flooding disaster by the weekend. So sad, for such a great town.
After nine hours in the car, me and the dog are now holed up in a houseboat in Virginia, on one of the rivers that will eventually receive all that water, down from the hills. The owner assures me that the worst that will happen is that we’ll only be able to get off the boat six hours in every twelve. Let’s hope he knows his stuff.
Asheville was seriously bad this morning; the raging wind had woken me early, and after breakfast as soon as service started (kudos to the hotel staff who all made it in), I had a stick or twist decision. Stick was tempting, with whole tree branches flying down the main street, but seeing that the forecast was for worse still to come, chose twist. In town, trees littered the streets, most of the traffic lights were out, and some hotel guests who had unwisely used the lift were trapped inside.
Ninety miles east, the near-hurricane conditions subsided into just ordinary, terrible, weather, but it took three hours to do those ninety miles. The lifetime worst conditions in which I have ever driven. Huge admiration for all the NC fire crews out there trying to clear multiple tree falls from the I40, while new trees were still coming down, with the road littered with cars that had failed such a stern test. Fortunately my hire car, although not robust by US standards, is almost new, and got me through. All the while, both my mobile and the car radio were being overridden with government all-channel warnings: three for Tornadoes, four for floods, two for high winds. Remarkable that they can transmit all that through your phone, in such circumstances.
Sadly, poor Asheville faces a catastrophe once all that water comes down from the mountains into the town; they are expecting a one-in-a-thousand year flooding disaster by the weekend. So sad, for such a great town.
After nine hours in the car, me and the dog are now holed up in a houseboat in Virginia, on one of the rivers that will eventually receive all that water, down from the hills. The owner assures me that the worst that will happen is that we’ll only be able to get off the boat six hours in every twelve. Let’s hope he knows his stuff.
IanB2 - Glad to hear that you and the dog are OK, at least for now.
(For those unfamiliar with the route: Interstate 40: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_40 Even-numbered insterstates run mosly east and west, odd-numbered mostly south and north.)
IanB2 - Glad to hear that you and the dog are OK, at least for now.
(For those unfamiliar with the route: Interstate 40: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_40 Even-numbered insterstates run mosly east and west, odd-numbered mostly south and north.)
What I find interesting is that Americans pronounce "route" the British way when you're talking about Route 66, but not otherwise.
IanB2 - Glad to hear that you and the dog are OK, at least for now.
(For those unfamiliar with the route: Interstate 40: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_40 Even-numbered insterstates run mosly east and west, odd-numbered mostly south and north.)
Years ago I flew to Atlanta, where it was 100°F, and immediately started up Route 75 to Chattanooga. At the top of the pass we hit a rainstorm so severe I had to pull off the road for half an hour and wait it out. And this was just an average summer storm, not even dignified by a girl's name. It can get pretty hairy up there even in normal times.
I rarely read novels. Professional deformation. But, my god, “Lincoln in the Bardo” - Booker Prizewinner 2017 - is just so obviously mediocre. Not bad, as such. But like a shoddy chunk of Ulysses that Joyce cast aside. So: really quite poor
Comments
5 pairs of Churches = £1,500
10 shirts = £1,500
1x great coat = £5,000
That’s more than £32,000 on the basics.
but he probably wanted a tux, morning suit and white tie as well.
So I had a suit made with 5 pairs of trousers…. Still got it.
Happy to help.
(Practchett blatantly stole the example from Dorothy L Sayers' Murder Must Advertise, but he also put it better)
I have never had a pair of trousers last 300 wears. (I havr fairly thick thighs and they wear out where they rub together.)
I really find it surreal that the Guardian seem to be leading the attack on a labour government and forcefully
Why ?
This is a slow motion assassination
You will understand there is a reason why compliance bans gifts from people who may benefit from your decisions
There's only so much durability that comes from quality and M&S is reasonable quality not cheap tat.
Buy from Primark and things can fall very rapidly, that is disposable.
Spending £32k on "basics" is because you can because money is no object, not because its a wise investment.
I realise the PM has to look quite dapper - but even at 10x those costs I find it unfathomable.
I know I have developed this theme before but a real man needs three pairs of shoes:
- work/wedding
- not work
- gardening
(Though you can add on as many specialist shoes for specific sports that you need.)
Admittedly, this is a standard I fail to live up to. But not by much. Dr. Martens serve most purposes. (But even these wear oit morr quickly than you'd expect.)
Churches are owned by Prada, with all the marketing might and pricing nous that ensures.
Cheaney and Trickers are points of value.
(Various things follow from this. One is that, if you want to financially motivate people who already have a lot of money, you need a simply enormous sum of cash to do it. I don't know if anyone has done the experiments, but I suspect it's more exponential than linear.
The other is lifestylegate, if we can call it that. No question that the Starmers are very comfortably off in the grand scheme of things. But let's say they are in the 1 percent; there are bits of the expectation of Prime Ministers that are more the 0.1 percent. Boris had much the same problem, made worse by his shambolic private life.
None of this goes against the observation that JM is a pompous nitwit a lot of the time.)
And only 1 shirt to iron each week.
This possibly explains why I work in IT.
Or the prefer it when their parents use their winter fuel allowance to spend January somewere hot and abroad?
Or it's a proxy for the internal war about trans at Guardian Towers? I forget who is on which side on that one.
Or it's just lefties doing what they do, which is fighting people who should be allies but disagree with them.
Let’s say that the Colorado river is drained dry by Californian lawns. As a result Colorado complains.
Do you think that the President would put pressure on Canada to extract less water themselves?
So isn't it in America's best interests to maintain the agreement, more than Canada's? If America breaks the agreement then nothing stops Canada taking whatever water they want and whatever's left will flow down to California.
I can understand why Colorado will be pissed off if this happens far more than Canada.
https://x.com/feedthedrummer/status/1839659021835338040?t=7i-YyECD7sYjfAw-u8zFkQ&s=19
I reckon I could source 73,003,208 bobble hats there at a GREAT price. Third poorest country on Earth. Must be able to gouge them on price, surely?
Given he only does zoom, i just presumed like Hamas leadership that he was safely elsewhere in Syria or Iran.
I see Mr Forensic Lawyer messed up his paperwork again.
Great shoes are now easily north of £400. Ouch
Clarks shoe shops are common and can supply you with footwear for any occasion. If you want to push the boat out, go to Timpsons they will tell you which brands can be easily repaired and then get a pair. Again, much less than £200.
Pffft
https://www.gettyimages.fi/detail/uutiskuva/this-file-picture-shows-former-and-current-candidate-uutiskuva/89236033
In a dark era, seeing so many defeats for Hezbollah has been quite a bright spark going on.
In the letter MP Brendan O' Hara suggested that Labour’s freebies and donations scandal have become Sir Keir’s version of the expenses scandal
I thought this was inevitable from someone sooner or later
So the trousers wear out faster than the jacket.
So many suits at the higher end, come with the option of more than one pair of trousers.
I went to the most extreme on this - had a suit made with 5 pairs of trousers. Between that and other suits, I was able to wear a different pair of trousers each day for two weeks.
The result is that suits I bought a decade ago are still sharp.
Mind you, work went smart casual. So they are all in moth proof dust jackets now, deep in the wardrobe.
Then he made Prescilla, Queen of the Desert. The budget was tiny. He spent the shoot with his feet crammed into ill-fitting camp footwear.
And at the end of filming, none of his hand-made shoes would fit.
He told me that story himself. Over dinner. In Cannes.
They are fucking geniuses at that. And it adds to the fear of them - and paranoia among their enemies.
I have an excellent Cannes story, too. We are past the lagershed....
Remember a famous husky voiced TV presenter of yore. now of a certain age, but in her 20s dazzlingly beautiful. Really really stunning, 9/10? Yes, her
I joined her in Cannes many years ago - when she was about 27 - where she was presenting for TV, interviewing the stars. I had nothing much to do but loaf around her luxe suite. But then she got some spare time and we went for a trip to the little islands off Cannes, where..... I fucked her from behind over an altar in a disused monastery (she was quite sub)
Two hours after THAT I saw her on live TV, not a hair out of place, innocent and freshly made-up, you would never have guessed. Ah, Sigh
She dumped me for George Clooney. Another true story. It made being dumped a bit easier to bear
National Harris 48% Trump 47%
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/24/politics/polls-trump-harris-presidential-election/index.html?iid=cnn_buildContentRecirc_end_recirc
North Carolina Harris 48% Trump 48%
NE02 Harris 53% Trump 42%
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/27/politics/cnn-poll-harris-trump-north-carolina-nebraska/index.html
Fast forward 44 years. I still wear that coat. It still makes me look a million dollars. It hasn't worn. It hasn't dated.
Couple of years ago I was getting off the train at Totnes in said coat and a hat I have had damn near as long. A distinguished Indian gentleman was getting off at Totnes. He looked me up and down. "Love the hat. But - oh, that coat!"
It was Art Malik.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/inflation/inflation-calculator
I am trying to work out where it was (the memory only occasionally returns, I have a lot of anecdotes). It must have been one of these two islands
https://www.cannes.com/en/boating-beaches/the-lerins-islands.html
One has a functioning monastery, but this place was a semi-ruin, otherwise it would have been impossible to lift up her skimpy dress and fuck her over the altar, practically speaking. But I remember we were quick, rough and urgent, so people were nearby...... So maybe it is the OTHER island?
Maybe there is a plaque there, now. I should go check
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Coulee_Dam
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_Valley_Authority
There were similar "failures" in distribution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Electrification_Act
It's my impression, from discussions here, that the rules for UK prime ministers are somewhat loser.
Ninety miles east, the near-hurricane conditions subsided into just ordinary, terrible, weather, but it took three hours to do those ninety miles. The lifetime worst conditions in which I have ever driven. Huge admiration for all the NC fire crews out there trying to clear multiple tree falls from the I40, while new trees were still coming down, with the road littered with cars that had failed such a stern test. Fortunately my hire car, although not robust by US standards, is almost new, and got me through. All the while, both my mobile and the car radio were being overridden with government all-channel warnings: three for Tornadoes, four for floods, two for high winds. Remarkable that they can transmit all that through your phone, in such circumstances.
Sadly, poor Asheville faces a catastrophe once all that water comes down from the mountains into the town; they are expecting a one-in-a-thousand year flooding disaster by the weekend. So sad, for such a great town.
After nine hours in the car, me and the dog are now holed up in a houseboat in Virginia, on one of the rivers that will eventually receive all that water, down from the hills. The owner assures me that the worst that will happen is that we’ll only be able to get off the boat six hours in every twelve. Let’s hope he knows his stuff.
Stay safe
(For those unfamiliar with the route: Interstate 40: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_40 Even-numbered insterstates run mosly east and west, odd-numbered mostly south and north.)
https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/27/us/video/asheville-north-carolina-flooding-helene-rosales-cnc-digvid
People living in lower lying areas are being advised to write their name and date of birth on their leg with marker pen.
NEW THREAD