Meanwhile the enshittification of business travel exhibit B: Eurostar this morning to Paris in standard class. Long queues, virtually no free seats in the waiting area and a Pret coffee that was more like a hot milkshake than a cappuccino.
The CIA analyst who triggered Trump’s first impeachment asks: Was it worth it? The whistleblower’s lonely stand upended his career and put his life at risk. Now he’s speaking about it for the first time.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/20/cia-analyst-whistleblower-trump-impeachment-ukraine/ ...He described his experience, which included death threats that upended his life and required the CIA to provide him with round-the-clock protection, in interviews over the past two months. The Washington Post is granting him anonymity because of the ongoing concerns for his safety and has confirmed his account with more than a half dozen former senior officials.
His story mirrors those of dozens of other bureaucrats, diplomats, intelligence analysts, FBI agents, politicians and military officers who stood up to what they saw as efforts by Trump to subvert the country’s democracy. Some of these officials were fired or resigned in protest. Others sought to temper Trump’s demands without alienating him and, in the process, protect themselves and their institutions from retribution...
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
It is really sad if it is true
As you say, one of the great joys of london is - was - just nipping into the national gallery to look at maybe one single painting for five minutes - the Rokeby Venus or Whisteljacket
If that is taken away from us by Tarquins with paint
Fuck em
London is great like that, with so many of the galleries and museums not enforcing entry charges so you can just walk around on a lunch break if you’re nearby.
Having long queues for searches makes a big difference to the more causal visitor, and probably doesn’t solve the problem of small amounts of liquids (or powdered paint to be mixed with water) getting through carried on the person.
Oh, and it also probably means that hundreds of genuine visitors are going to have to throw away a load of expensive toiletries and cosmetics every day, getting caught up in a system designed to keep a handful of well-known idiots from causing carnage.
Are they not getting laid because they are Trump supporters? Or are they Trump supporters because they are not getting laid?
Probably both, which is how you get a doom loop.
All very self comforting.
But, despite what we might wish, large numbers of Trump voters are utterly normal. The idea that they are all nutty MAGA idiots is comforting, but wrong.
Sky Marshal Tehat Meru: To fight the bug, we must understand the bug.
They are low information voters (I use that term neutrally) who don't realise the consequences of voting for Trump, probably even after voting for him and not actually liking the consequences.
Coming from a hapless fuckwit like you, who can’t even read an Amazon chart, that is ironic indeed
Even when you have the information in front of your eyes, you are too stupid to understand it
You do pick random, uninformed and actually quite stupid fights with people.
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
It is really sad if it is true
As you say, one of the great joys of london is - was - just nipping into the national gallery to look at maybe one single painting for five minutes - the Rokeby Venus or Whisteljacket
If that is taken away from us by Tarquins with paint
Fuck em
No actual statement from the NG, I see, just what some person on Twitter imagines to be the case.
Blockbuster exhibition? And some other reason for security? Museums and galleries have always varied their security.
The CIA analyst who triggered Trump’s first impeachment asks: Was it worth it? The whistleblower’s lonely stand upended his career and put his life at risk. Now he’s speaking about it for the first time.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/20/cia-analyst-whistleblower-trump-impeachment-ukraine/ ...He described his experience, which included death threats that upended his life and required the CIA to provide him with round-the-clock protection, in interviews over the past two months. The Washington Post is granting him anonymity because of the ongoing concerns for his safety and has confirmed his account with more than a half dozen former senior officials.
His story mirrors those of dozens of other bureaucrats, diplomats, intelligence analysts, FBI agents, politicians and military officers who stood up to what they saw as efforts by Trump to subvert the country’s democracy. Some of these officials were fired or resigned in protest. Others sought to temper Trump’s demands without alienating him and, in the process, protect themselves and their institutions from retribution...
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
God, some political hacks are such drama queens. We were removing litter bins from London stations in the early 90s because the IRA were putting bombs in them, and holding football fans behind huge wire cages until Hillsborough. That wasn’t exactly high trust.
The same hacks will be all for expanding stop and search, so long as it doesn’t affect them personally.
Though Downing Street is still fenced off, with armed guards, despite this having originally been a temporary precaution against the IRA.
The fact this has been the case for decades rather demonstrates the point that London wasn’t some security-free paradise right up until the point just stop oil arrived.
Another piece of security theatre to join the rest, though.
Museums used to be wander in, wander out.
How long before its libraries etc? How long before it is something you really care about?
Museums are something I do really care about. Our borders with the EU are another thing I care about - they used to be virtually wander in, wander out too. I think you’re misreading my point. It’s the golden age nonsense from hacks who don’t like JSO, who are trying to argue that this particular direct action group have transformed Britain from a freedom loving paradise to a security police state.
Just for now, stores remain 'wander in, wander out' but the current spate of aggravated shop-lifting may put an end to that. I recall a corner store in a 'nice' part of Washington DC with an armed security guard on the door, paying close attention to everyone entering and leaving. That was in 1978.
Back in the early 1990s, I knew a lady who worked at a school in Stepney Green. It was apparently the first state school to have 'security' measures for staff and pupils. ISTR it caused a little media comment at the time.
Annoyingly, I cannot remember the school's name, or what the 'controversial' measures were. I'm guessing they were things we would not blink twice at nowdays.
Meanwhile the enshittification of business travel exhibit B: Eurostar this morning to Paris in standard class. Long queues, virtually no free seats in the waiting area and a Pret coffee that was more like a hot milkshake than a cappuccino.
McDonalds win blind tasting of their coffee vs other chains, regularly.
The theory is that given reputation and expectations, they try harder. Starfucks & Prat can put any old swill in a cup and sell it.
Starbucks is the worst. Burnt, bitter stuff which apparently is designed for those American 3 gallon buckets of hot milk they drink over there.
But as noted last week, Costa - long the awfulest of all - actually served me a very decent cup of coffee at KX station.
Did you report the Costa franchise to corporate for unauthorised modification of the product?
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
Almost all railways cost more than expected. What is now the WCML cost three times the estimate, mostly due to having to buy the land at vastly inflated prices but also due to engineering difficulties (e.g. Kilsby Tunnel).
In this case, the real culprit seems to be chronic mismanagement with the chopping and changing of requirements and specs by the government, coupled with some shockingly badly drawn up contracts.
Why or how this will be solved by direct government control is unclear to me. I would have thought it more likely to make matters considerably worse.
Are they not getting laid because they are Trump supporters? Or are they Trump supporters because they are not getting laid?
Probably both, which is how you get a doom loop.
All very self comforting.
But, despite what we might wish, large numbers of Trump voters are utterly normal. The idea that they are all nutty MAGA idiots is comforting, but wrong.
Sky Marshal Tehat Meru: To fight the bug, we must understand the bug.
They are low information voters (I use that term neutrally) who don't realise the consequences of voting for Trump, probably even after voting for him and not actually liking the consequences.
Coming from a hapless fuckwit like you, who can’t even read an Amazon chart, that is ironic indeed
Even when you have the information in front of your eyes, you are too stupid to understand it
You do pick random, uninformed and actually quite stupid fights with people.
No, I pick them with stupid people, like you
I suppose we must all find comfort where we can. Shame it's all pretty unpleasant and boring for everyone else.
Wait. I was making a cogent and relevant point not randomly attacking you for no reason
You were accusing Trump voters of being low intelligence, low information voters. I was noting that all the evidence on here suggests you are not particularly intelligent (sorry, but that is the case) and as for “information”, even when you are given it, you are unable to correctly process it
So I don’t see why you feel the right to mock and despise all Trump voters as “dumb”. Yet you go right ahead anyway. We see this embarrassing pattern all the time on PB
Meanwhile the enshittification of business travel exhibit B: Eurostar this morning to Paris in standard class. Long queues, virtually no free seats in the waiting area and a Pret coffee that was more like a hot milkshake than a cappuccino.
McDonalds win blind tasting of their coffee vs other chains, regularly.
The theory is that given reputation and expectations, they try harder. Starfucks & Prat can put any old swill in a cup and sell it.
Starbucks is the worst. Burnt, bitter stuff which apparently is designed for those American 3 gallon buckets of hot milk they drink over there.
But as noted last week, Costa - long the awfulest of all - actually served me a very decent cup of coffee at KX station.
Did you report the Costa franchise to corporate for unauthorised modification of the product?
Starbucks is overpriced poison.
Ask for a Cortado -Costa's is generally good; Caffe Nero varies but can be OK if they remember to warm the glass.
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
It’s politically easier to have the project approved with a much lower number than the actual cost, and then to up the price later once serious amounts of money have already been spent.
Compounding this is government of ever-changing faces in management and ministerial roles, all of whom want to keep changing he scope of the project even when it’s well under way.
I can see my old bedroom window. And the apartment block is exactly as crummy as I remember it
Superb
You remind me of the John Major PPB when he rediscovered Coldharbour Road from the back of a cab.
I found that a little cringe too.
Now you’re here I’ve been meaning to ask: can you give us some warning when you’re going to write a comment that is in some way insightful, funny, intelligent, witty, sagacious, deft, eloquent, clever or - in fact - in any way even remotely fucking interesting, as I’d like to be here for that once-in-a-lifetime, never-seen-before event?
Thankyou
Well being as I am waiting for your first post "that is in some way insightful, funny, intelligent, witty, sagacious, deft, eloquent, clever or - in fact - in any way even remotely fucking interesting", I don't see that I should follow any more rigorous rules.
Ya see? You have to cut and paste my prose to make any kind of point. QED
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
It is really sad if it is true
As you say, one of the great joys of london is - was - just nipping into the national gallery to look at maybe one single painting for five minutes - the Rokeby Venus or Whisteljacket
If that is taken away from us by Tarquins with paint
Fuck em
But you have the constant consolation of AI art at your fingertips.
I can see my old bedroom window. And the apartment block is exactly as crummy as I remember it
Superb
You remind me of the John Major PPB when he rediscovered Coldharbour Road from the back of a cab.
I found that a little cringe too.
Now you’re here I’ve been meaning to ask: can you give us some warning when you’re going to write a comment that is in some way insightful, funny, intelligent, witty, sagacious, deft, eloquent, clever or - in fact - in any way even remotely fucking interesting, as I’d like to be here for that once-in-a-lifetime, never-seen-before event?
Thankyou
Well being as I am waiting for your first post "that is in some way insightful, funny, intelligent, witty, sagacious, deft, eloquent, clever or - in fact - in any way even remotely fucking interesting", I don't see that I should follow any more rigorous rules.
Ya see? You have to cut and paste my prose to make any kind of point. QED
Have you ever read Hare's works on philosophical language?
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
It is really sad if it is true
As you say, one of the great joys of london is - was - just nipping into the national gallery to look at maybe one single painting for five minutes - the Rokeby Venus or Whisteljacket
If that is taken away from us by Tarquins with paint
Fuck em
But you have the constant consolation of AI art at your fingertips.
Re shoplifting. Wore my new Down filled Gant jacket to the Rugby yesterday -first outing after having been bought a month ago in TKMaxx (at a third the Gant price). It still had a massive security tag on the cuff which amused everyone. I no longer have the receipt - off back to TK this morning with a print of my bank statement!
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
Almost all railways cost more than expected. What is now the WCML cost three times the estimate, mostly due to having to buy the land at vastly inflated prices but also due to engineering difficulties (e.g. Kilsby Tunnel).
In this case, the real culprit seems to be chronic mismanagement with the chopping and changing of requirements and specs by the government, coupled with some shockingly badly drawn up contracts.
Why or how this will be solved by direct government control is unclear to me. I would have thought it more likely to make matters considerably worse.
Lord Mandelson calls Wes Streeting 'courageous' as the role of Blairite New Labour torchbearer is clearly passed from David Miliband to Streeting "Michael Gove says personal attacks on ex-wife Sarah Vine hurt most in his career - BBC News" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz04v3yv053o
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
All because of the same 4-5 twats...that have been arrested numerous times. They will just go to a different mueseum, so it doesn't really solve the problem.
Its like all the barriers supermarkets have put in, it doesn't do anything to stop organised shoplighting gangs, as they know nobody will actually try and stop them.
Meanwhile the enshittification of business travel exhibit B: Eurostar this morning to Paris in standard class. Long queues, virtually no free seats in the waiting area and a Pret coffee that was more like a hot milkshake than a cappuccino.
McDonalds win blind tasting of their coffee vs other chains, regularly.
The theory is that given reputation and expectations, they try harder. Starfucks & Prat can put any old swill in a cup and sell it.
Starbucks is the worst. Burnt, bitter stuff which apparently is designed for those American 3 gallon buckets of hot milk they drink over there.
But as noted last week, Costa - long the awfulest of all - actually served me a very decent cup of coffee at KX station.
Did you report the Costa franchise to corporate for unauthorised modification of the product?
Starbucks is overpriced poison.
I think Nero's is the best of the high street chains. Although, as ever, you are better off finding a small business that prides itself on sourcing its coffee
Lord Mandelson calls Wes Streeting 'courageous' as the role of Blairite New Labour torchbearer is clearly passed from David Miliband to Streeting "Michael Gove says personal attacks on ex-wife Sarah Vine hurt most in his career - BBC News" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz04v3yv053o
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
Almost all railways cost more than expected. What is now the WCML cost three times the estimate, mostly due to having to buy the land at vastly inflated prices but also due to engineering difficulties (e.g. Kilsby Tunnel).
In this case, the real culprit seems to be chronic mismanagement with the chopping and changing of requirements and specs by the government, coupled with some shockingly badly drawn up contracts.
Why or how this will be solved by direct government control is unclear to me. I would have thought it more likely to make matters considerably worse.
IANAE, but it seems to me the biggest problem with HS2 was risk allocation. The government wanted so much of the project's risks put on the contractors, it raised the price massively.
There is some sense in this, especially if you look at the litigation mess over the Misguided Bus here in Cambridge. But you can go too far in shoving the risk onto the contractors.
Lord Mandelson calls Wes Streeting 'courageous' as the role of Blairite New Labour torchbearer is clearly passed from David Miliband to Streeting "Michael Gove says personal attacks on ex-wife Sarah Vine hurt most in his career - BBC News" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz04v3yv053o
Lord Mandelson calls Wes Streeting 'courageous' as the role of Blairite New Labour torchbearer is clearly passed from David Miliband to Streeting "Michael Gove says personal attacks on ex-wife Sarah Vine hurt most in his career - BBC News" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz04v3yv053o
On the other hand, some are just understandably seeking that emotionally, rather than intellectually, coherent narrative. The left should be able to provide that, but it can't.
Meanwhile the enshittification of business travel exhibit B: Eurostar this morning to Paris in standard class. Long queues, virtually no free seats in the waiting area and a Pret coffee that was more like a hot milkshake than a cappuccino.
McDonalds win blind tasting of their coffee vs other chains, regularly.
The theory is that given reputation and expectations, they try harder. Starfucks & Prat can put any old swill in a cup and sell it.
Starbucks is the worst. Burnt, bitter stuff which apparently is designed for those American 3 gallon buckets of hot milk they drink over there.
But as noted last week, Costa - long the awfulest of all - actually served me a very decent cup of coffee at KX station.
Did you report the Costa franchise to corporate for unauthorised modification of the product?
Starbucks is overpriced poison.
Ask for a Cortado -Costa's is generally good; Caffe Nero varies but can be OK if they remember to warm the glass.
The depressing thing about getting our own bean to cup machine and sourcing top notch beans roasted just the way we like them is that drinking coffee out is forever a little bit lacking.
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
It’s politically easier to have the project approved with a much lower number than the actual cost, and then to up the price later once serious amounts of money have already been spent.
Compounding this is government of ever-changing faces in management and ministerial roles, all of whom want to keep changing he scope of the project even when it’s well under way.
There is no reward for bringing a project in under budget.
On the other hand, some are just understandably seeking that emotionally, rather than intellectually, coherent narrative. The left should be able to provide that, but it can't.
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
Almost all railways cost more than expected. What is now the WCML cost three times the estimate, mostly due to having to buy the land at vastly inflated prices but also due to engineering difficulties (e.g. Kilsby Tunnel).
In this case, the real culprit seems to be chronic mismanagement with the chopping and changing of requirements and specs by the government, coupled with some shockingly badly drawn up contracts.
Why or how this will be solved by direct government control is unclear to me. I would have thought it more likely to make matters considerably worse.
IANAE, but it seems to me the biggest problem with HS2 was risk allocation. The government wanted so much of the project's risks put on the contractors, it raised the price massively.
There is some sense in this, especially if you look at the litigation mess over the Misguided Bus here in Cambridge. But you can go too far in shoving the risk onto the contractors.
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
It’s politically easier to have the project approved with a much lower number than the actual cost, and then to up the price later once serious amounts of money have already been spent.
Compounding this is government of ever-changing faces in management and ministerial roles, all of whom want to keep changing he scope of the project even when it’s well under way.
Thirdly - the Government no longer employs anyone who has the skills to supervise the project so issues are not picked up early enough....
I'm saying that as I have an interview for a contract today that is literally sanity check what our delivery partners are implementing because we don't trust them and we don't have the expertise in house.
Meanwhile the enshittification of business travel exhibit B: Eurostar this morning to Paris in standard class. Long queues, virtually no free seats in the waiting area and a Pret coffee that was more like a hot milkshake than a cappuccino.
McDonalds win blind tasting of their coffee vs other chains, regularly.
The theory is that given reputation and expectations, they try harder. Starfucks & Prat can put any old swill in a cup and sell it.
Starbucks is the worst. Burnt, bitter stuff which apparently is designed for those American 3 gallon buckets of hot milk they drink over there.
But as noted last week, Costa - long the awfulest of all - actually served me a very decent cup of coffee at KX station.
Did you report the Costa franchise to corporate for unauthorised modification of the product?
Starbucks is overpriced poison.
I think Nero's is the best of the high street chains. Although, as ever, you are better off finding a small business that prides itself on sourcing its coffee
The big chains are all expensive but generally OK though usually too hot. A bad cup is not down to the coffee IMO. Their high turnovers means that, at least, the beans are unlikely to be stale. A bad cup is more likely down to the maker I'd say, particularly a tendency to overheat the milk. In some other countries a further challenge is UHT milk - which is disgusting.
On the other hand, some are just understandably seeking that emotionally, rather than intellectually, coherent narrative. The left should be able to provide that, but it can't.
Because they refuse to make America great again!
FDR had the skills for this, as did Democrats even in the Jimmy Carter era.
I don't know how they're going to find them again so easily, now.
Are they not getting laid because they are Trump supporters? Or are they Trump supporters because they are not getting laid?
Probably both, which is how you get a doom loop.
All very self comforting.
But, despite what we might wish, large numbers of Trump voters are utterly normal. The idea that they are all nutty MAGA idiots is comforting, but wrong.
Sky Marshal Tehat Meru: To fight the bug, we must understand the bug.
They are low information voters (I use that term neutrally) who don't realise the consequences of voting for Trump, probably even after voting for him and not actually liking the consequences.
Coming from a hapless fuckwit like you, who can’t even read an Amazon chart, that is ironic indeed
Even when you have the information in front of your eyes, you are too stupid to understand it
You do pick random, uninformed and actually quite stupid fights with people.
No, I pick them with stupid people, like you
I suppose we must all find comfort where we can. Shame it's all pretty unpleasant and boring for everyone else.
Wait. I was making a cogent and relevant point not randomly attacking you for no reason
You were accusing Trump voters of being low intelligence, low information voters. I was noting that all the evidence on here suggests you are not particularly intelligent (sorry, but that is the case) and as for “information”, even when you are given it, you are unable to correctly process it
So I don’t see why you feel the right to mock and despise all Trump voters as “dumb”. Yet you go right ahead anyway. We see this embarrassing pattern all the time on PB
You weren't making a cogent and relevant point but this one's OK, so I'll engage. These voters are low information because they are not interested in politics hence why I said I was using the term neutrally. They don't understand the consequence of their vote because of that lack of information and interest. I didn't say they were dumb and to be clear I don't think they are.
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
It is really sad if it is true
As you say, one of the great joys of london is - was - just nipping into the national gallery to look at maybe one single painting for five minutes - the Rokeby Venus or Whisteljacket
If that is taken away from us by Tarquins with paint
Fuck em
No actual statement from the NG, I see, just what some person on Twitter imagines to be the case.
Blockbuster exhibition? And some other reason for security? Museums and galleries have always varied their security.
I would be genuinely interested in which art gallery/exhibition PBers last attended. I assume from their regular fits of the vapours over security glass & soup that they’re enthusiastic art lovers.
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
That is because the National Gallery, 40 years ago, resisted the government's call for museums and galleries to charge for admission.
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
That is because the National Gallery, 40 years ago, resisted the government's call for museums and galleries to charge for admission.
I've always found the National Portrait Gallery just around the corner less crowded and more interesting.
On the other hand, some are just understandably seeking that emotionally, rather than intellectually, coherent narrative. The left should be able to provide that, but it can't.
Because they refuse to make America great again!
FDR had the skills for this, as did Democrats even in the Jimmy Carter era.
I don't know how they're going to find them again so easily, now.
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
It is really sad if it is true
As you say, one of the great joys of london is - was - just nipping into the national gallery to look at maybe one single painting for five minutes - the Rokeby Venus or Whisteljacket
If that is taken away from us by Tarquins with paint
Fuck em
No actual statement from the NG, I see, just what some person on Twitter imagines to be the case.
Blockbuster exhibition? And some other reason for security? Museums and galleries have always varied their security.
I would be genuinely interested in which art gallery/exhibition PBers last attended. I assume from their regular fits of the vapours over security glass & soup that they’re enthusiastic art lovers.
Used to wander into the National Gallery a fair bit, when waiting to meet people in the area.
Was last there 2 weeks ago.
It’s quite amusing to hear people claiming that nothing has changed. It has. Rather telling, really.
His McDonald’s stunt was clever and effective. The Trump campaign has reduced the Dems to spluttering “but but but the McDonalds was actually closed and the security services vetted everyone” - well yeah seeing as he’s a presidential candidate who was nearly killed by two different assassins in the last few weeks
Yeah. Fair comment. Unfortunately.
I really have a sense of foreboding. Horrifically Trump may win.
What is so maddening is that the Dems have, after the experience with Hillary, ended up giving us Kamala. FFS.
All, the same, fingers crossed. But it really shouldn't be like this.
Meanwhile the enshittification of business travel exhibit B: Eurostar this morning to Paris in standard class. Long queues, virtually no free seats in the waiting area and a Pret coffee that was more like a hot milkshake than a cappuccino.
McDonalds win blind tasting of their coffee vs other chains, regularly.
The theory is that given reputation and expectations, they try harder. Starfucks & Prat can put any old swill in a cup and sell it.
Starbucks is the worst. Burnt, bitter stuff which apparently is designed for those American 3 gallon buckets of hot milk they drink over there.
But as noted last week, Costa - long the awfulest of all - actually served me a very decent cup of coffee at KX station.
Did you report the Costa franchise to corporate for unauthorised modification of the product?
Starbucks is overpriced poison.
I think Nero's is the best of the high street chains. Although, as ever, you are better off finding a small business that prides itself on sourcing its coffee
The big chains are all expensive but generally OK though usually too hot. A bad cup is not down to the coffee IMO. Their high turnovers means that, at least, the beans are unlikely to be stale. A bad cup is more likely down to the maker I'd say, particularly a tendency to overheat the milk. In some other countries a further challenge is UHT milk - which is disgusting.
His McDonald’s stunt was clever and effective. The Trump campaign has reduced the Dems to spluttering “but but but the McDonalds was actually closed and the security services vetted everyone” - well yeah seeing as he’s a presidential candidate who was nearly killed by two different assassins in the last few weeks
Yeah. Fair comment. Unfortunately.
I really have a sense of foreboding. Horrifically Trump may win.
What is so maddening is that the Dems have, after the experience with Hillary, ended up giving us Kamala. FFS.
All, the same, fingers crossed. But it really shouldn't be like this.
It seems to be. Not sure that it really is like this.
Are they not getting laid because they are Trump supporters? Or are they Trump supporters because they are not getting laid?
Probably both, which is how you get a doom loop.
All very self comforting.
But, despite what we might wish, large numbers of Trump voters are utterly normal. The idea that they are all nutty MAGA idiots is comforting, but wrong.
Sky Marshal Tehat Meru: To fight the bug, we must understand the bug.
They are low information voters (I use that term neutrally) who don't realise the consequences of voting for Trump, probably even after voting for him and not actually liking the consequences.
Coming from a hapless fuckwit like you, who can’t even read an Amazon chart, that is ironic indeed
Even when you have the information in front of your eyes, you are too stupid to understand it
You do pick random, uninformed and actually quite stupid fights with people.
No, I pick them with stupid people, like you
I suppose we must all find comfort where we can. Shame it's all pretty unpleasant and boring for everyone else.
Wait. I was making a cogent and relevant point not randomly attacking you for no reason
You were accusing Trump voters of being low intelligence, low information voters. I was noting that all the evidence on here suggests you are not particularly intelligent (sorry, but that is the case) and as for “information”, even when you are given it, you are unable to correctly process it
So I don’t see why you feel the right to mock and despise all Trump voters as “dumb”. Yet you go right ahead anyway. We see this embarrassing pattern all the time on PB
You weren't making a cogent and relevant point but this one's OK, so I'll engage. These voters are low information because they are not interested in politics hence why I said I was using the term neutrally. They don't understand the consequence of their vote because of that lack of information and interest. I didn't say they were dumb and to be clear I don't think they are.
Another idiotic post. Have you ever travelled in America? Recently? Trump got 75 MILLION votes last time
You’re dismissing seventy five million people in the most powerful nation on earth as “low information fools that know nothing about politics and don’t care and can’t even understand consequences”
This asinine bollocks becomes infuriating. You say this gormless embarassing shit because you’re an unthinking cretin but it probably makes you feel good and superior. That’s it. And that’s me being charitable
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
It’s politically easier to have the project approved with a much lower number than the actual cost, and then to up the price later once serious amounts of money have already been spent.
Compounding this is government of ever-changing faces in management and ministerial roles, all of whom want to keep changing he scope of the project even when it’s well under way.
There is no reward for bringing a project in under budget.
I remember the Wembley stadium redevelopment, where the FA screwed the contractor to the ground and let them deal with anything unexpected that came up during construction.
The primary contractor underestimated the time and cost involved in the build, and the FA were very careful not to creep the scope even as the project ran late.
His McDonald’s stunt was clever and effective. The Trump campaign has reduced the Dems to spluttering “but but but the McDonalds was actually closed and the security services vetted everyone” - well yeah seeing as he’s a presidential candidate who was nearly killed by two different assassins in the last few weeks
Yeah. Fair comment. Unfortunately.
I really have a sense of foreboding. Horrifically Trump may win.
What is so maddening is that the Dems have, after the experience with Hillary, ended up giving us Kamala. FFS.
All, the same, fingers crossed. But it really shouldn't be like this.
Yes, if Trump wins, the ululating from righties blaming libs for a moral defective being elected under the righty banner will be deafening.
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
Almost all railways cost more than expected. What is now the WCML cost three times the estimate, mostly due to having to buy the land at vastly inflated prices but also due to engineering difficulties (e.g. Kilsby Tunnel).
In this case, the real culprit seems to be chronic mismanagement with the chopping and changing of requirements and specs by the government, coupled with some shockingly badly drawn up contracts.
Why or how this will be solved by direct government control is unclear to me. I would have thought it more likely to make matters considerably worse.
Get with the times.
This is Labour Britain.
More government is the cure for all our problems, even when the government caused them in the first place.
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
It is really sad if it is true
As you say, one of the great joys of london is - was - just nipping into the national gallery to look at maybe one single painting for five minutes - the Rokeby Venus or Whisteljacket
If that is taken away from us by Tarquins with paint
Fuck em
No actual statement from the NG, I see, just what some person on Twitter imagines to be the case.
Blockbuster exhibition? And some other reason for security? Museums and galleries have always varied their security.
I would be genuinely interested in which art gallery/exhibition PBers last attended. I assume from their regular fits of the vapours over security glass & soup that they’re enthusiastic art lovers.
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
Almost all railways cost more than expected. What is now the WCML cost three times the estimate, mostly due to having to buy the land at vastly inflated prices but also due to engineering difficulties (e.g. Kilsby Tunnel).
In this case, the real culprit seems to be chronic mismanagement with the chopping and changing of requirements and specs by the government, coupled with some shockingly badly drawn up contracts.
Why or how this will be solved by direct government control is unclear to me. I would have thought it more likely to make matters considerably worse.
IANAE, but it seems to me the biggest problem with HS2 was risk allocation. The government wanted so much of the project's risks put on the contractors, it raised the price massively.
There is some sense in this, especially if you look at the litigation mess over the Misguided Bus here in Cambridge. But you can go too far in shoving the risk onto the contractors.
That and the Cheryl Gillan tunnels.
I think the amount of tunnelling went up from 20km to 60km for phase 1, between the initial budgeting and the current plan.
Lord Mandelson calls Wes Streeting 'courageous' as the role of Blairite New Labour torchbearer is clearly passed from David Miliband to Streeting "Michael Gove says personal attacks on ex-wife Sarah Vine hurt most in his career - BBC News" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz04v3yv053o
Gove. I wonder he is planning. Nasty man.
He's interesting, because it's hard to predict what he'll say next. Not that many politicians who you can say that about.
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
Almost all railways cost more than expected. What is now the WCML cost three times the estimate, mostly due to having to buy the land at vastly inflated prices but also due to engineering difficulties (e.g. Kilsby Tunnel).
In this case, the real culprit seems to be chronic mismanagement with the chopping and changing of requirements and specs by the government, coupled with some shockingly badly drawn up contracts.
Why or how this will be solved by direct government control is unclear to me. I would have thought it more likely to make matters considerably worse.
IANAE, but it seems to me the biggest problem with HS2 was risk allocation. The government wanted so much of the project's risks put on the contractors, it raised the price massively.
There is some sense in this, especially if you look at the litigation mess over the Misguided Bus here in Cambridge. But you can go too far in shoving the risk onto the contractors.
That and the Cheryl Gillan tunnels.
I think the amount of tunnelling went up from 20km to 60km for phase 1, between the initial budgeting and the current plan.
The funniest thing about the tunnels is that they've made the disruption far worse than what would have happened with the original plan...
Lord Mandelson calls Wes Streeting 'courageous' as the role of Blairite New Labour torchbearer is clearly passed from David Miliband to Streeting "Michael Gove says personal attacks on ex-wife Sarah Vine hurt most in his career - BBC News" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz04v3yv053o
Gove. I wonder he is planning. Nasty man.
He's interesting, because it's hard to predict what he'll say next. Not that many politicians who you can say that about.
On topic, being young and right wing was never an issue for me wrt dating. Most girls didn't care very much about it and as long as you're not a dickhead on the first date and start espousing the dangers of high tax or quoting Milton Friedman etc... then it doesn't even come into conversation. My wife was an active member of the Swiss leftist party when we met, we're married with two kids now. People who let politics prevent them from forming personal relationships are sad and deserve to be lonely.
Lord Mandelson calls Wes Streeting 'courageous' as the role of Blairite New Labour torchbearer is clearly passed from David Miliband to Streeting "Michael Gove says personal attacks on ex-wife Sarah Vine hurt most in his career - BBC News" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz04v3yv053o
Gove. I wonder he is planning. Nasty man.
He's interesting, because it's hard to predict what he'll say next. Not that many politicians who you can say that about.
Possibly of interest to anyone with a new boss to suck up to.
But on this, I reckon he's right. Even if you think that Trump has accurately diagnosed the problem, why the hell would anyone trust him to provide the solution? We have seen versions of this movie many times before and we know how it tends to end.
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
It’s politically easier to have the project approved with a much lower number than the actual cost, and then to up the price later once serious amounts of money have already been spent.
Compounding this is government of ever-changing faces in management and ministerial roles, all of whom want to keep changing he scope of the project even when it’s well under way.
There is no reward for bringing a project in under budget.
I remember the Wembley stadium redevelopment, where the FA screwed the contractor to the ground and let them deal with anything unexpected that came up during construction.
The primary contractor underestimated the time and cost involved in the build, and the FA were very careful not to creep the scope even as the project ran late.
That should be a model for public sector building procurement, even if it results in a different set of problems.
It's sorta like the RAAC issue. When you design a building or structure, you build it to a design life. Building it to last much longer than that design life can be very expensive, so you tend to design 'down' to that life. (*)
Imagine a structure that has a 60-year design life (quite long for a building...).
But what if the structure needs unplanned works after 40 years? Who pays? One approach is to say the client (in this case the government) takes on that cost, which is a risk. Another approach is to say the contractor needs to take on that risk. And as the contractor may not still be around in 40 years, it makes the structure or building stronger than it needs to be, just in case, and insures it against future costs.
As I said, the Cambridge Misguided bus is an example of where problems within a few years of opening led to mahoosively expensive and long court battles.
I don't know what the answer is; place more risk on the contractor, the client takes more risk, or we pay lawyers to sort it out later.
(*) That does not mean it will automatically need replacing or renewing after that time; just that is the time after which you can expect to need to spend lots of money on it.
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
It is really sad if it is true
As you say, one of the great joys of london is - was - just nipping into the national gallery to look at maybe one single painting for five minutes - the Rokeby Venus or Whisteljacket
If that is taken away from us by Tarquins with paint
Fuck em
No actual statement from the NG, I see, just what some person on Twitter imagines to be the case.
Blockbuster exhibition? And some other reason for security? Museums and galleries have always varied their security.
I would be genuinely interested in which art gallery/exhibition PBers last attended. I assume from their regular fits of the vapours over security glass & soup that they’re enthusiastic art lovers.
I went to see the Brian Lalor Retrospective at the Uillinn.
We were going to wander around the Crawford before it closed for refurbishment, but the cafe inside was gone already, we were hungry, and we didn't make it back to the gallery that day.
You are reading too many opinion polls, suggest we all take a week out from them. Most are giving out confusing messages, best just ignore them, there r will be surprises on Election day due to shifting demographics in individual states.
I've not noticed a post for a while but I can't check his activity as he has a private profile.
He was off somewhere doing some teaching or learning...
Immersing himself in Arabic somewhere in the Middle East (Egypt?) Istr?
I have only travelled to a few countries in the Middle East so my experience is limited. I recommend this book I just read about the region. Arabia by Levison Wood. Some of you may have read it. It is very insightful and a lot of fun!
Is there any general set of reasons for the regular massive cost increase of public projects as they go along?
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
It’s politically easier to have the project approved with a much lower number than the actual cost, and then to up the price later once serious amounts of money have already been spent.
Compounding this is government of ever-changing faces in management and ministerial roles, all of whom want to keep changing he scope of the project even when it’s well under way.
There is no reward for bringing a project in under budget.
I remember the Wembley stadium redevelopment, where the FA screwed the contractor to the ground and let them deal with anything unexpected that came up during construction.
The primary contractor underestimated the time and cost involved in the build, and the FA were very careful not to creep the scope even as the project ran late.
That should be a model for public sector building procurement, even if it results in a different set of problems.
It's sorta like the RAAC issue. When you design a building or structure, you build it to a design life. Building it to last much longer than that design life can be very expensive, so you tend to design 'down' to that life. (*)
Imagine a structure that has a 60-year design life (quite long for a building...).
But what if the structure needs unplanned works after 40 years? Who pays? One approach is to say the client (in this case the government) takes on that cost, which is a risk. Another approach is to say the contractor needs to take on that risk. And as the contractor may not still be around in 40 years, it makes the structure or building stronger than it needs to be, just in case, and insures it against future costs.
As I said, the Cambridge Misguided bus is an example of where problems within a few years of opening led to mahoosively expensive and long court battles.
I don't know what the answer is; place more risk on the contractor, the client takes more risk, or we pay lawyers to sort it out later.
(*) That does not mean it will automatically need replacing or renewing after that time; just that is the time after which you can expect to need to spend lots of money on it.
Ultimately the client always pays- either by fixing things when they break or upfront by paying more for the initial project.
Meanwhile the enshittification of business travel exhibit B: Eurostar this morning to Paris in standard class. Long queues, virtually no free seats in the waiting area and a Pret coffee that was more like a hot milkshake than a cappuccino.
McDonalds win blind tasting of their coffee vs other chains, regularly.
The theory is that given reputation and expectations, they try harder. Starfucks & Prat can put any old swill in a cup and sell it.
Starbucks is the worst. Burnt, bitter stuff which apparently is designed for those American 3 gallon buckets of hot milk they drink over there.
But as noted last week, Costa - long the awfulest of all - actually served me a very decent cup of coffee at KX station.
Did you report the Costa franchise to corporate for unauthorised modification of the product?
Starbucks is overpriced poison.
I think Nero's is the best of the high street chains. Although, as ever, you are better off finding a small business that prides itself on sourcing its coffee
The big chains are all expensive but generally OK though usually too hot. A bad cup is not down to the coffee IMO. Their high turnovers means that, at least, the beans are unlikely to be stale. A bad cup is more likely down to the maker I'd say, particularly a tendency to overheat the milk. In some other countries a further challenge is UHT milk - which is disgusting.
Probably part of the coffee problem is due to people asking for exotic variants with which they are unfamiliar and then not liking the slightly odd flavour, whereas McDonalds basically sells a cup of coffee. You see the same with tea where Earl Grey and lapsang souchong sound posh but are acquired tastes.
You weren't making a cogent and relevant point but this one's OK, so I'll engage. These voters are low information because they are not interested in politics hence why I said I was using the term neutrally. They don't understand the consequence of their vote because of that lack of information and interest. I didn't say they were dumb and to be clear I don't think they are.
You are reading too many opinion polls, suggest we all take a week out from them. Most are giving out confusing messages, best just ignore them, there r will be surprises on Election day due to shifting demographics in individual states.
I agree with you. Timeout and see the state of play in one week to ten days.
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
It is really sad if it is true
As you say, one of the great joys of london is - was - just nipping into the national gallery to look at maybe one single painting for five minutes - the Rokeby Venus or Whisteljacket
If that is taken away from us by Tarquins with paint
Fuck em
No actual statement from the NG, I see, just what some person on Twitter imagines to be the case.
Blockbuster exhibition? And some other reason for security? Museums and galleries have always varied their security.
I would be genuinely interested in which art gallery/exhibition PBers last attended. I assume from their regular fits of the vapours over security glass & soup that they’re enthusiastic art lovers.
I went to see the Brian Lalor Retrospective at the Uillinn.
We were going to wander around the Crawford before it closed for refurbishment, but the cafe inside was gone already, we were hungry, and we didn't make it back to the gallery that day.
The Burrell Collection in Glasgow (Southside) is fantastic. Well worth the effort of getting to it. They hosted a Degas exhibition I went to, a year or two back.
I consider "fits of vapours" an appropriate response to twonks compromising the pleasures of gallery-cruising.
Apparently this awful security queue for the National Gallery is now permanent. I used to just walk up the steps and in. Just Stop Oil madness means this is just the future we are a living in.
Sad. My London days ended 40 years ago and one of the many delights was to be able to go into the National Gallery regularly and often just for a short time at some point in a working day.
It is really sad if it is true
As you say, one of the great joys of london is - was - just nipping into the national gallery to look at maybe one single painting for five minutes - the Rokeby Venus or Whisteljacket
If that is taken away from us by Tarquins with paint
Fuck em
No actual statement from the NG, I see, just what some person on Twitter imagines to be the case.
Blockbuster exhibition? And some other reason for security? Museums and galleries have always varied their security.
I would be genuinely interested in which art gallery/exhibition PBers last attended. I assume from their regular fits of the vapours over security glass & soup that they’re enthusiastic art lovers.
The big-name galleries will be able to afford the security, the smaller ones won't. So no more touring Monets in York or Hepworths in Wakefield.
On topic, being young and right wing was never an issue for me wrt dating. Most girls didn't care very much about it and as long as you're not a dickhead on the first date and start espousing the dangers of high tax or quoting Milton Friedman etc... then it doesn't even come into conversation. My wife was an active member of the Swiss leftist party when we met, we're married with two kids now. People who let politics prevent them from forming personal relationships are sad and deserve to be lonely.
In my youth meeting girls was a common reason for young men to join the Young Conservatives. I went once, but really didn't fancy any of the talent on offer. Stuck to the Students Union.
On topic, being young and right wing was never an issue for me wrt dating. Most girls didn't care very much about it and as long as you're not a dickhead on the first date and start espousing the dangers of high tax or quoting Milton Friedman etc... then it doesn't even come into conversation. My wife was an active member of the Swiss leftist party when we met, we're married with two kids now. People who let politics prevent them from forming personal relationships are sad and deserve to be lonely.
Question of degree though.
As long as there's some common ground, there's somewhere a relationship can grow. From this distance, America's problem seems to be the complete lack of common ground.
Centrists are pompous, boring and terrible at explaining stuff, let alone telling convincing stories. There, I've said it- happy now? But they are also essential at holding societies together.
On topic, being young and right wing was never an issue for me wrt dating. Most girls didn't care very much about it and as long as you're not a dickhead on the first date and start espousing the dangers of high tax or quoting Milton Friedman etc... then it doesn't even come into conversation. My wife was an active member of the Swiss leftist party when we met, we're married with two kids now. People who let politics prevent them from forming personal relationships are sad and deserve to be lonely.
If you are a rich, high earning good looking rightwinger yes I suspect you do rather better with getting a date than a low income, spotty rightwinger living in their mother's basement
On topic, being young and right wing was never an issue for me wrt dating. Most girls didn't care very much about it and as long as you're not a dickhead on the first date and start espousing the dangers of high tax or quoting Milton Friedman etc... then it doesn't even come into conversation. My wife was an active member of the Swiss leftist party when we met, we're married with two kids now. People who let politics prevent them from forming personal relationships are sad and deserve to be lonely.
On topic, being young and right wing was never an issue for me wrt dating. Most girls didn't care very much about it and as long as you're not a dickhead on the first date and start espousing the dangers of high tax or quoting Milton Friedman etc... then it doesn't even come into conversation. My wife was an active member of the Swiss leftist party when we met, we're married with two kids now. People who let politics prevent them from forming personal relationships are sad and deserve to be lonely.
Agreed, within reason - as you say, the exception is if it dominates the early conversation. In general politics is either not that important to people (in which case who cares) or deep and complex (in which case it's something to discuss with interest at a later date). I just shy away from people who have strong but uninformed views which they thrust on you at the first opportunity.
Meanwhile the enshittification of business travel exhibit B: Eurostar this morning to Paris in standard class. Long queues, virtually no free seats in the waiting area and a Pret coffee that was more like a hot milkshake than a cappuccino.
McDonalds win blind tasting of their coffee vs other chains, regularly.
The theory is that given reputation and expectations, they try harder. Starfucks & Prat can put any old swill in a cup and sell it.
Starbucks is the worst. Burnt, bitter stuff which apparently is designed for those American 3 gallon buckets of hot milk they drink over there.
But as noted last week, Costa - long the awfulest of all - actually served me a very decent cup of coffee at KX station.
Did you report the Costa franchise to corporate for unauthorised modification of the product?
Starbucks is overpriced poison.
I think Nero's is the best of the high street chains. Although, as ever, you are better off finding a small business that prides itself on sourcing its coffee
The big chains are all expensive but generally OK though usually too hot. A bad cup is not down to the coffee IMO. Their high turnovers means that, at least, the beans are unlikely to be stale. A bad cup is more likely down to the maker I'd say, particularly a tendency to overheat the milk. In some other countries a further challenge is UHT milk - which is disgusting.
Probably part of the coffee problem is due to people asking for exotic variants with which they are unfamiliar and then not liking the slightly odd flavour, whereas McDonalds basically sells a cup of coffee. You see the same with tea where Earl Grey and lapsang souchong sound posh but are acquired tastes.
Drinking it without milk helps. I gave up on milk-in-coffee many years ago and appreciate coffee much more.
You weren't making a cogent and relevant point but this one's OK, so I'll engage. These voters are low information because they are not interested in politics hence why I said I was using the term neutrally. They don't understand the consequence of their vote because of that lack of information and interest. I didn't say they were dumb and to be clear I don't think they are.
lol indeed. PB’s “analysis” of this election is quite pitifully poor and simplistic and biased - with some noble exceptions
Lots and lots and lots of intelligent, aware, high information American voters are going to vote for Trump, even tho they are unhappily cognisant of his multiple flaws
Why? Because, as one despairing educated American put it to me on my last visit “incredibly, the Democrats are even worse”
Something to note, now that we've established that the GOP-aligned pollsters are not actually responsible for the tightening poll numbers: a lot of this comes from Trump consolidating his vote, even as Harris' stays steady...
You can see that when Harris came in the race, she consolidated Democrats and Dem-leaning independents really quickly. Trump managed to pull a few GOP-leaning stragglers to his side as the election nears, and I'd guess that this is a lot of what's driving this.
His McDonald’s stunt was clever and effective. The Trump campaign has reduced the Dems to spluttering “but but but the McDonalds was actually closed and the security services vetted everyone” - well yeah seeing as he’s a presidential candidate who was nearly killed by two different assassins in the last few weeks
Yeah. Fair comment. Unfortunately.
I really have a sense of foreboding. Horrifically Trump may win.
What is so maddening is that the Dems have, after the experience with Hillary, ended up giving us Kamala. FFS.
All, the same, fingers crossed. But it really shouldn't be like this.
Yes, if Trump wins, the ululating from righties blaming libs for a moral defective being elected under the righty banner will be deafening.
Yes, it's as self-servingly dishonest as everything else recently emanating from that side of US politics.
I prefer this take.
I've always disagreed with the "Democrats are fumbling the election" angle. It's not their race to fumble.
And it's Trump's *third time*. Voters have agency, and it's a conscious choice they're making. They've seen his presidency. If he wins, it would mean they want it back. https://x.com/lxeagle17/status/1848181289393721465
On topic, being young and right wing was never an issue for me wrt dating. Most girls didn't care very much about it and as long as you're not a dickhead on the first date and start espousing the dangers of high tax or quoting Milton Friedman etc... then it doesn't even come into conversation. My wife was an active member of the Swiss leftist party when we met, we're married with two kids now. People who let politics prevent them from forming personal relationships are sad and deserve to be lonely.
I don't think that party affiliation should be a factor, but there are elements of personal character - generosity, optimism, responsibility, morality, etc - that are to a certain degree correlated with it, which I think would be difficult to get past.
One of the things that I've appreciated about PB.com over the years is that, even though I disagree with mostly everyone most of the time, when you look a bit closer there's often more agreement there than at first sight.
On topic, being young and right wing was never an issue for me wrt dating. Most girls didn't care very much about it and as long as you're not a dickhead on the first date and start espousing the dangers of high tax or quoting Milton Friedman etc... then it doesn't even come into conversation. My wife was an active member of the Swiss leftist party when we met, we're married with two kids now. People who let politics prevent them from forming personal relationships are sad and deserve to be lonely.
Agreed, within reason - as you say, the exception is if it dominates the early conversation. In general politics is either not that important to people (in which case who cares) or deep and complex (in which case it's something to discuss with interest at a later date). I just shy away from people who have strong but uninformed views which they thrust on you at the first opportunity.
Those sort of people have lots of unresolved issues in their personality which in many cases they are scared to address or fail to accept the issues exist at all.
You weren't making a cogent and relevant point but this one's OK, so I'll engage. These voters are low information because they are not interested in politics hence why I said I was using the term neutrally. They don't understand the consequence of their vote because of that lack of information and interest. I didn't say they were dumb and to be clear I don't think they are.
lol indeed. PB’s “analysis” of this election is quite pitifully poor and simplistic and biased - with some noble exceptions
Lots and lots and lots of intelligent, aware, high information American voters are going to vote for Trump, even tho they are unhappily cognisant of his multiple flaws
Why? Because, as one despairing educated American put it to me on my last visit “incredibly, the Democrats are even worse”
Genuine question - why did your "despairing educated American" think the Democrats are even worse?
On topic, being young and right wing was never an issue for me wrt dating. Most girls didn't care very much about it and as long as you're not a dickhead on the first date and start espousing the dangers of high tax or quoting Milton Friedman etc... then it doesn't even come into conversation. My wife was an active member of the Swiss leftist party when we met, we're married with two kids now. People who let politics prevent them from forming personal relationships are sad and deserve to be lonely.
Agreed, within reason - as you say, the exception is if it dominates the early conversation. In general politics is either not that important to people (in which case who cares) or deep and complex (in which case it's something to discuss with interest at a later date). I just shy away from people who have strong but uninformed views which they thrust on you at the first opportunity.
Those sort of people have lots of unresolved issues in their personality which in many cases they are scared to address or fail to accept the issues exist at all.
And let's face it they come across as overly intense and boring in some cases.
On topic, being young and right wing was never an issue for me wrt dating. Most girls didn't care very much about it and as long as you're not a dickhead on the first date and start espousing the dangers of high tax or quoting Milton Friedman etc... then it doesn't even come into conversation. My wife was an active member of the Swiss leftist party when we met, we're married with two kids now. People who let politics prevent them from forming personal relationships are sad and deserve to be lonely.
If you are a rich, high earning good looking rightwinger yes I suspect you do rather better with getting a date than a low income, spotty rightwinger living in their mother's basement
You weren't making a cogent and relevant point but this one's OK, so I'll engage. These voters are low information because they are not interested in politics hence why I said I was using the term neutrally. They don't understand the consequence of their vote because of that lack of information and interest. I didn't say they were dumb and to be clear I don't think they are.
lol indeed. PB’s “analysis” of this election is quite pitifully poor and simplistic and biased - with some noble exceptions
Lots and lots and lots of intelligent, aware, high information American voters are going to vote for Trump, even tho they are unhappily cognisant of his multiple flaws
Why? Because, as one despairing educated American put it to me on my last visit “incredibly, the Democrats are even worse”
Genuine question - why did your "despairing educated American" think the Democrats are even worse?
Wokeness, anti whiteness, defund police idiocy, crime, migration, collapsing democrat cities, all the wars under Biden
You weren't making a cogent and relevant point but this one's OK, so I'll engage. These voters are low information because they are not interested in politics hence why I said I was using the term neutrally. They don't understand the consequence of their vote because of that lack of information and interest. I didn't say they were dumb and to be clear I don't think they are.
lol indeed. PB’s “analysis” of this election is quite pitifully poor and simplistic and biased - with some noble exceptions
Lots and lots and lots of intelligent, aware, high information American voters are going to vote for Trump, even tho they are unhappily cognisant of his multiple flaws
Why? Because, as one despairing educated American put it to me on my last visit “incredibly, the Democrats are even worse”
Genuine question - why did your "despairing educated American" think the Democrats are even worse?
As an example, didn't you see the Harris Tweet last week?
You weren't making a cogent and relevant point but this one's OK, so I'll engage. These voters are low information because they are not interested in politics hence why I said I was using the term neutrally. They don't understand the consequence of their vote because of that lack of information and interest. I didn't say they were dumb and to be clear I don't think they are.
lol indeed. PB’s “analysis” of this election is quite pitifully poor and simplistic and biased - with some noble exceptions
Lots and lots and lots of intelligent, aware, high information American voters are going to vote for Trump, even tho they are unhappily cognisant of his multiple flaws
Why? Because, as one despairing educated American put it to me on my last visit “incredibly, the Democrats are even worse”
Genuine question - why did your "despairing educated American" think the Democrats are even worse?
Wokeness, anti whiteness, defund police idiocy, crime, migration, collapsing democrat cities, all the wars under Biden
Comments
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/beleaguered-hs2-rail-project-to-be-taken-over-by-ministers/ar-AA1sAXbz?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=1a4faf847e7f41c0bb79a1521e299e6d&ei=15
I expect. these will now always be associated with large hereditary endowments, to institutions, and businesses.
Bit of a wasted effort now.
James Cleverly spent £655 a head on in-flight catering for one-day trip to Rwanda
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/oct/21/james-cleverly-spent-655-a-head-on-in-flight-catering-for-one-day-trip-to-rwanda
The whistleblower’s lonely stand upended his career and put his life at risk. Now he’s speaking about it for the first time.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/20/cia-analyst-whistleblower-trump-impeachment-ukraine/
...He described his experience, which included death threats that upended his life and required the CIA to provide him with round-the-clock protection, in interviews over the past two months. The Washington Post is granting him anonymity because of the ongoing concerns for his safety and has confirmed his account with more than a half dozen former senior officials.
His story mirrors those of dozens of other bureaucrats, diplomats, intelligence analysts, FBI agents, politicians and military officers who stood up to what they saw as efforts by Trump to subvert the country’s democracy. Some of these officials were fired or resigned in protest. Others sought to temper Trump’s demands without alienating him and, in the process, protect themselves and their institutions from retribution...
Having long queues for searches makes a big difference to the more causal visitor, and probably doesn’t solve the problem of small amounts of liquids (or powdered paint to be mixed with water) getting through carried on the person.
Oh, and it also probably means that hundreds of genuine visitors are going to have to throw away a load of expensive toiletries and cosmetics every day, getting caught up in a system designed to keep a handful of well-known idiots from causing carnage.
Blockbuster exhibition? And some other reason for security? Museums and galleries have always varied their security.
Two particular puzzles: Isn't there considerable expertise available in accurately costing things?
And isn't it politically cleverer to slightly overestimate so that tax payer funded things often turn out 'under budget'.
Annoyingly, I cannot remember the school's name, or what the 'controversial' measures were. I'm guessing they were things we would not blink twice at nowdays.
In this case, the real culprit seems to be chronic mismanagement with the chopping and changing of requirements and specs by the government, coupled with some shockingly badly drawn up contracts.
Why or how this will be solved by direct government control is unclear to me. I would have thought it more likely to make matters considerably worse.
You were accusing Trump voters of being low intelligence, low information voters. I was noting that all the evidence on here suggests you are not particularly intelligent (sorry, but that is the case) and as for “information”, even when you are given it, you are unable to correctly process it
So I don’t see why you feel the right to mock and despise all Trump voters as “dumb”. Yet you go right ahead anyway. We see this embarrassing pattern all the time on PB
Compounding this is government of ever-changing faces in management and ministerial roles, all of whom want to keep changing he scope of the project even when it’s well under way.
"Michael Gove says personal attacks on ex-wife Sarah Vine hurt most in his career - BBC News" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz04v3yv053o
Its like all the barriers supermarkets have put in, it doesn't do anything to stop organised shoplighting gangs, as they know nobody will actually try and stop them.
There is some sense in this, especially if you look at the litigation mess over the Misguided Bus here in Cambridge. But you can go too far in shoving the risk onto the contractors.
Popped in after being with family this weekend, and it is really rather unpleasant reading some of the invective
Is it really necessary ?
On the other hand, some are just understandably seeking that emotionally, rather than intellectually, coherent narrative. The left should be able to provide that, but it can't.
Oh well, at least Waitrose still stock good Brie.
I'm saying that as I have an interview for a contract today that is literally sanity check what our delivery partners are implementing because we don't trust them and we don't have the expertise in house.
I don't know how they're going to find them again so easily, now.
I've not noticed a post for a while but I can't check his activity as he has a private profile.
Was last there 2 weeks ago.
It’s quite amusing to hear people claiming that nothing has changed. It has. Rather telling, really.
I really have a sense of foreboding. Horrifically Trump may win.
What is so maddening is that the Dems have, after the experience with Hillary, ended up giving us Kamala. FFS.
All, the same, fingers crossed. But it really shouldn't be like this.
You’re dismissing seventy five million people in the most powerful nation on earth as “low information fools that know nothing about politics and don’t care and can’t even understand consequences”
This asinine bollocks becomes infuriating. You say this gormless embarassing shit because you’re an unthinking cretin but it probably makes you feel good and superior. That’s it. And that’s me being charitable
The primary contractor underestimated the time and cost involved in the build, and the FA were very careful not to creep the scope even as the project ran late.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wembley_Stadium
That should be a model for public sector building procurement, even if it results in a different set of problems.
This is Labour Britain.
More government is the cure for all our problems, even when the government caused them in the first place.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/jacob-heilbrunn/why-michael-gove-supporting-kamala-harris-213283
Possibly of interest to anyone with a new boss to suck up to.
But on this, I reckon he's right. Even if you think that Trump has accurately diagnosed the problem, why the hell would anyone trust him to provide the solution? We have seen versions of this movie many times before and we know how it tends to end.
Imagine a structure that has a 60-year design life (quite long for a building...).
But what if the structure needs unplanned works after 40 years? Who pays? One approach is to say the client (in this case the government) takes on that cost, which is a risk. Another approach is to say the contractor needs to take on that risk. And as the contractor may not still be around in 40 years, it makes the structure or building stronger than it needs to be, just in case, and insures it against future costs.
As I said, the Cambridge Misguided bus is an example of where problems within a few years of opening led to mahoosively expensive and long court battles.
https://www.constructionenquirer.com/2023/06/13/bam-nuttall-settles-cambridge-busway-dispute/
I don't know what the answer is; place more risk on the contractor, the client takes more risk, or we pay lawyers to sort it out later.
(*) That does not mean it will automatically need replacing or renewing after that time; just that is the time after which you can expect to need to spend lots of money on it.
We were going to wander around the Crawford before it closed for refurbishment, but the cafe inside was gone already, we were hungry, and we didn't make it back to the gallery that day.
Most are giving out confusing messages, best just ignore them, there r will be surprises on Election day due to shifting demographics in individual states.
I consider "fits of vapours" an appropriate response to twonks compromising the pleasures of gallery-cruising.
I went once, but really didn't fancy any of the talent on offer. Stuck to the Students Union.
As long as there's some common ground, there's somewhere a relationship can grow. From this distance, America's problem seems to be the complete lack of common ground.
Centrists are pompous, boring and terrible at explaining stuff, let alone telling convincing stories. There, I've said it- happy now? But they are also essential at holding societies together.
https://bsky.app/profile/borlingon.bsky.social/post/3l6z52skndu24
Lots and lots and lots of intelligent, aware, high information American voters are going to vote for Trump, even tho they are unhappily cognisant of his multiple flaws
Why? Because, as one despairing educated American put it to me on my last visit “incredibly, the Democrats are even worse”
https://nitter.poast.org/lxeagle17/status/1848253567934640308#m
I prefer this take.
I've always disagreed with the "Democrats are fumbling the election" angle. It's not their race to fumble.
And it's Trump's *third time*. Voters have agency, and it's a conscious choice they're making. They've seen his presidency. If he wins, it would mean they want it back.
https://x.com/lxeagle17/status/1848181289393721465
One of the things that I've appreciated about PB.com over the years is that, even though I disagree with mostly everyone most of the time, when you look a bit closer there's often more agreement there than at first sight.
But the differences can be quite fundamental.
This is the modern problem of the Left throughout the West.
https://x.com/KamalaHarris/status/1845993766441644386
Incidentally, can someone confirm that 'and others' has been added to the first on the list? Not sure this was on the original.