How to make politics better, more lawyers getting involved – politicalbetting.com

Taz said:

Leon said:

noneoftheabove said:

Leon said:

noneoftheabove said:

Leon said:

I’m at Bangkok airport and I just got a slightly unnerved phone call from one of my best friends

He lost his home in the LA fires - his was in Malibu. Whoooof! All gone. Quite terrifying

His loss is somewhat mitigated by the fact he has two other homes in LA (they’d just vacated the Malibu one to rent it out) and he’s worth roughly £1bn

But still. He was quite choked. Just shows that even obscene wealth does not shield you

It shows that the opposite! He has two other homes and can buy another few hundred. That is a pretty impressive shield.

It’s where their only and very precious child - a daughter - spent her early years and for that reason it has intense emotional value

Tsk

Yeah, but for someone with one home and no spare cash, unable to get insurance because they live somewhere at risk of destruction, may also have fond family memories, but if they lost their house may end up sleeping on the streets or in shelters, as well as feeling sad about the memories.

Its a big massive f*** off shield to have a billion quid.

Jesus. You’re nice

I’m not saying he’s the unluckiest man in history I’m saying that even untold wealth can’t stop a fire from seriously fucking your life in a way that cannot be reversed

It’s not the observation of the ages, it’s so true it’s trite

But still. Quite a fire

This was part of the morning politics debate on GMB today, and actually quite a good one for a change.

The victims of this fire are seen, by some, as less than worthy of our sympathy as we are talking the fabulously wealthy by and large.

Although it was pointed out there are plenty of people who will be victims of this who are just ordinary people who just happen to live there.

Pulp's Common People is most prescient.

If these fires were in a working class community the posh boys here would be radiating their worthiness all over it.

DavidL said:

Sandpit said:

The last thing the World needs, is more lawyers.

Oh I am so hurt @Sandpit. Do we not bring reason, clarity and the public good to every issue?

Theuniondivvie said:

Musk leaps ahead of the standard sign of ahistorical dimwittery (Hitler was a socialist actually) by agreeing with the leader of AfD that Hitler was a communist who nationalised businesses.
We really are at the stage of folk with swastika t-shirts endlessly bellowing 'NO, YOU'RE THE REAL NAZI!'.

https://www.politico.eu/article/elon-musk-german-far-right-politics-alice-weidel-afd-olaf-scholz-donald-trump/

WhisperingOracle said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Musk leaps ahead of the standard sign of ahistorical dimwittery (Hitler was a socialist actually) by agreeing with the leader of AfD that Hitler was a communist who nationalised businesses.
We really are at the stage of folk with swastika t-shirts endlessly bellowing 'NO, YOU'RE THE REAL NAZI!'.

https://www.politico.eu/article/elon-musk-german-far-right-politics-alice-weidel-afd-olaf-scholz-donald-trump/

There's no question that Musk is ar the Erno Goldfinger stage.

In his interview with the AfD yesterday, he said that "X is the collective consciousness of humanity, good and bad." Now the collective consciousness is going to overthrow the British government, and send a select few of us into space.

Carnyx said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Musk leaps ahead of the standard sign of ahistorical dimwittery (Hitler was a socialist actually) by agreeing with the leader of AfD that Hitler was a communist who nationalised businesses.
We really are at the stage of folk with swastika t-shirts endlessly bellowing 'NO, YOU'RE THE REAL NAZI!'.

https://www.politico.eu/article/elon-musk-german-far-right-politics-alice-weidel-afd-olaf-scholz-donald-trump/

There's no question that Musk is ar the Erno Goldfinger stage.

In his interview with the AfD yesterday, he said that "X is the collective consciousness of humanity, good and bad." Now the collective consciousness is going to overthrow the British government, and send a select few of us into space.

I know a lot of us on PB don't like Brutalists, but surely you mean Auric!

Taz said:

Leon said:

noneoftheabove said:

Leon said:

noneoftheabove said:

Leon said:

I’m at Bangkok airport and I just got a slightly unnerved phone call from one of my best friends

He lost his home in the LA fires - his was in Malibu. Whoooof! All gone. Quite terrifying

His loss is somewhat mitigated by the fact he has two other homes in LA (they’d just vacated the Malibu one to rent it out) and he’s worth roughly £1bn

But still. He was quite choked. Just shows that even obscene wealth does not shield you

It shows that the opposite! He has two other homes and can buy another few hundred. That is a pretty impressive shield.

It’s where their only and very precious child - a daughter - spent her early years and for that reason it has intense emotional value

Tsk

Yeah, but for someone with one home and no spare cash, unable to get insurance because they live somewhere at risk of destruction, may also have fond family memories, but if they lost their house may end up sleeping on the streets or in shelters, as well as feeling sad about the memories.

Its a big massive f*** off shield to have a billion quid.

Jesus. You’re nice

I’m not saying he’s the unluckiest man in history I’m saying that even untold wealth can’t stop a fire from seriously fucking your life in a way that cannot be reversed

It’s not the observation of the ages, it’s so true it’s trite

But still. Quite a fire

This was part of the morning politics debate on GMB today, and actually quite a good one for a change.

The victims of this fire are seen, by some, as less than worthy of our sympathy as we are talking the fabulously wealthy by and large.

Although it was pointed out there are plenty of people who will be victims of this who are just ordinary people who just happen to live there.

Pulp's Common People is most prescient.

If these fires were in a working class community the posh boys here would be radiating their worthiness all over it.

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

stodge said:

Evening all from Aotearoa

I thought what the world needs now was love, sweet love, no, not just for fun but for everyone.

Dreadful scenes from Los Angeles once again on the New Zealand evening news followed by confirmation 2024 was Earth’s warmest year. Sometimes the impact of climate change doesn’t become real until it becomes personal - a bit like immigration...

It's still not real for an awful lot of people.
LA was entirely down to the governor, not climate change, apparently.

Have you seen the excruciating interview with the mayor of LA where she is asked some pretty simple questions like “why did you go abroad during the fires” and she simply freezes? That’s one career finished

https://x.com/skynews/status/1877115173443400065?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

The LA Fire Department had their budget cut by $17.5m this year, had to cancel the planned testing of fire hydrants last week - but of course still had enough budget for the $250k Head of DEI, and waving flags at the Pride march while writing articles moaning that the FD has “a white man problem”.

The City also failed to clear scrub from the forests, and the water utility failed to ensure that the reservoirs used for firefighting were full. The water utility head (on $750k per year) did an interview that was equally excruciating. She had one job to do.

Leon said:

noneoftheabove said:

Leon said:

noneoftheabove said:

Leon said:

noneoftheabove said:

Leon said:

I’m at Bangkok airport and I just got a slightly unnerved phone call from one of my best friends

He lost his home in the LA fires - his was in Malibu. Whoooof! All gone. Quite terrifying

His loss is somewhat mitigated by the fact he has two other homes in LA (they’d just vacated the Malibu one to rent it out) and he’s worth roughly £1bn

But still. He was quite choked. Just shows that even obscene wealth does not shield you

It shows that the opposite! He has two other homes and can buy another few hundred. That is a pretty impressive shield.

It’s where their only and very precious child - a daughter - spent her early years and for that reason it has intense emotional value

Tsk

Yeah, but for someone with one home and no spare cash, unable to get insurance because they live somewhere at risk of destruction, may also have fond family memories, but if they lost their house may end up sleeping on the streets or in shelters, as well as feeling sad about the memories.

Its a big massive f*** off shield to have a billion quid.

Jesus. You’re nice

I’m not saying he’s the unluckiest man in history I’m saying that even untold wealth can’t stop a fire from seriously fucking your life in a way that cannot be reversed

It’s not the observation of the ages, it’s so true it’s trite

But still. Quite a fire

If you want nice perhaps you should stop cheerleading for millions of Ukranians to have to live under Putins murderous regime. Just saying.....

Are you on ketamine? What the fuck has Ukraine got to do with my friend losing his house in the LA fires??’

WhisperingOracle said:

Carnyx said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Musk leaps ahead of the standard sign of ahistorical dimwittery (Hitler was a socialist actually) by agreeing with the leader of AfD that Hitler was a communist who nationalised businesses.
We really are at the stage of folk with swastika t-shirts endlessly bellowing 'NO, YOU'RE THE REAL NAZI!'.

https://www.politico.eu/article/elon-musk-german-far-right-politics-alice-weidel-afd-olaf-scholz-donald-trump/

There's no question that Musk is ar the Erno Goldfinger stage.

In his interview with the AfD yesterday, he said that "X is the collective consciousness of humanity, good and bad." Now the collective consciousness is going to overthrow the British government, and send a select few of us into space.

I know a lot of us on PB don't like Brutalists, but surely you mean Auric!

;,) Haha , yes, I was getting mixed up with Ernst Stavro Blofeld , again.

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

stodge said:

Evening all from Aotearoa

I thought what the world needs now was love, sweet love, no, not just for fun but for everyone.

Dreadful scenes from Los Angeles once again on the New Zealand evening news followed by confirmation 2024 was Earth’s warmest year. Sometimes the impact of climate change doesn’t become real until it becomes personal - a bit like immigration...

It's still not real for an awful lot of people.
LA was entirely down to the governor, not climate change, apparently.

Have you seen the excruciating interview with the mayor of LA where she is asked some pretty simple questions like “why did you go abroad during the fires” and she simply freezes? That’s one career finished

https://x.com/skynews/status/1877115173443400065?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

The LA Fire Department had their budget cut by $17.5m this year, had to cancel the planned testing of fire hydrants last week - but of course still had enough budget for the $250k Head of DEI, and waving flags at the Pride march while writing articles moaning that the FD has “a white man problem”.

The City also failed to clear scrub from the forests, and the water utility failed to ensure that the reservoirs used for firefighting were full. The water utility head (on $750k per year) did an interview that was equally excruciating. She had one job to do.

Leon said:

bondegezou said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I’m loving the revisionist history from PB Tories. Of course she didn’t crash the economy. And as a result she didn’t have to sack her chancellor and hire the guy to rip up and immediately reverse the things she had done to crash the economy. Because she hadn’t. So it didn’t happen. Indeed it’s such a lie because she’s still our PM. And she’ll sue anyone who claims that having crashed the economy, sacking her chancellor and having to scrap her entire programme to stop the crash being permanent that she then was forced to resign.

It’s defamation.

The difference in politics today is less between left and right and more between those who live in reality and those who live in fantasy. Truss didn’t crash the economy, Canada will join the US, threatening Greenland is a sensible policy, Russia only invaded Ukraine because they felt threatened by NATO expansion, Matt Gaetz would be a good Attorney General, etc.

Also: the virus came from a wet market and everyone agrees on that and it’s all settled can we now move on, thanks

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Ah, more use of our libel laws as intended. Warms the heart.

You should read that David Allen Green link in the header.

Carnyx said:

Phil said:

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

It seems wildfires are possible anytime from when the summer heat has finally dried out all the brush & foliage to the arrival of the first rains of the winter / spring.

IIRC I saw somewhere that it’s been an unusually dry winter in LA this year, which perhaps explains how a wildfire in the middle of January is possible.

Unusually dry would be an, erm, unusually dry understatement. Apparently this year they've had cumulatively 2.2% of the normal winter rainfall total (Oct-Mar), if I read the graph rightly.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/09/los-angeles-wildfires-climate-disasters

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

stodge said:

Evening all from Aotearoa

I thought what the world needs now was love, sweet love, no, not just for fun but for everyone.

Dreadful scenes from Los Angeles once again on the New Zealand evening news followed by confirmation 2024 was Earth’s warmest year. Sometimes the impact of climate change doesn’t become real until it becomes personal - a bit like immigration...

It's still not real for an awful lot of people.
LA was entirely down to the governor, not climate change, apparently.

Have you seen the excruciating interview with the mayor of LA where she is asked some pretty simple questions like “why did you go abroad during the fires” and she simply freezes? That’s one career finished

https://x.com/skynews/status/1877115173443400065?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

The LA Fire Department had their budget cut by $17.5m this year, had to cancel the planned testing of fire hydrants last week - but of course still had enough budget for the $250k Head of DEI, and waving flags at the Pride march while writing articles moaning that the FD has “a white man problem”.

The City also failed to clear scrub from the forests, and the water utility failed to ensure that the reservoirs used for firefighting were full. The water utility head (on $750k per year) did an interview that was equally excruciating. She had one job to do.

That isn't true. The LA fire department didn't get a budget cut, it got an increase of $50 million.

https://bsky.app/profile/mrsbettybowers.bsky.social/post/3lfcxbnjxp22a

MaxPB said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

The header acknowledges that the minibudget didn't crash the economy. Nor were the tax cuts contained therein particularly extreme or expensive. On the information we now have the 30% increase in Corporation Tax that she fought against has added 10% to CT receipts in the full year it has been in place. Yes there are some mitigating factors with expensing that would mean you wouldn't expect to get the full 30%, but the bottom line is if those trends continue, it will become revenue neutral and then actually cost the exchequer money in the coming years. As any idiot looking at Ireland could have predicted.

If CT at 25% with expensing becomes revenue negative vs CT at 15% with limited expensing then it's hugely beneficial to the economy because it's pushing corporate money into capital investment. If you look at the stats business investment is on a hot streak too since full expensing was introduced. I'd estimate it's raised growth by 0.3-0.5% per year so far vs the baseline before when business investment was absolutely terrible.

This is the intended result if having a higher rate with big reliefs/incentives to bring that rate down. You simply can't compare the UK to Ireland, Ireland works on the basis of 0.25-0.75% sweetheart rates for multinationals in exchange for a few thousand jobs. In small countries this might just about make sense because there's a low number of people and a few thousand jobs is enough to keep everyone employed and the state funded without any proper CT receipts. In the UK exchanging CT receipts for a few thousand jobs isn't viable our population is 10x larger. The multiplier that we get from those extra jobs is absolutely tiny compared to what we'd get with proper CT rates. You simply lack the understanding on this subject and by continually raising Ireland as a valid point of comparison and suggesting that a drop in CT receipts with full expensing is a bad outcome you show it time and again.

From my perspective what the previous government achieved with the new CT policy was getting money out of dividends and into capital growth and if the trend proves correct then out of government hands into capital growth too. Money has gone from two very low multiplier categories to the single highest multiplier category, I don't see how this is the huge negative you think it is?

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Ah, more use of our libel laws as intended. Warms the heart.

You should read that David Allen Green link in the header.

I have, and obvs she's not going to win if she pursues it but doubtless there are similar vexatious claims that have the chilling effect Cyclefree pointed out a few threads ago. If there is one bit of US law I'd swap yesterday and twice on sundays for UK law it'd be their first amendment in place of our libel laws.

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

stodge said:

Evening all from Aotearoa

I thought what the world needs now was love, sweet love, no, not just for fun but for everyone.

Dreadful scenes from Los Angeles once again on the New Zealand evening news followed by confirmation 2024 was Earth’s warmest year. Sometimes the impact of climate change doesn’t become real until it becomes personal - a bit like immigration...

It's still not real for an awful lot of people.
LA was entirely down to the governor, not climate change, apparently.

Have you seen the excruciating interview with the mayor of LA where she is asked some pretty simple questions like “why did you go abroad during the fires” and she simply freezes? That’s one career finished

https://x.com/skynews/status/1877115173443400065?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

The LA Fire Department had their budget cut by $17.5m this year, had to cancel the planned testing of fire hydrants last week - but of course still had enough budget for the $250k Head of DEI, and waving flags at the Pride march while writing articles moaning that the FD has “a white man problem”.

The City also failed to clear scrub from the forests, and the water utility failed to ensure that the reservoirs used for firefighting were full. The water utility head (on $750k per year) did an interview that was equally excruciating. She had one job to do.

Simples. Keep the head of DEI, the flags and tax the rich more.

The US super-rich are leeches. They usually have the money to avoid the worst of their acts, but it seems fire is hard to avoid.

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

Sandpit said:

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

stodge said:

Evening all from Aotearoa

I thought what the world needs now was love, sweet love, no, not just for fun but for everyone.

Dreadful scenes from Los Angeles once again on the New Zealand evening news followed by confirmation 2024 was Earth’s warmest year. Sometimes the impact of climate change doesn’t become real until it becomes personal - a bit like immigration...

It's still not real for an awful lot of people.
LA was entirely down to the governor, not climate change, apparently.

Have you seen the excruciating interview with the mayor of LA where she is asked some pretty simple questions like “why did you go abroad during the fires” and she simply freezes? That’s one career finished

https://x.com/skynews/status/1877115173443400065?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

The LA Fire Department had their budget cut by $17.5m this year, had to cancel the planned testing of fire hydrants last week - but of course still had enough budget for the $250k Head of DEI, and waving flags at the Pride march while writing articles moaning that the FD has “a white man problem”.

The City also failed to clear scrub from the forests, and the water utility failed to ensure that the reservoirs used for firefighting were full. The water utility head (on $750k per year) did an interview that was equally excruciating. She had one job to do.

That isn't true. The LA fire department didn't get a budget cut, it got an increase of $50 million.

https://bsky.app/profile/mrsbettybowers.bsky.social/post/3lfcxbnjxp22a

Well Twitter community notes are correcting everyone saying your figure, and insisting they had a cut of $17.5m from the budget this year.

Here’s the letter from the FD Chief to the Mayor last month, saying that the budget cuts are affecting performance and readiness.
https://x.com/realsaavedra/status/1877184214296068346

Here’s local ABC News LA with the $17.5m figure https://x.com/abc7newsbayarea/status/1877480490619277511

Eabhal said:

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

stodge said:

Evening all from Aotearoa

I thought what the world needs now was love, sweet love, no, not just for fun but for everyone.

Dreadful scenes from Los Angeles once again on the New Zealand evening news followed by confirmation 2024 was Earth’s warmest year. Sometimes the impact of climate change doesn’t become real until it becomes personal - a bit like immigration...

It's still not real for an awful lot of people.
LA was entirely down to the governor, not climate change, apparently.

Have you seen the excruciating interview with the mayor of LA where she is asked some pretty simple questions like “why did you go abroad during the fires” and she simply freezes? That’s one career finished

https://x.com/skynews/status/1877115173443400065?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

The LA Fire Department had their budget cut by $17.5m this year, had to cancel the planned testing of fire hydrants last week - but of course still had enough budget for the $250k Head of DEI, and waving flags at the Pride march while writing articles moaning that the FD has “a white man problem”.

The City also failed to clear scrub from the forests, and the water utility failed to ensure that the reservoirs used for firefighting were full. The water utility head (on $750k per year) did an interview that was equally excruciating. She had one job to do.

Simples. Keep the head of DEI, the flags and tax the rich more.

The US super-rich are leeches. They usually have the money to avoid the worst of their acts, but it seems fire is hard to avoid.

I like how in Sandpit's eyes the $250k on the DEI director is the real problem, while the LAPD (not the world's wokeist institution) got a funding increase of $126 million to total funding if $2.14 billion.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Ah, more use of our libel laws as intended. Warms the heart.

You should read that David Allen Green link in the header.

Phil said:

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

It seems wildfires are possible anytime from when the summer heat has finally dried out all the brush & foliage to the arrival of the first rains of the winter / spring.

IIRC I saw somewhere that it’s been an unusually dry winter in LA this year, which perhaps explains how a wildfire in the middle of January is possible.

Casino_Royale said:

TimS said:

First council by-election of the year. And it’s a Lib Dem gain from the Tories.

https://x.com/aldc/status/1877515826477113710?s=46

LIBDEM GAIN FROM CON
NORTH DEVON DC: Instow Ward
🔶 LibDem, Becky Coombs, 197, 38%
🔵 Con, 166, 32%
➡️ Reform, 99, 17%
*️⃣ Ind, 49, 9%
🟢 Grn, 17, 4%

Hard one to read as last time there were 3 independents standing, as well as a small Labour showing, and no Reform or Lib Dem.

Looks like Reform has cost the Tories that one.

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

stodge said:

Evening all from Aotearoa

I thought what the world needs now was love, sweet love, no, not just for fun but for everyone.

Dreadful scenes from Los Angeles once again on the New Zealand evening news followed by confirmation 2024 was Earth’s warmest year. Sometimes the impact of climate change doesn’t become real until it becomes personal - a bit like immigration...

It's still not real for an awful lot of people.
LA was entirely down to the governor, not climate change, apparently.

Have you seen the excruciating interview with the mayor of LA where she is asked some pretty simple questions like “why did you go abroad during the fires” and she simply freezes? That’s one career finished

https://x.com/skynews/status/1877115173443400065?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

The LA Fire Department had their budget cut by $17.5m this year, had to cancel the planned testing of fire hydrants last week - but of course still had enough budget for the $250k Head of DEI, and waving flags at the Pride march while writing articles moaning that the FD has “a white man problem”.

The City also failed to clear scrub from the forests, and the water utility failed to ensure that the reservoirs used for firefighting were full. The water utility head (on $750k per year) did an interview that was equally excruciating. She had one job to do.

That isn't true. The LA fire department didn't get a budget cut, it got an increase of $50 million.

https://bsky.app/profile/mrsbettybowers.bsky.social/post/3lfcxbnjxp22a

Well Twitter community notes are correcting everyone saying your figure, and insisting they had a cut of $17.5m from the budget this year.

Here’s the letter from the FD Chief to the Mayor last month, saying that the budget cuts are affecting performance and readiness.
https://x.com/realsaavedra/status/1877184214296068346

Here’s local ABC News LA with the $17.5m figure https://x.com/abc7newsbayarea/status/1877480490619277511

The confusion is because there were ongoing negotiations so two funding rounds. There was a substantial increase according to the LA Daily News:

https://www.dailynews.com/2025/01/09/factcheck-was-the-lafd-budget-cut-no-it-actually-increased-heres-how/

Though of course right wingers are usually in favour of cuts to government spending...

Sandpit said:

glw said:

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

I don't know about January, but LA has a lot of trouble with fires, and drainage and so flash floods. I remember reading about this years ago, and the book I read might have been written decades before that. But LA is such an attractive place to live that the city kept expanding up into the hills and areas where it might not have been prudent to do so.

Basically people who know about these sort of issues have been warning about them for a long time.

Yes there’s always been fires in the area, and people have been warning about ‘the big one’ for years. Just requires the right combination of dryness and wind direction.

Building houses in the canyons was always a silly idea, but as you say the city expanded and the demand was there. Some of the largest and most expensive houses in the whole city are in the hills, surrounded by trees.

bondegezou said:

Leon said:

bondegezou said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I’m loving the revisionist history from PB Tories. Of course she didn’t crash the economy. And as a result she didn’t have to sack her chancellor and hire the guy to rip up and immediately reverse the things she had done to crash the economy. Because she hadn’t. So it didn’t happen. Indeed it’s such a lie because she’s still our PM. And she’ll sue anyone who claims that having crashed the economy, sacking her chancellor and having to scrap her entire programme to stop the crash being permanent that she then was forced to resign.

It’s defamation.

The difference in politics today is less between left and right and more between those who live in reality and those who live in fantasy. Truss didn’t crash the economy, Canada will join the US, threatening Greenland is a sensible policy, Russia only invaded Ukraine because they felt threatened by NATO expansion, Matt Gaetz would be a good Attorney General, etc.

Also: the virus came from a wet market and everyone agrees on that and it’s all settled can we now move on, thanks

This may be the most perfect reply I've ever received to a post.

glw said:

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

I don't know about January, but LA has a lot of trouble with fires, and drainage and so flash floods. I remember reading about this years ago, and the book I read might have been written decades before that. But LA is such an attractive place to live that the city kept expanding up into the hills and areas where it might not have been prudent to do so.

Basically people who know about these sort of issues have been warning about them for a long time.

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

Eabhal said:

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

stodge said:

Evening all from Aotearoa

I thought what the world needs now was love, sweet love, no, not just for fun but for everyone.

Dreadful scenes from Los Angeles once again on the New Zealand evening news followed by confirmation 2024 was Earth’s warmest year. Sometimes the impact of climate change doesn’t become real until it becomes personal - a bit like immigration...

It's still not real for an awful lot of people.
LA was entirely down to the governor, not climate change, apparently.

Have you seen the excruciating interview with the mayor of LA where she is asked some pretty simple questions like “why did you go abroad during the fires” and she simply freezes? That’s one career finished

https://x.com/skynews/status/1877115173443400065?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

The LA Fire Department had their budget cut by $17.5m this year, had to cancel the planned testing of fire hydrants last week - but of course still had enough budget for the $250k Head of DEI, and waving flags at the Pride march while writing articles moaning that the FD has “a white man problem”.

The City also failed to clear scrub from the forests, and the water utility failed to ensure that the reservoirs used for firefighting were full. The water utility head (on $750k per year) did an interview that was equally excruciating. She had one job to do.

Simples. Keep the head of DEI, the flags and tax the rich more.

The US super-rich are leeches. They usually have the money to avoid the worst of their acts, but it seems fire is hard to avoid.

I like how in Sandpit's eyes the $250k on the DEI director is the real problem, while the LAPD (not the world's wokeist institution) got a funding increase of $126 million to total funding if $2.14 billion.

Oh dear. They had to shower money on the LAPD, because they tried “defunding the police” for political reasons and it resulted in a massive crime wave. So they gave the police the money, and took it from the fire department, so the LAFD were unprepared for severe fires.

The problem isn’t a lack of money, it’s the choices made by the politicians (and, as @rcs1000 has mentioned, by the public themselves in various referenda over the years).

LA already has the highest local income tax and some of the highest property taxes in the whole of the USA.

Certainly there is a lot of violent crime in America generally, but I am not clear what you mean by a "massive crime wave" .

Here are the stats on violent crimes in LA.

https://www.laalmanac.com/crime/cr01.php

Pulpstar said:

Northern_Al said:

On the Truss/Kwarteng budget, it's rarely mentioned now but in my view the most egregious part of it was cutting the top rate of tax from 45% to 40%. This meant the highest earners would gain an extra £10k instantly, on average. At a time when most people were really struggling with the cost of living, they were just taking the piss. It's no surprise they had to U-turn on this pretty quickly, but the damage had been done.

I'm nowhere near that tax bracket BUT (Obviously this didn't happen) if it had attracted more rich people, and rich people to work more and earn more and spend more and generate economic growth though .... would it have been so wrong ?

Sandpit said:

Eabhal said:

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

stodge said:

Evening all from Aotearoa

I thought what the world needs now was love, sweet love, no, not just for fun but for everyone.

Dreadful scenes from Los Angeles once again on the New Zealand evening news followed by confirmation 2024 was Earth’s warmest year. Sometimes the impact of climate change doesn’t become real until it becomes personal - a bit like immigration...

It's still not real for an awful lot of people.
LA was entirely down to the governor, not climate change, apparently.

Have you seen the excruciating interview with the mayor of LA where she is asked some pretty simple questions like “why did you go abroad during the fires” and she simply freezes? That’s one career finished

https://x.com/skynews/status/1877115173443400065?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

The LA Fire Department had their budget cut by $17.5m this year, had to cancel the planned testing of fire hydrants last week - but of course still had enough budget for the $250k Head of DEI, and waving flags at the Pride march while writing articles moaning that the FD has “a white man problem”.

The City also failed to clear scrub from the forests, and the water utility failed to ensure that the reservoirs used for firefighting were full. The water utility head (on $750k per year) did an interview that was equally excruciating. She had one job to do.

Simples. Keep the head of DEI, the flags and tax the rich more.

The US super-rich are leeches. They usually have the money to avoid the worst of their acts, but it seems fire is hard to avoid.

I like how in Sandpit's eyes the $250k on the DEI director is the real problem, while the LAPD (not the world's wokeist institution) got a funding increase of $126 million to total funding if $2.14 billion.

Oh dear. They had to shower money on the LAPD, because they tried “defunding the police” for political reasons and it resulted in a massive crime wave. So they gave the police the money, and took it from the fire department, so the LAFD were unprepared for severe fires.

The problem isn’t a lack of money, it’s the choices made by the politicians (and, as @rcs1000 has mentioned, by the public themselves in various referenda over the years).

LA already has the highest local income tax and some of the highest property taxes in the whole of the USA.

Carnyx said:

Sandpit said:

glw said:

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

I don't know about January, but LA has a lot of trouble with fires, and drainage and so flash floods. I remember reading about this years ago, and the book I read might have been written decades before that. But LA is such an attractive place to live that the city kept expanding up into the hills and areas where it might not have been prudent to do so.

Basically people who know about these sort of issues have been warning about them for a long time.

Yes there’s always been fires in the area, and people have been warning about ‘the big one’ for years. Just requires the right combination of dryness and wind direction.

Building houses in the canyons was always a silly idea, but as you say the city expanded and the demand was there. Some of the largest and most expensive houses in the whole city are in the hills, surrounded by trees.

Same around Sydney. Went hiking in the periurban rough valleys with woods and bush with a friend (prof at Sydney) who showed me the fire-adapted vegetation (eucalyptus, banksia, etc.) and pointed out how new houses were being built in hazardous areas. Though perhaps not to the same degree?

Carnyx said:

MattW said:

Carnyx said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Musk leaps ahead of the standard sign of ahistorical dimwittery (Hitler was a socialist actually) by agreeing with the leader of AfD that Hitler was a communist who nationalised businesses.
We really are at the stage of folk with swastika t-shirts endlessly bellowing 'NO, YOU'RE THE REAL NAZI!'.

https://www.politico.eu/article/elon-musk-german-far-right-politics-alice-weidel-afd-olaf-scholz-donald-trump/

There's no question that Musk is ar the Erno Goldfinger stage.

In his interview with the AfD yesterday, he said that "X is the collective consciousness of humanity, good and bad." Now the collective consciousness is going to overthrow the British government, and send a select few of us into space.

I know a lot of us on PB don't like Brutalists, but surely you mean Auric!

Well, he upset Ian Fleming when he built his masterpieces at 1-3 Willow Road in Hampstead on the site of a terrace he demolished that Fleming preferred.

There was a modest dispute about the villain name, and Fleming threatened to rename him "Goldprick".

Shades of Jean-Pierre the Pervert. "This is not the Post Office Tower. It is the Post Office PRICK."

I had not heard of that building, but looking that up, my sympathies are with the author. My instant reaction was that I was looking at a carpet emporium converted to housing in the currently fashionable manner.

https://architectuul.com/architecture/1-3-willow-road

Northern_Al said:

On the Truss/Kwarteng budget, it's rarely mentioned now but in my view the most egregious part of it was cutting the top rate of tax from 45% to 40%. This meant the highest earners would gain an extra £10k instantly, on average. At a time when most people were really struggling with the cost of living, they were just taking the piss. It's no surprise they had to U-turn on this pretty quickly, but the damage had been done.

turbotubbs said:

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

Fires are due to lack of water, not air temperature. California is prone to several long term weather patterns, some of which are dry. Not everything that happens is down to climate change.

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

stodge said:

Evening all from Aotearoa

I thought what the world needs now was love, sweet love, no, not just for fun but for everyone.

Dreadful scenes from Los Angeles once again on the New Zealand evening news followed by confirmation 2024 was Earth’s warmest year. Sometimes the impact of climate change doesn’t become real until it becomes personal - a bit like immigration...

It's still not real for an awful lot of people.
LA was entirely down to the governor, not climate change, apparently.

Have you seen the excruciating interview with the mayor of LA where she is asked some pretty simple questions like “why did you go abroad during the fires” and she simply freezes? That’s one career finished

https://x.com/skynews/status/1877115173443400065?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

No tears from me.

One unremarked villain is the Sierra Club. While they're in the right side of the climate change argument, they've regularly litigated, using clean air legislation, to prevent controlled burning of forestry, which is about the only reliable way of preventing disasters like this.

Dopermean said:

Malmesbury said:

Phil said:

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

It seems wildfires are possible anytime from when the summer heat has finally dried out all the brush & foliage to the arrival of the first rains of the winter / spring.

IIRC I saw somewhere that it’s been an unusually dry winter in LA this year, which perhaps explains how a wildfire in the middle of January is possible.

Yes

https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/01/why-are-wildfires-raging-across-southern-california-well-its-complicated/

Written by an actual meteorologist

“After a typically arid summer and fall, the Los Angeles area has also had a dry winter so far. December, January, February, and March are usually the wettest months in the region by far. More than 80 percent of Los Angeles' rain comes during these colder months. But this year, during December, the region received, on average, less than one-tenth of an inch of rainfall. Normal totals are on the order of 2.5 inches in December.

So, the foliage in the area was already very dry, effectively extending the region's wildfire season.”

Today had an interview with the former Fire chief for LA, he said that the fire risk was dependent on whether the rain or wind arrived first. He also said that, because it had been a few years since the last big wildfire, the authorities had lost focus on prevention measures.

CharlieShark said:

Dopermean said:

Malmesbury said:

Phil said:

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

It seems wildfires are possible anytime from when the summer heat has finally dried out all the brush & foliage to the arrival of the first rains of the winter / spring.

IIRC I saw somewhere that it’s been an unusually dry winter in LA this year, which perhaps explains how a wildfire in the middle of January is possible.

Yes

https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/01/why-are-wildfires-raging-across-southern-california-well-its-complicated/

Written by an actual meteorologist

“After a typically arid summer and fall, the Los Angeles area has also had a dry winter so far. December, January, February, and March are usually the wettest months in the region by far. More than 80 percent of Los Angeles' rain comes during these colder months. But this year, during December, the region received, on average, less than one-tenth of an inch of rainfall. Normal totals are on the order of 2.5 inches in December.

So, the foliage in the area was already very dry, effectively extending the region's wildfire season.”

Today had an interview with the former Fire chief for LA, he said that the fire risk was dependent on whether the rain or wind arrived first. He also said that, because it had been a few years since the last big wildfire, the authorities had lost focus on prevention measures.

Why is no-one mentioning the obvious? That these fires were probably deliberately started by a human. Is it a wildfire if it is arson? One man has already been arrested for starting one of them.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/man-arrested-on-suspicion-of-starting-los-angeles-fire/ar-BB1rcX4t?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=f8b0c6a22c544ef2b44a5a77fc169f9b&ei=11

CharlieShark said:

Dopermean said:

Malmesbury said:

Phil said:

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

It seems wildfires are possible anytime from when the summer heat has finally dried out all the brush & foliage to the arrival of the first rains of the winter / spring.

IIRC I saw somewhere that it’s been an unusually dry winter in LA this year, which perhaps explains how a wildfire in the middle of January is possible.

Yes

https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/01/why-are-wildfires-raging-across-southern-california-well-its-complicated/

Written by an actual meteorologist

“After a typically arid summer and fall, the Los Angeles area has also had a dry winter so far. December, January, February, and March are usually the wettest months in the region by far. More than 80 percent of Los Angeles' rain comes during these colder months. But this year, during December, the region received, on average, less than one-tenth of an inch of rainfall. Normal totals are on the order of 2.5 inches in December.

So, the foliage in the area was already very dry, effectively extending the region's wildfire season.”

Today had an interview with the former Fire chief for LA, he said that the fire risk was dependent on whether the rain or wind arrived first. He also said that, because it had been a few years since the last big wildfire, the authorities had lost focus on prevention measures.

Why is no-one mentioning the obvious? That these fires were probably deliberately started by a human. Is it a wildfire if it is arson? One man has already been arrested for starting one of them.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/man-arrested-on-suspicion-of-starting-los-angeles-fire/ar-BB1rcX4t?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=f8b0c6a22c544ef2b44a5a77fc169f9b&ei=11

Foxy said:

Northern_Al said:

Pulpstar said:

Northern_Al said:

On the Truss/Kwarteng budget, it's rarely mentioned now but in my view the most egregious part of it was cutting the top rate of tax from 45% to 40%. This meant the highest earners would gain an extra £10k instantly, on average. At a time when most people were really struggling with the cost of living, they were just taking the piss. It's no surprise they had to U-turn on this pretty quickly, but the damage had been done.

I'm nowhere near that tax bracket BUT (Obviously this didn't happen) if it had attracted more rich people, and rich people to work more and earn more and spend more and generate economic growth though .... would it have been so wrong ?

Yes. And anyway, why is it that it's always rich people who need incentivising? If middle and lower income people earn more, they're much more likely to actually spend their extra money than the rich.

Surely the rise in the minimum wage is an incentive for far more people than the higher tax band?

Sandpit said:

Right, work to do this afternoon, but will leave with this.

A certain orange man bad, on a certain very popular podcast, ranting for seven minutes about the water and forest problems in California.

https://x.com/collinrugg/status/1877048612519121223

Unfortunately, the vast majority of what he said is completely right.

Foxy said:

CharlieShark said:

Dopermean said:

Malmesbury said:

Phil said:

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

It seems wildfires are possible anytime from when the summer heat has finally dried out all the brush & foliage to the arrival of the first rains of the winter / spring.

IIRC I saw somewhere that it’s been an unusually dry winter in LA this year, which perhaps explains how a wildfire in the middle of January is possible.

Yes

https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/01/why-are-wildfires-raging-across-southern-california-well-its-complicated/

Written by an actual meteorologist

“After a typically arid summer and fall, the Los Angeles area has also had a dry winter so far. December, January, February, and March are usually the wettest months in the region by far. More than 80 percent of Los Angeles' rain comes during these colder months. But this year, during December, the region received, on average, less than one-tenth of an inch of rainfall. Normal totals are on the order of 2.5 inches in December.

So, the foliage in the area was already very dry, effectively extending the region's wildfire season.”

Today had an interview with the former Fire chief for LA, he said that the fire risk was dependent on whether the rain or wind arrived first. He also said that, because it had been a few years since the last big wildfire, the authorities had lost focus on prevention measures.

Why is no-one mentioning the obvious? That these fires were probably deliberately started by a human. Is it a wildfire if it is arson? One man has already been arrested for starting one of them.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/man-arrested-on-suspicion-of-starting-los-angeles-fire/ar-BB1rcX4t?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=f8b0c6a22c544ef2b44a5a77fc169f9b&ei=11

Yes, there are multiple causes for the fires, but a fire cannot burn without fuel, and the absence of rain this winter is an obvious causal factor.

But no, it's because some fire chief went on a Pride march, not climate change.

CharlieShark said:

Carnyx said:

CharlieShark said:

Dopermean said:

Malmesbury said:

Phil said:

Pulpstar said:

Do wildfires normally happen in LA in January ?

I mean I know it's ( *checks* ) 34 degrees north, but that's still 11 degrees north of the tropic of cancer so I'd have thought we're closish to the coldest (normal) point of the year there. I presume if fires are happening now they can happen at literally any time of year ?

It seems wildfires are possible anytime from when the summer heat has finally dried out all the brush & foliage to the arrival of the first rains of the winter / spring.

IIRC I saw somewhere that it’s been an unusually dry winter in LA this year, which perhaps explains how a wildfire in the middle of January is possible.

Yes

https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/01/why-are-wildfires-raging-across-southern-california-well-its-complicated/

Written by an actual meteorologist

“After a typically arid summer and fall, the Los Angeles area has also had a dry winter so far. December, January, February, and March are usually the wettest months in the region by far. More than 80 percent of Los Angeles' rain comes during these colder months. But this year, during December, the region received, on average, less than one-tenth of an inch of rainfall. Normal totals are on the order of 2.5 inches in December.

So, the foliage in the area was already very dry, effectively extending the region's wildfire season.”

Today had an interview with the former Fire chief for LA, he said that the fire risk was dependent on whether the rain or wind arrived first. He also said that, because it had been a few years since the last big wildfire, the authorities had lost focus on prevention measures.

Why is no-one mentioning the obvious? That these fires were probably deliberately started by a human. Is it a wildfire if it is arson? One man has already been arrested for starting one of them.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/man-arrested-on-suspicion-of-starting-los-angeles-fire/ar-BB1rcX4t?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=f8b0c6a22c544ef2b44a5a77fc169f9b&ei=11

Citizen's arrest, and on suspicion ... and it may not have been deliberate. Idiot with barbecue syndrome is a thing.

But it could be a bit of broken glass, or a power line going sparky, or an old disposable vape lithium battery. The way the wider risk is, does it make much difference?

You don't think that the actual cause of a fire, that has killed 10's of people and caused billions of pounds worth of damage, is important? Odd. Surely that is the critical starting point for any investigation.

The temperature out in LA is about 19, maybe 20 degrees during the day, down to 11 at night, at the moment.

Very odd that that you are all willing to gloss over a pretty pertinent point, yet concentrate heavily on others.

rottenborough said:

Gas over 50% of grid this morning.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Ah, more use of our libel laws as intended. Warms the heart.

You should read that David Allen Green link in the header.