Not if they buy more American made products instead though
So you are economically illiterate, then.
Even where it's possible to substitute domestic production, the Trump tariffs increase raw materials input costs, which will raise prices. And the reduced price competition from imported gooods means that domestic producers have more scope to increase their prices.
And of course there is a huge range of consumer products - notably affordable clothing - where there is no real domestic production. Buying American can mean paying several times the imported price - and for most goods, domestic production barely exists.
If more buy American products that expands production and jobs in those areas. That could include in supplies previously imported.
You do realise even Biden imposed tariffs on cheap Chinese goods mass dumped on the US market given the damage it did US industry? The EU also imposed tariffs on imports of Chinese EVs etc
You do realise that you are arguing for zero trade between any countries at all? Have a think about why that might not be such a great idea and get back to us.
Vaguely on topic. I suspect even if there weren't a war in Ukraine, the incoming Trump administration would be making many of the same noises it made in its first incarnation.
The truth is we've prospered on America's dime since 1945 and as with so much else the party is over and the bill is on the table. Whether you think defence spending should be as much as 5% of GDP in time is a matter for discussion - it may be you can achieve big improvements in defensive capability without having to spend fortunes if you spend wisely.
Nonetheless, increasing defence spending means hard choices elsewhere and it would have been more interesting to see how those supportive of that spending would jump if it was a choice between raising taxes and cutting services. Fortunately, it may not be as it won't be an either/or but more likely a both/and but with stagnant growth, that means, to be blunt, we're all going to be worse off to pay to be safe (or to have the illusion or delusion of safety if you prefer).
I increasingly suspect that the welfarism that we have indulged in during the last thirty years has had a degenerative effect on the UK economy.
And that reversing this would be a good idea even if the money wasn't needed for increased defence spending.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
Another reminder that Reform voters aren't simply interchangeable with Tories.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
Meanwhile Russia Hoovers up Kursk and marches for Kyiv. If Trump set Ukraine up for a ceasefire it looks like it has back fired, and instead he foolishly stacked the cards against them for a defeat
The sensible thing to do is to agree to the ceasefire. Then quintuple arms delivering to Ukraine.
Go Trumpian...
"There are no arms deliveries. Plus they are agricultural tools - the best agricultural tools in the world. Plus Russia cooperation with the Aliens from Zeta Reticula is breaking the ceasefire."
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
Russia is moving into Belarus and now pointing out the Finland used to be Russian. Not the comments of someone worried about Trump.
I wonder if annexing Belarus would be a potential way for Russia to claim a victory internally while accepting their gains in Ukraine will be more limited (for now).
In the new era of strong men and Trump threatening to annex neighbours, Putin doing the same to what is already a vassal state doesn't feel unlikely.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
On this morning's BBC news they are reporting it as if Putin has rejected the ceasefire offer. Which of course he has, he is dressing it up as considering it but it is nothing of the sort.
Not if they buy more American made products instead though
So you are economically illiterate, then.
Even where it's possible to substitute domestic production, the Trump tariffs increase raw materials input costs, which will raise prices. And the reduced price competition from imported gooods means that domestic producers have more scope to increase their prices.
And of course there is a huge range of consumer products - notably affordable clothing - where there is no real domestic production. Buying American can mean paying several times the imported price - and for most goods, domestic production barely exists.
If more buy American products that expands production and jobs in those areas. That could include in supplies previously imported.
You do realise even Biden imposed tariffs on cheap Chinese goods mass dumped on the US market given the damage it did US industry? The EU also imposed tariffs on imports of Chinese EVs etc
The only reason you import is because the imported goods are either more expensive locally, not available locally or of a poorer quality locally. In the case of the latter two it either can't be replicated locally or to do so makes it more expensive, which brings us back to 'more expensive locally'. If you could expand local production to compete on price, market forces would have made it happen already.
Now if you apply tariffs the imported competition prices are now higher which does enable local competitors to set up and compete, but only against the new importers prices not against their original prices.
So prices will still go up
e.g.
Imported T shirt at $5. Lowest local production possible at $7 so people buy import.
Tariff increases import to $10 so local production can set up, but still an increase of $2
Regarding dumping - that is a completely different issue.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Russia is moving into Belarus and now pointing out the Finland used to be Russian. Not the comments of someone worried about Trump.
I wonder if annexing Belarus would be a potential way for Russia to claim a victory internally while accepting their gains in Ukraine will be more limited (for now).
In the new era of strong men and Trump threatening to annex neighbours, Putin doing the same to what is already a vassal state doesn't feel unlikely.
Putin is very exposed to Belarus's hardman suffering some, er, terminal event and being overthrown by a democracy that then runs to join NATO. Putin would probably have to invade before that could happen. Otherwise, his problems just got massively worse. ANd UKraine's security just got much easier to manage with the western half of the country safer from invaion.
How Trump would see his friend invading Belarus - with the ensuing slaughter of democracy protestors - would be, er, enlightening.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Within the forseeable future the chances of there being an 'off world colony' more than a human presence of a few people at most for a matter of days is close to zero. And at just the point when the realise that it would be nice to be home for tea and watch a bit of football on the telly, it will dawn on them that the journey back is not simple.
Moving on to less serious matters and the final day of Cheltenham and anyone following my selections is probably going to have to do a Dettori (too soon?):
Triumph Hurdle: HELLO NEIGHBOUR
Mares Chase: ALLEGORIE DE VASSY
Albert Bartlett Hurdle: WENDIGO (each way)
Gold Cup: GALOPIN DES CHAMPS (win), CORBETTS CROSS (each way)
I have done not too bad so far , just did the one yesterday , winner at 17/2. Today only did one as well Derryhassen Paddy 15:20. May have an EW in Gold Cup on Banbridge
Russia is moving into Belarus and now pointing out the Finland used to be Russian. Not the comments of someone worried about Trump.
I can find no comments by Putin about Finland which is part of NATO anyway
You don't seem to realise that Trump has just gutted NATO on behalf of Putin.
Is Article 5 still a thing? Certainly not for the US it isn't. You have to consider NATO operating sans USA. That is the new reality.
Well if Putin invaded Finland NATO would be at war with Russia including the US unless Trump and Congress had withdrawn from NATO by then
I don't think it works like that. A request for assistance under Article 5 is just that, a request. The US would simply refuse to provide assistance, it is voluntary.
It might be better to think of Article 5 as a being like a financial option. If you attack a NATO member then you know that every other NATO member has the option to go to war with you in response.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
On this morning's BBC news they are reporting it as if Putin has rejected the ceasefire offer. Which of course he has, he is dressing it up as considering it but it is nothing of the sort.
Fine. We continue to arm UKr and Russian war economy collapses by end of the year.
The idea that he is winning or he can keep going for years is crap imho.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Not if they buy more American made products instead though
So you are economically illiterate, then.
Even where it's possible to substitute domestic production, the Trump tariffs increase raw materials input costs, which will raise prices. And the reduced price competition from imported gooods means that domestic producers have more scope to increase their prices.
And of course there is a huge range of consumer products - notably affordable clothing - where there is no real domestic production. Buying American can mean paying several times the imported price - and for most goods, domestic production barely exists.
If more buy American products that expands production and jobs in those areas. That could include in supplies previously imported.
You do realise even Biden imposed tariffs on cheap Chinese goods mass dumped on the US market given the damage it did US industry? The EU also imposed tariffs on imports of Chinese EVs etc
The only reason you import is because the imported goods are either more expensive locally, not available locally or of a poorer quality locally. In the case of the latter two it either can't be replicated locally or to do so makes it more expensive, which brings us back to 'more expensive locally'. If you could expand local production to compete on price, market forces would have made it happen already.
Now if you apply tariffs the imported competition prices are now higher which does enable local competitors to set up and compete, but only against the new importers prices not against their original prices.
So prices will still go up
e.g.
Imported T shirt at $5. Lowest local production possible at $7 so people buy import.
Tariff increases import to $10 so local production can set up, but still an increase of $2
Regarding dumping - that is a completely different issue.
Not really, you can use tariffs to reduce dumping too
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Within the forseeable future the chances of there being an 'off world colony' more than a human presence of a few people at most for a matter of days is close to zero. And at just the point when the realise that it would be nice to be home for tea and watch a bit of football on the telly, it will dawn on them that the journey back is not simple.
I don't actually think so.
We (humans) could establish a moon base with permanent occupation with current technology. It would be a bit harder than ISS, but not much.
"NATO boss Mark Rutte sat in silence as Donald Trump said he wanted to annexe Greenland (NATO member) and Canada (NATO Member) "
Rutte hasn't had a good war. He's been a rabbit in the headlights since 1/20/25. One can't help thinking Baldy Ben would have been a much better option.
I'm remembering how certain people, here, were sure that his "Full Tonto" remark was career ending insanity.
"NATO boss Mark Rutte sat in silence as Donald Trump said he wanted to annexe Greenland (NATO member) and Canada (NATO Member) "
Rutte hasn't had a good war. He's been a rabbit in the headlights since 1/20/25. One can't help thinking Baldy Ben would have been a much better option.
I'm remembering how certain people, here, were sure that his "Full Tonto" remark was career ending insanity.
That was then. Now part of the political lexicon.
More that he was proved 100% right, within a short period of time.
Not if they buy more American made products instead though
So you are economically illiterate, then.
Even where it's possible to substitute domestic production, the Trump tariffs increase raw materials input costs, which will raise prices. And the reduced price competition from imported gooods means that domestic producers have more scope to increase their prices.
And of course there is a huge range of consumer products - notably affordable clothing - where there is no real domestic production. Buying American can mean paying several times the imported price - and for most goods, domestic production barely exists.
If more buy American products that expands production and jobs in those areas. That could include in supplies previously imported.
You do realise even Biden imposed tariffs on cheap Chinese goods mass dumped on the US market given the damage it did US industry? The EU also imposed tariffs on imports of Chinese EVs etc
You do realise that you are arguing for zero trade between any countries at all? Have a think about why that might not be such a great idea and get back to us.
No you could export any excess production to countries which lack much of that good even in a largely protectionist economy
Moving on to less serious matters and the final day of Cheltenham and anyone following my selections is probably going to have to do a Dettori (too soon?):
Triumph Hurdle: HELLO NEIGHBOUR
Damn - I read that as Trump Hurdle. The all caps seemed quite appropriate.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Partial gravity experiments have been studiously avoided by NASA for decades. The reasons are complicated, but come down to organisational politics/personal views of a small number of people. Rather like the slow motion disaster that is the space suit division.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
Meanwhile Russia Hoovers up Kursk and marches for Kyiv. If Trump set Ukraine up for a ceasefire it looks like it has back fired, and instead he foolishly stacked the cards against them for a defeat
Kursk is part of Russia.
Neither Zelensky nor Putin have agreed current ceasefire terms anyway and until they do there won't be one and peacekeeping troops talk is irrelevant
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
On this morning's BBC news they are reporting it as if Putin has rejected the ceasefire offer. Which of course he has, he is dressing it up as considering it but it is nothing of the sort.
Fine. We continue to arm UKr and Russian war economy collapses by end of the year.
The idea that he is winning or he can keep going for years is crap imho.
Yes, I saw it as good news, at least some people are seeing through the Kremlin's dissembling. Seems Witkoff/Vitkov's trip to Moscow might not have gone well, rumours he left late at night
Russia is moving into Belarus and now pointing out the Finland used to be Russian. Not the comments of someone worried about Trump.
I can find no comments by Putin about Finland which is part of NATO anyway
You don't seem to realise that Trump has just gutted NATO on behalf of Putin.
Is Article 5 still a thing? Certainly not for the US it isn't. You have to consider NATO operating sans USA. That is the new reality.
Well if Putin invaded Finland NATO would be at war with Russia including the US unless Trump and Congress had withdrawn from NATO by then
I don't think it works like that. A request for assistance under Article 5 is just that, a request. The US would simply refuse to provide assistance, it is voluntary.
Which it could though other NATO nations would then no longer be required to support the US if say China invaded or a second 9/11
Not if they buy more American made products instead though
So you are economically illiterate, then.
Even where it's possible to substitute domestic production, the Trump tariffs increase raw materials input costs, which will raise prices. And the reduced price competition from imported gooods means that domestic producers have more scope to increase their prices.
And of course there is a huge range of consumer products - notably affordable clothing - where there is no real domestic production. Buying American can mean paying several times the imported price - and for most goods, domestic production barely exists.
If more buy American products that expands production and jobs in those areas. That could include in supplies previously imported.
You do realise even Biden imposed tariffs on cheap Chinese goods mass dumped on the US market given the damage it did US industry? The EU also imposed tariffs on imports of Chinese EVs etc
The only reason you import is because the imported goods are either more expensive locally, not available locally or of a poorer quality locally. In the case of the latter two it either can't be replicated locally or to do so makes it more expensive, which brings us back to 'more expensive locally'. If you could expand local production to compete on price, market forces would have made it happen already.
Now if you apply tariffs the imported competition prices are now higher which does enable local competitors to set up and compete, but only against the new importers prices not against their original prices.
So prices will still go up
e.g.
Imported T shirt at $5. Lowest local production possible at $7 so people buy import.
Tariff increases import to $10 so local production can set up, but still an increase of $2
Regarding dumping - that is a completely different issue.
Not really, you can use tariffs to reduce dumping too
Oh absolutely. It is about the only sensible use of tariffs. Not disagreeing on that.
Just pointing out it is a completely different issue to the one I gave as an example and is not what Trump is doing generally.
What he is doing is economically illiterate and will isolate America. Fortunately for a America, unlike many countries, they can survive isolation pretty well, but it will make them poorer and reduce the availability of goods.
Crunch time then with Putin rejecting a ceasefire. How Trump plays this will show whether he is genuinely seeking a viable peace deal. Either he applies leverage on Putin to force concessions or he doesn't. Nowhere to hide now.
Russia is moving into Belarus and now pointing out the Finland used to be Russian. Not the comments of someone worried about Trump.
I wonder if annexing Belarus would be a potential way for Russia to claim a victory internally while accepting their gains in Ukraine will be more limited (for now).
In the new era of strong men and Trump threatening to annex neighbours, Putin doing the same to what is already a vassal state doesn't feel unlikely.
Putin is very exposed to Belarus's hardman suffering some, er, terminal event and being overthrown by a democracy that then runs to join NATO. Putin would probably have to invade before that could happen. Otherwise, his problems just got massively worse. ANd UKraine's security just got much easier to manage with the western half of the country safer from invaion.
How Trump would see his friend invading Belarus - with the ensuing slaughter of democracy protestors - would be, er, enlightening.
A sensible first step in any UK presence in Ukraine might be to guarantee the northern border with Belarus, leaving the Ukrainians to fight it out elsewhere.
Crunch time then with Putin rejecting a ceasefire. How Trump plays this will show whether he is genuinely seeking a viable peace deal. Either he applies leverage on Putin to force concessions or he doesn't. Nowhere to hide now.
The US has increased sanctions on Russian banks, oil and gas this morning
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
"NATO boss Mark Rutte sat in silence as Donald Trump said he wanted to annexe Greenland (NATO member) and Canada (NATO Member) "
Rutte hasn't had a good war. He's been a rabbit in the headlights since 1/20/25. One can't help thinking Baldy Ben would have been a much better option.
I'm remembering how certain people, here, were sure that his "Full Tonto" remark was career ending insanity.
That was then. Now part of the political lexicon.
More that he was proved 100% right, within a short period of time.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
Meanwhile Russia Hoovers up Kursk and marches for Kyiv. If Trump set Ukraine up for a ceasefire it looks like it has back fired, and instead he foolishly stacked the cards against them for a defeat
Kursk is part of Russia.
Neither Zelensky nor Putin have agreed current ceasefire terms anyway and until they do there won't be one and peacekeeping troops talk is irrelevant
Zelenskyy has indeed agreed current ceasefire terms. It is for an unconditional temporary cessation in hostilities, without preconditions, to allow talks to start. Putin has clearly rejected that.
My view is that next time Putin wibbles on about no NATO troops we immediately deploy a small defensive or logistic formation in western Ukraine, as a way of saying idi na khuy
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
Meanwhile Russia Hoovers up Kursk and marches for Kyiv. If Trump set Ukraine up for a ceasefire it looks like it has back fired, and instead he foolishly stacked the cards against them for a defeat
Kursk is part of Russia.
Neither Zelensky nor Putin have agreed current ceasefire terms anyway and until they do there won't be one and peacekeeping troops talk is irrelevant
Once peacekeeping troops are in Ukraine the borders will be fixed and Russia won’t be able to restart the war.
Which is problematic for Putin because at best he wants time to rearm
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Within the forseeable future the chances of there being an 'off world colony' more than a human presence of a few people at most for a matter of days is close to zero. And at just the point when the realise that it would be nice to be home for tea and watch a bit of football on the telly, it will dawn on them that the journey back is not simple.
I don't actually think so.
We (humans) could establish a moon base with permanent occupation with current technology. It would be a bit harder than ISS, but not much.
Though most wouldn't volunteer, we still haven't found a planet or moon with anywhere near the conditions for human life as on earth
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Surely Musk et al should be looking at colonising Twix rather than Mars?
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Within the forseeable future the chances of there being an 'off world colony' more than a human presence of a few people at most for a matter of days is close to zero. And at just the point when the realise that it would be nice to be home for tea and watch a bit of football on the telly, it will dawn on them that the journey back is not simple.
I don't actually think so.
We (humans) could establish a moon base with permanent occupation with current technology. It would be a bit harder than ISS, but not much.
Thanks. I shall wait and see.
SFAICS most of the excitable talk is about Mars colonies; with the idea of habitation of a permanent sort. Whether moon or Mars similar problems arise - the major technical ones; and the human ones of living for long in an environment utterly hostile to everything you were evolved to manage, and socially detached from what gives you meaning. Like tickling the grandchild's toes.
"O world, Your loves, your chances, are beyond the stretch Of any hand from here!"
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Surely Musk et al should be looking at colonising Twix rather than Mars?
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
For sure (although LibDems have had MPs in such places before). Reform ought to be clear favourites, with their toxic infighting and ties to Trump being the two obvious weaknesses. All Labour really has going for it is an appeal for tactical voting to keep Reform out. With the five MPs Reform already has being pretty invisible, I'm not convinced that line is going to have the pull that they might hope, in a by-election. Their having six MPs (or back to five, without Lowe) won't change anything.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
Meanwhile Russia Hoovers up Kursk and marches for Kyiv. If Trump set Ukraine up for a ceasefire it looks like it has back fired, and instead he foolishly stacked the cards against them for a defeat
Kursk is part of Russia.
Neither Zelensky nor Putin have agreed current ceasefire terms anyway and until they do there won't be one and peacekeeping troops talk is irrelevant
Once peacekeeping troops are in Ukraine the borders will be fixed and Russia won’t be able to restart the war.
Which is problematic for Putin because at best he wants time to rearm
And Zelensky won't agree a ceasefire without peacekeeping troops anyway so it is still miles off
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
Meanwhile Russia Hoovers up Kursk and marches for Kyiv. If Trump set Ukraine up for a ceasefire it looks like it has back fired, and instead he foolishly stacked the cards against them for a defeat
Kursk is part of Russia.
Neither Zelensky nor Putin have agreed current ceasefire terms anyway and until they do there won't be one and peacekeeping troops talk is irrelevant
Once peacekeeping troops are in Ukraine the borders will be fixed and Russia won’t be able to restart the war.
Which is problematic for Putin because at best he wants time to rearm
And Zelensky won't agree a ceasefire without peacekeeping troops anyway so it is still miles off
Nope, he's just agreed a temporary ceasefire with no preconditions
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Until the turning point, eh? Where the LibDems do so well they overtake Reform.
Good Morning everyone. Pleasant and sunny here, if a little cold so far.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
Meanwhile Russia Hoovers up Kursk and marches for Kyiv. If Trump set Ukraine up for a ceasefire it looks like it has back fired, and instead he foolishly stacked the cards against them for a defeat
Kursk is part of Russia.
Neither Zelensky nor Putin have agreed current ceasefire terms anyway and until they do there won't be one and peacekeeping troops talk is irrelevant
Once peacekeeping troops are in Ukraine the borders will be fixed and Russia won’t be able to restart the war.
Which is problematic for Putin because at best he wants time to rearm
And Zelensky won't agree a ceasefire without peacekeeping troops anyway so it is still miles off
Nope, he's just agreed a temporary ceasefire with no preconditions
Have we decided whose court the ball is currently in? Who has to play the next shot?
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
But according to our resident Tory insider, he is rather keen for a RefCon love in with Tories lending their votes to eradicate Labour. I am not sure he is aware this tactic could also eradicate the Tories.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Partial gravity experiments have been studiously avoided by NASA for decades. The reasons are complicated, but come down to organisational politics/personal views of a small number of people. Rather like the slow motion disaster that is the space suit division.
AIUI, a big reason for the module's late cancellation was questions of how vibrations from the large centrifuge would affect long-term zero-G experiments in the rest of the ISS.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Within the forseeable future the chances of there being an 'off world colony' more than a human presence of a few people at most for a matter of days is close to zero. And at just the point when the realise that it would be nice to be home for tea and watch a bit of football on the telly, it will dawn on them that the journey back is not simple.
I don't actually think so.
We (humans) could establish a moon base with permanent occupation with current technology. It would be a bit harder than ISS, but not much.
Thanks. I shall wait and see.
SFAICS most of the excitable talk is about Mars colonies; with the idea of habitation of a permanent sort. Whether moon or Mars similar problems arise - the major technical ones; and the human ones of living for long in an environment utterly hostile to everything you were evolved to manage, and socially detached from what gives you meaning. Like tickling the grandchild's toes.
"O world, Your loves, your chances, are beyond the stretch Of any hand from here!"
The first step is getting the cost down to get there and back.
If moon missions are 10 billion, once every two years, you’re not going to get more than flags and footprints. Again.
We’ve seen an explosion (ha!) of orbital space usage, driven by reduced costs.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
But according to our resident Tory insider, he is rather keen for a RefCon love in with Tories lending their votes to eradicate Labour. I am not sure he is aware this tactic could also eradicate the Tories.
Possible I suppose, but my sense is that the Tory polling number is so small generally that those who remain are those who are quite resistent to the charms, such as they are, of Farageism. If Reform were an acceptable replacement for Toryism, Tories would now be found only in a museum.
This is basically just get the UK/Japan/Italy to pay for NGAD because Boeing or Lockmart would have to be the prime. P&W would expect, with some justification, to get the propulsion because the inevitable GE/RR consortium can't match their awesome lobbying power.
This is basically just get the UK/Japan/Italy to pay for NGAD because Boeing or Lockmart would have to be the prime. P&W would expect, with some justification, to get the propulsion because the inevitable GE/RR consortium can't match their awesome lobbying power.
So the sane answer is nope we want the planes delivered this century and with working engines and fuselages without cracks
Ferrari look pretty promising in Aus. Leclerc for pole, MD ?
He's 2.75 for pole with Ladbrokes... but start of the season uncertainty makes me reluctant to bet at those odds. Both McLarens are in with a shot, maybe Hamilton/Verstappen too.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
Meanwhile Russia Hoovers up Kursk and marches for Kyiv. If Trump set Ukraine up for a ceasefire it looks like it has back fired, and instead he foolishly stacked the cards against them for a defeat
Kursk is part of Russia.
Neither Zelensky nor Putin have agreed current ceasefire terms anyway and until they do there won't be one and peacekeeping troops talk is irrelevant
Once peacekeeping troops are in Ukraine the borders will be fixed and Russia won’t be able to restart the war.
Which is problematic for Putin because at best he wants time to rearm
And Zelensky won't agree a ceasefire without peacekeeping troops anyway so it is still miles off
Nope, he's just agreed a temporary ceasefire with no preconditions
Have we decided whose court the ball is currently in? Who has to play the next shot?
That depends on Trump's next brain fart... he seems more preoccupied with Greenland and Canada at the moment. My view is that Putin has just knocked the ball out the stadium and we need to apply pressure to make him go and fetch it
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Partial gravity experiments have been studiously avoided by NASA for decades. The reasons are complicated, but come down to organisational politics/personal views of a small number of people. Rather like the slow motion disaster that is the space suit division.
AIUI, a big reason for the module's late cancellation was questions of how vibrations from the large centrifuge would affect long-term zero-G experiments in the rest of the ISS.
The point was made earlier about problems with gestation in different gravity situations. Unless a colony's members can reproduce themselves then it's surely not a 'colony' but some sort of 'outstation'. I don't think human reproduction has ever been tried in Antarctica, has it. At least, not to full term.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Within the forseeable future the chances of there being an 'off world colony' more than a human presence of a few people at most for a matter of days is close to zero. And at just the point when the realise that it would be nice to be home for tea and watch a bit of football on the telly, it will dawn on them that the journey back is not simple.
I don't actually think so.
We (humans) could establish a moon base with permanent occupation with current technology. It would be a bit harder than ISS, but not much.
Thanks. I shall wait and see.
SFAICS most of the excitable talk is about Mars colonies; with the idea of habitation of a permanent sort. Whether moon or Mars similar problems arise - the major technical ones; and the human ones of living for long in an environment utterly hostile to everything you were evolved to manage, and socially detached from what gives you meaning. Like tickling the grandchild's toes.
"O world, Your loves, your chances, are beyond the stretch Of any hand from here!"
The first step is getting the cost down to get there and back.
If moon missions are 10 billion, once every two years, you’re not going to get more than flags and footprints. Again.
We’ve seen an explosion (ha!) of orbital space usage, driven by reduced costs.
Extraterrestrial colonies are a whole different ball game to research outposts. Hell, we don't even have colonies on Antarctica, let alone the moon or Mars.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
For sure (although LibDems have had MPs in such places before). Reform ought to be clear favourites, with their toxic infighting and ties to Trump being the two obvious weaknesses. All Labour really has going for it is an appeal for tactical voting to keep Reform out. With the five MPs Reform already has being pretty invisible, I'm not convinced that line is going to have the pull that they might hope, in a by-election. Their having six MPs (or back to five, without Lowe) won't change anything.
It allows Farage a victory lap and claim Reform are heading towards Government. Goebbels claimed propaganda was very important.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
On this morning's BBC news they are reporting it as if Putin has rejected the ceasefire offer. Which of course he has, he is dressing it up as considering it but it is nothing of the sort.
Whoever's court the ball is in, SFAICS it isn't Mr Z's. And to get to that point, non-USA NATO countries have played it well.
Trump possibly has the choice between doing something difficult - negotiation with Russia when he doesn't hold all the cards, and there is no simple outcome, and he can't quite blame Mr Z - or, more likely, acting deranged again.
🐎 It’s last day of the Fez 😭 maybe just as well, I feel totally overtired and need an early night.
Just the 4 wins from the 3 days so far. 🤦♀️
I have looked again at my Friday picks, from Tuesdays header, made from jottings in my notebook and sifting a mountain of tips last weekend, and there is still no one I would rather be on today, than those same tips.
Except.
Learning the horses for courses lesson from Il Est Francais, who had never raced at Cheltenham before, Wodhoo goes in the Martin Pipe (5.20) has won on this course at same distance, this season.
And - this is more abstract and debatable - FAIRLY FAMOUS has won course and distance too, but when I first joined this site I got entangled in an argument with Topping (which I know today, isn’t such a surprising thing to occur on PB, but I quickly learnt posting here can become like wrestling a pig in mud before finding the pig enjoying itself so much, whilst you are asking not only how do I extract myself from this, but how did I come to be pointlessly wrestling in mud for so long on such a niche point in the first place) where I had only suggested keep an eye on non rules racing, because how horses pop up from under radar as long odds winners at events like the Fez - and sure enough, where this horse doesn’t appear to have raced much for a while, look closer and it’s won 2 3m point to points in recent months. I still call it under the radar honing for specific target race, and more than happy for mud wrestle on this niche point. So I suggest keep an eye on FAIRLY FAMOUS in the Hunters Chase (4.40).
13:20 The JCB Triumph Hurdle WINNER East India Dock NAP 14:00 The William Hill County Handicap WINNER Absurde 14:40 The Mrs Paddy Power Mares' Steeple Chase WINNER Dinoblue 15:20 The Albert Bartlett Novices’ Hurdle Race WINNER Jet Blue 16:00 The Boodles Cheltenham Gold Cup Steeple Chase WINNER Galopin Des Champs NAP 16:40 The St. James’s Place Festival Hunters Chase WINNER Angel’s Dawn but consider Fairly Famous who has recent distance points wins behind the scenes. 17:20 Martin Pipe Conditional Jockeys’ Handicap Hurdle WINNER Kopeck De Mee but consider Wodhoo who won c&d few months ago.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Just as new council tax and water bills are being paid and the impact of the budget on businesses.
Lots of negatives.
Few positives. Reintroducing beavers seems to be the main one.
Big increase in minimum wage, also pensions, and whatever else is coming in on April 1st.
Plus workers rights, rental bill coming down the track very soon, and others.
There's plenty total about, if they get a media strategy and some self-confidence.
All of those are potentially banana skins.
The renting bill has already seen private landlords sell up.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Partial gravity experiments have been studiously avoided by NASA for decades. The reasons are complicated, but come down to organisational politics/personal views of a small number of people. Rather like the slow motion disaster that is the space suit division.
AIUI, a big reason for the module's late cancellation was questions of how vibrations from the large centrifuge would affect long-term zero-G experiments in the rest of the ISS.
The point was made earlier about problems with gestation in different gravity situations. Unless a colony's members can reproduce themselves then it's surely not a 'colony' but some sort of 'outstation'. I don't think human reproduction has ever been tried in Antarctica, has it. At least, not to full term.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Partial gravity experiments have been studiously avoided by NASA for decades. The reasons are complicated, but come down to organisational politics/personal views of a small number of people. Rather like the slow motion disaster that is the space suit division.
AIUI, a big reason for the module's late cancellation was questions of how vibrations from the large centrifuge would affect long-term zero-G experiments in the rest of the ISS.
The point was made earlier about problems with gestation in different gravity situations. Unless a colony's members can reproduce themselves then it's surely not a 'colony' but some sort of 'outstation'. I don't think human reproduction has ever been tried in Antarctica, has it. At least, not to full term.
If anything goes wrong, it's a hell of a long way to Argentina/Chile....
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
On this morning's BBC news they are reporting it as if Putin has rejected the ceasefire offer. Which of course he has, he is dressing it up as considering it but it is nothing of the sort.
Whoever's court the ball is in, SFAICS it isn't Mr Z's. And to get to that point, non-USA NATO countries have played it well.
Trump possibly has the choice between doing something difficult - negotiation with Russia when he doesn't hold all the cards, and there is no simple outcome, and he can't quite blame Mr Z - or, more likely, acting deranged again.
As part of that derangement he would of course blame someone else. If it can't be Zelenskyy, then who? The Poles?
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Within the forseeable future the chances of there being an 'off world colony' more than a human presence of a few people at most for a matter of days is close to zero. And at just the point when the realise that it would be nice to be home for tea and watch a bit of football on the telly, it will dawn on them that the journey back is not simple.
I don't actually think so.
We (humans) could establish a moon base with permanent occupation with current technology. It would be a bit harder than ISS, but not much.
Thanks. I shall wait and see.
SFAICS most of the excitable talk is about Mars colonies; with the idea of habitation of a permanent sort. Whether moon or Mars similar problems arise - the major technical ones; and the human ones of living for long in an environment utterly hostile to everything you were evolved to manage, and socially detached from what gives you meaning. Like tickling the grandchild's toes.
"O world, Your loves, your chances, are beyond the stretch Of any hand from here!"
The first step is getting the cost down to get there and back.
If moon missions are 10 billion, once every two years, you’re not going to get more than flags and footprints. Again.
We’ve seen an explosion (ha!) of orbital space usage, driven by reduced costs.
Extraterrestrial colonies are a whole different ball game to research outposts. Hell, we don't even have colonies on Antarctica, let alone the moon or Mars.
Both Chile and Argentina have small civilian "towns" which include facilities such as schools. I'm not sure how long people actually live there though, they are presumably on some sort of rotation
I think we should allow them in, on condition they say please and thank you on each future visit, promise to wear suits, and we can brick their multi billion dollar purchases on any random whim.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Within the forseeable future the chances of there being an 'off world colony' more than a human presence of a few people at most for a matter of days is close to zero. And at just the point when the realise that it would be nice to be home for tea and watch a bit of football on the telly, it will dawn on them that the journey back is not simple.
I don't actually think so.
We (humans) could establish a moon base with permanent occupation with current technology. It would be a bit harder than ISS, but not much.
Thanks. I shall wait and see.
SFAICS most of the excitable talk is about Mars colonies; with the idea of habitation of a permanent sort. Whether moon or Mars similar problems arise - the major technical ones; and the human ones of living for long in an environment utterly hostile to everything you were evolved to manage, and socially detached from what gives you meaning. Like tickling the grandchild's toes.
"O world, Your loves, your chances, are beyond the stretch Of any hand from here!"
The first step is getting the cost down to get there and back.
If moon missions are 10 billion, once every two years, you’re not going to get more than flags and footprints. Again.
We’ve seen an explosion (ha!) of orbital space usage, driven by reduced costs.
Extraterrestrial colonies are a whole different ball game to research outposts. Hell, we don't even have colonies on Antarctica, let alone the moon or Mars.
This is basically just get the UK/Japan/Italy to pay for NGAD because Boeing or Lockmart would have to be the prime. P&W would expect, with some justification, to get the propulsion because the inevitable GE/RR consortium can't match their awesome lobbying power.
So the sane answer is nope we want the planes delivered this century and with working engines and fuselages without cracks
I could see it happening. The UK and Italy were Tier 1/2 partners on F-35. Get the band back together and all that.
None of the GCAP gang are committing any more than a fraction of the money it would take actually to do it so this would be a convenient out which ingratiates them with DJT. Which they are all keen to do, one way or another... eg the MoD just put Starlink on HMS PoW because of Musk, not despite Musk.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Partial gravity experiments have been studiously avoided by NASA for decades. The reasons are complicated, but come down to organisational politics/personal views of a small number of people. Rather like the slow motion disaster that is the space suit division.
AIUI, a big reason for the module's late cancellation was questions of how vibrations from the large centrifuge would affect long-term zero-G experiments in the rest of the ISS.
The point was made earlier about problems with gestation in different gravity situations. Unless a colony's members can reproduce themselves then it's surely not a 'colony' but some sort of 'outstation'. I don't think human reproduction has ever been tried in Antarctica, has it. At least, not to full term.
If anything goes wrong, it's a hell of a long way to Argentina/Chile....
Even further back from Mars! Seriously, I know a child was born to one of the Pilgrim Mothers fairly soon after arrival but was was the neonatal death rate compared with England. For the first five years or so, anyway. Anyone know?
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Within the forseeable future the chances of there being an 'off world colony' more than a human presence of a few people at most for a matter of days is close to zero. And at just the point when the realise that it would be nice to be home for tea and watch a bit of football on the telly, it will dawn on them that the journey back is not simple.
I don't actually think so.
We (humans) could establish a moon base with permanent occupation with current technology. It would be a bit harder than ISS, but not much.
Though most wouldn't volunteer, we still haven't found a planet or moon with anywhere near the conditions for human life as on earth
You'd actually be fighting volunteers off with a stick. Surveys have been done on this. Some people really love adventure.
This is basically just get the UK/Japan/Italy to pay for NGAD because Boeing or Lockmart would have to be the prime. P&W would expect, with some justification, to get the propulsion because the inevitable GE/RR consortium can't match their awesome lobbying power.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Partial gravity experiments have been studiously avoided by NASA for decades. The reasons are complicated, but come down to organisational politics/personal views of a small number of people. Rather like the slow motion disaster that is the space suit division.
AIUI, a big reason for the module's late cancellation was questions of how vibrations from the large centrifuge would affect long-term zero-G experiments in the rest of the ISS.
The point was made earlier about problems with gestation in different gravity situations. Unless a colony's members can reproduce themselves then it's surely not a 'colony' but some sort of 'outstation'. I don't think human reproduction has ever been tried in Antarctica, has it. At least, not to full term.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
But according to our resident Tory insider, he is rather keen for a RefCon love in with Tories lending their votes to eradicate Labour. I am not sure he is aware this tactic could also eradicate the Tories.
Possible I suppose, but my sense is that the Tory polling number is so small generally that those who remain are those who are quite resistent to the charms, such as they are, of Farageism. If Reform were an acceptable replacement for Toryism, Tories would now be found only in a museum.
But don't Tories want the RedWall Angry Brigade voting Tory rather than fash-lite. HY seems comfortable with the latter which gives us lots of Reform MPs.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
Sorry, but you weren't under the impression I was predicting a LD win were you? I don't wish to be identified as the PB idiot. I was distinguishing between a taxi load of votes (which you would expect when being squeezed in this type of by election) or actually getting a respectable vote because of reasons as discussed and shown in that by election poll
Crunch time then with Putin rejecting a ceasefire. How Trump plays this will show whether he is genuinely seeking a viable peace deal. Either he applies leverage on Putin to force concessions or he doesn't. Nowhere to hide now.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
But according to our resident Tory insider, he is rather keen for a RefCon love in with Tories lending their votes to eradicate Labour. I am not sure he is aware this tactic could also eradicate the Tories.
Reform were second to Labour in Runcorn even in 2024 when the Tories were second to Labour nationally. So Tory voters tactically voting Reform there makes sense given most Tories want to get rid of this awful Labour government above all and given we still have FPTP
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Partial gravity experiments have been studiously avoided by NASA for decades. The reasons are complicated, but come down to organisational politics/personal views of a small number of people. Rather like the slow motion disaster that is the space suit division.
AIUI, a big reason for the module's late cancellation was questions of how vibrations from the large centrifuge would affect long-term zero-G experiments in the rest of the ISS.
That was the official reason.
When the Japanese (and others) pointed out mitigations, or even a redesign using active magnetic bearings (even having it as a free flyer was posited), they were told that it still wouldn't happen.
The reason is that the ISS project division has a fundamental belief in "We are only here for micro-gravity research" - anything else is actively not wanted.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Within the forseeable future the chances of there being an 'off world colony' more than a human presence of a few people at most for a matter of days is close to zero. And at just the point when the realise that it would be nice to be home for tea and watch a bit of football on the telly, it will dawn on them that the journey back is not simple.
I don't actually think so.
We (humans) could establish a moon base with permanent occupation with current technology. It would be a bit harder than ISS, but not much.
Thanks. I shall wait and see.
SFAICS most of the excitable talk is about Mars colonies; with the idea of habitation of a permanent sort. Whether moon or Mars similar problems arise - the major technical ones; and the human ones of living for long in an environment utterly hostile to everything you were evolved to manage, and socially detached from what gives you meaning. Like tickling the grandchild's toes.
"O world, Your loves, your chances, are beyond the stretch Of any hand from here!"
The first step is getting the cost down to get there and back.
If moon missions are 10 billion, once every two years, you’re not going to get more than flags and footprints. Again.
We’ve seen an explosion (ha!) of orbital space usage, driven by reduced costs.
Extraterrestrial colonies are a whole different ball game to research outposts. Hell, we don't even have colonies on Antarctica, let alone the moon or Mars.
Both Chile and Argentina have small civilian "towns" which include facilities such as schools. I'm not sure how long people actually live there though, they are presumably on some sort of rotation
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
Yes. The LibDems would have to throw everything at it, to be in contention, with a pitch giving a stack of reasons not to vote for the government or for the extremists. If they got to being seen as in contention, everything could change. But it's not very fertile territory, and has no LibDem track record at all to build on. And, more pointedly, with local elections looming and a stack of newly elected Home Counties MPs wanting to shore up their position by sweeping away Tories from their local councils, the timing isn't going to work.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Partial gravity experiments have been studiously avoided by NASA for decades. The reasons are complicated, but come down to organisational politics/personal views of a small number of people. Rather like the slow motion disaster that is the space suit division.
AIUI, a big reason for the module's late cancellation was questions of how vibrations from the large centrifuge would affect long-term zero-G experiments in the rest of the ISS.
The point was made earlier about problems with gestation in different gravity situations. Unless a colony's members can reproduce themselves then it's surely not a 'colony' but some sort of 'outstation'. I don't think human reproduction has ever been tried in Antarctica, has it. At least, not to full term.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
Meanwhile Russia Hoovers up Kursk and marches for Kyiv. If Trump set Ukraine up for a ceasefire it looks like it has back fired, and instead he foolishly stacked the cards against them for a defeat
Kursk is part of Russia.
It hadn't been for a while until Trump became President.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
Yes. The LibDems would have to throw everything at it, to be in contention, with a pitch giving a stack of reasons not to vote for the government or for the extremists. If they got to being seen as in contention, everything could change. But it's not very fertile territory, and has no LibDem track record at all to build on. And, more pointedly, with local elections looming and a stack of newly elected Home Counties MPs wanting to shore up their position by sweeping away Tories from their local councils, the timing isn't going to work.
Couldn't have written that better.
Getting worried now that people think I am tipping a LD win. One can only dream. And that is what it would be - a dream.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Within the forseeable future the chances of there being an 'off world colony' more than a human presence of a few people at most for a matter of days is close to zero. And at just the point when the realise that it would be nice to be home for tea and watch a bit of football on the telly, it will dawn on them that the journey back is not simple.
I don't actually think so.
We (humans) could establish a moon base with permanent occupation with current technology. It would be a bit harder than ISS, but not much.
Thanks. I shall wait and see.
SFAICS most of the excitable talk is about Mars colonies; with the idea of habitation of a permanent sort. Whether moon or Mars similar problems arise - the major technical ones; and the human ones of living for long in an environment utterly hostile to everything you were evolved to manage, and socially detached from what gives you meaning. Like tickling the grandchild's toes.
"O world, Your loves, your chances, are beyond the stretch Of any hand from here!"
The first step is getting the cost down to get there and back.
If moon missions are 10 billion, once every two years, you’re not going to get more than flags and footprints. Again.
We’ve seen an explosion (ha!) of orbital space usage, driven by reduced costs.
Extraterrestrial colonies are a whole different ball game to research outposts. Hell, we don't even have colonies on Antarctica, let alone the moon or Mars.
The lack of mining towns on Antarctica is likely due to treaty rather than tech.
This is basically just get the UK/Japan/Italy to pay for NGAD because Boeing or Lockmart would have to be the prime. P&W would expect, with some justification, to get the propulsion because the inevitable GE/RR consortium can't match their awesome lobbying power.
Like that's going to happen after the way Trump has behaved recently. If they really are asking to be part of the program (which I somewhat doubt), their lobbying power would be somewhat limited compared to what it would be domestically.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
But according to our resident Tory insider, he is rather keen for a RefCon love in with Tories lending their votes to eradicate Labour. I am not sure he is aware this tactic could also eradicate the Tories.
Reform were second to Labour in Runcorn even in 2024 when the Tories were second to Labour nationally. So Tory voters tactically voting Reform there makes sense given most Tories want to get rid of this awful Labour government above all and given we still have FPTP
I don't believe you are speaking for lifelong one nation Tories. You are not a Tory, you are a RefConner.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
Sorry, but you weren't under the impression I was predicting a LD win were you? I don't wish to be identified as the PB idiot. I was distinguishing between a taxi load of votes (which you would expect when being squeezed in this type of by election) or actually getting a respectable vote because of reasons as discussed and shown in that by election poll
I expect the average LD member is more likely to have been to Tuscany than 2 Pints Runcorn. Would they even be able to find it on a map? No Gails for a cappuccino and pastry break either at most they might get a Greggs sausage roll (presumably half of them would want the vegan option?)
This is basically just get the UK/Japan/Italy to pay for NGAD because Boeing or Lockmart would have to be the prime. P&W would expect, with some justification, to get the propulsion because the inevitable GE/RR consortium can't match their awesome lobbying power.
Like that's going to happen after the way Trump has behaved recently. If they really are asking to be part of the program (which I somewhat doubt), their lobbying power would be somewhat limited compared to what it would be domestically.
Let them be a customer of the platform and rely on BAE for maintenance...
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
Sorry, but you weren't under the impression I was predicting a LD win were you? I don't wish to be identified as the PB idiot. I was distinguishing between a taxi load of votes (which you would expect when being squeezed in this type of by election) or actually getting a respectable vote because of reasons as discussed and shown in that by election poll
I expect the average LD member is more likely to have been to Tuscany than 2 Pints Runcorn. Would they even be able to find it on a map? No Gails for a cappuccino and pastry break either at most they might get a Greggs sausage roll (presumably half of them would want the vegan option?)
Made me laugh @hyufd. Possibly a little exaggerated, although a description that is a bit too close to me for comfort (other than not being vegan)
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
But according to our resident Tory insider, he is rather keen for a RefCon love in with Tories lending their votes to eradicate Labour. I am not sure he is aware this tactic could also eradicate the Tories.
Reform were second to Labour in Runcorn even in 2024 when the Tories were second to Labour nationally. So Tory voters tactically voting Reform there makes sense given most Tories want to get rid of this awful Labour government above all and given we still have FPTP
I don't believe you are speaking for lifelong one nation Tories. You are not a Tory, you are a RefConner.
If you are classifying One Nation Tories as those who prefer Starmer to Farage those can be counted on one hand and most of them would stick to voting Tory even in Runcorn not tactically vote Labour to keep Reform out
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Partial gravity experiments have been studiously avoided by NASA for decades. The reasons are complicated, but come down to organisational politics/personal views of a small number of people. Rather like the slow motion disaster that is the space suit division.
AIUI, a big reason for the module's late cancellation was questions of how vibrations from the large centrifuge would affect long-term zero-G experiments in the rest of the ISS.
The point was made earlier about problems with gestation in different gravity situations. Unless a colony's members can reproduce themselves then it's surely not a 'colony' but some sort of 'outstation'. I don't think human reproduction has ever been tried in Antarctica, has it. At least, not to full term.
If anything goes wrong, it's a hell of a long way to Argentina/Chile....
Even further back from Mars! Seriously, I know a child was born to one of the Pilgrim Mothers fairly soon after arrival but was was the neonatal death rate compared with England. For the first five years or so, anyway. Anyone know?
Talking of strange colonies, Los Alamos during the Manhattan Project was a proto-Soviet factory town in the heart of New Mexico, as far removed as possible from the American idyll it was designed to protect. It's still quite well preserved as an historic site, and as by-way to an alternate universe that wasn't taken.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
Meanwhile Russia Hoovers up Kursk and marches for Kyiv. If Trump set Ukraine up for a ceasefire it looks like it has back fired, and instead he foolishly stacked the cards against them for a defeat
Kursk is part of Russia.
It hadn't been for a while until Trump became President.
{Putin mode selected}
The Kursk region rejoined Ukraine. It has always been part of Ukraine.
I can only find one "by party" graph in the poll - support for sending troops to Ukraine. Reform UK out of line, as per the current usual.
I'd be interested to know which factions in Ref UK constitute the 20% difference. Commentary I have seen (TBF: social media of various types) suggests that they will be thinking "send the to the channel to stop the boats".
There has to first be a peace deal to enforce between Russia and Ukraine and second Russia would have to accept British peacekeeping troops none of which applies at present
Depressing that people are seriously defending the idea Russia should have a veto on what happens within a sovereign neighbouring country.
Well no ceasefire then as it takes Russian agreement too for any ceasefire
Meanwhile Russia Hoovers up Kursk and marches for Kyiv. If Trump set Ukraine up for a ceasefire it looks like it has back fired, and instead he foolishly stacked the cards against them for a defeat
Kursk is part of Russia.
It hadn't been for a while until Trump became President.
You have to wonder if the Ukrainians have been told to get out of Kursk if they don't want things to get nastier, the Americans having seen the Ukrainian presence there as a real sticking point in any peace negotiations (in that Putin would have to make significant concessions for its return).
If countries wish to rearm, it's not just the finance they need, there is a whole host of items that need to be considered first.
* The actual plan: Japanese tend to be good at this as they are detail conscious. Chinese just throw people at it. The Brits tend to start and get bogged down in the middle as someone hadn't thought to order the screwdrivers.
* The site: You're talking about space and utilities - air, water, power. Bashing metal takes a lot of power so unless there is spare capacity close by, there may be a restriction on how quickly production can be ramped up. Rheinmetall and their 155mm shell plant is close to completion but ramping up production is going to take time.
* Machinery: Usually you'll take any second hand plant that is close by that can be converted quickly if you are wanting to scale up sooner rather than later. New plant that is not sitting in a warehouse somewhere (unlikely) has it's own lead time. If it's on the critical path then someone grabbing it first (see PPE in Covid) will put you back.
*Raw Materials: Is the grade of material you want available. Can you use substitutes? Are the suppliers friendly or not.
Bringing this all together at scale will be for the next war and not this one. The Ukrainian developments of drones (air and sea) will be seen as an impressive response to their lack of resources. But when Russia changed the battlefield to men (they had some) and machines (they had lots), the nature of the fight changed. Especially when no airpower was offered.
So unless Europe has a few plants ready to go (e.g.Volkswagen) it could be all over if the US refuse to supply from their manufacturing base.
Do you Labour have a byelection guru they can send in?
There's plenty of positive things for them to talk about were they willing to do so consistently and repeatedly, starting with NHS waiting lists. And lots of stats are due out between now and the byelection date, so it needs a ground operation.
When do we expect the byelection to be?
Interesting that the LDs have nearly doubled in that by election poll and challenging the Tories for 3rd since the GE. You would expect them to be squeezed to nothing.
As I said a few days ago, there will be plenty of centre and left wing voters about with good reasons not to vote Labour, now they're in charge, and asking people to return a Labour MP to add to the hundreds they already have isn't a very persuasive pitch, anyway. The big card Labour had, of being the change, has gone now that people can see it for real.
Yep. I commented similarly yesterday (I think it was yesterday, great minds eh). I was convinced this was a Reform walk over until their recent troubles. Now we have the 3 leading parties in this by election that many don't want to vote for. An opportunity for LDs/Greens?
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The white working class Leave demographics of Runcorn make it a Reform v Labour fight.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
Don't disagree with any of that.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
There are only two feasible settings for the by-election: Reform win because not enough of the 70% who reject them gang up to vote Labour, as Labour are not popular enough.
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
Sorry, but you weren't under the impression I was predicting a LD win were you? I don't wish to be identified as the PB idiot. I was distinguishing between a taxi load of votes (which you would expect when being squeezed in this type of by election) or actually getting a respectable vote because of reasons as discussed and shown in that by election poll
No - and apologies for my unclarity which suggested otherwise.
This is basically just get the UK/Japan/Italy to pay for NGAD because Boeing or Lockmart would have to be the prime. P&W would expect, with some justification, to get the propulsion because the inevitable GE/RR consortium can't match their awesome lobbying power.
Like that's going to happen after the way Trump has behaved recently. If they really are asking to be part of the program (which I somewhat doubt), their lobbying power would be somewhat limited compared to what it would be domestically.
Let them be a customer of the platform and rely on BAE for maintenance...
The only way any such future collaborations will work is for the partners to have autonomy regarding their own use of the platform. The nonsense which applies with the F35 - where individual mission profiles are, de facto, vetted by the US* (unless you're Israel) - is not going to fly.
*It can't actually veto them, but without the tailored mission data files, the capability of the F35 is significantly degraded.
This is basically just get the UK/Japan/Italy to pay for NGAD because Boeing or Lockmart would have to be the prime. P&W would expect, with some justification, to get the propulsion because the inevitable GE/RR consortium can't match their awesome lobbying power.
Like that's going to happen after the way Trump has behaved recently. If they really are asking to be part of the program (which I somewhat doubt), their lobbying power would be somewhat limited compared to what it would be domestically.
Let them be a customer of the platform and rely on BAE for maintenance...
One thing we do need to do, is pull a Germany.
That is, claim that we are ordering an absurd number of aircraft, to get workshare. Then reduce the number, later. And threaten to collapse the project unless we keep the workshare.
Germany did this for both Tornado and Eurofighter.
Any off world colony is going to resemble the PRC or (even North Korea!) far more than the Western Democracies - at least for the first few generations. The fragile, incredibly resource constrained environment pretty much guarantees that.
Until the Federation a la Star Trek I presume
Until they attempt to break with their home groups - like the 13 colonies. A Mars colony attempting become self-sufficient would be the ultimate in command economy resource management. And that kind of struggle with imprint itself of the future nature of any society that evolves from any groups that survives.
I'd be happier promoting Mars colonies if we actually knew how low-gravity affects gestation in larger animals.
Partial gravity experiments have been studiously avoided by NASA for decades. The reasons are complicated, but come down to organisational politics/personal views of a small number of people. Rather like the slow motion disaster that is the space suit division.
AIUI, a big reason for the module's late cancellation was questions of how vibrations from the large centrifuge would affect long-term zero-G experiments in the rest of the ISS.
The point was made earlier about problems with gestation in different gravity situations. Unless a colony's members can reproduce themselves then it's surely not a 'colony' but some sort of 'outstation'. I don't think human reproduction has ever been tried in Antarctica, has it. At least, not to full term.
If anything goes wrong, it's a hell of a long way to Argentina/Chile....
Even further back from Mars! Seriously, I know a child was born to one of the Pilgrim Mothers fairly soon after arrival but was was the neonatal death rate compared with England. For the first five years or so, anyway. Anyone know?
Talking of strange colonies, Los Alamos during the Manhattan Project was a proto-Soviet factory town in the heart of New Mexico, as far removed as possible from the American idyll it was designed to protect. It's still quite well preserved as an historic site, and as by-way to an alternate universe that wasn't taken.
The daughter of a boffin I am working with was born there.
Comments
And that reversing this would be a good idea even if the money wasn't needed for increased defence spending.
Go Trumpian...
"There are no arms deliveries. Plus they are agricultural tools - the best agricultural tools in the world. Plus Russia cooperation with the Aliens from Zeta Reticula is breaking the ceasefire."
In the new era of strong men and Trump threatening to annex neighbours, Putin doing the same to what is already a vassal state doesn't feel unlikely.
Now if you apply tariffs the imported competition prices are now higher which does enable local competitors to set up and compete, but only against the new importers prices not against their original prices.
So prices will still go up
e.g.
Imported T shirt at $5. Lowest local production possible at $7 so people buy import.
Tariff increases import to $10 so local production can set up, but still an increase of $2
Regarding dumping - that is a completely different issue.
How Trump would see his friend invading Belarus - with the ensuing slaughter of democracy protestors - would be, er, enlightening.
I assumed initially the LDs would get squeezed to oblivion in this by election. Now not so sure and wonder if it is worth them putting in an effort. If it is not on local election day (which I assume it will be) it would have been worth a go to get a good result.
The idea that he is winning or he can keep going for years is crap imho.
Reform need Tory tactical votes and Labour LD and Green tactical votes.
So the better the LDs do there the better for Farage and Reform too
We (humans) could establish a moon base with permanent occupation with current technology. It would be a bit harder than ISS, but not much.
Now part of the political lexicon.
Neither Zelensky nor Putin have agreed current ceasefire terms anyway and until they do there won't be one and peacekeeping troops talk is irrelevant
Just pointing out it is a completely different issue to the one I gave as an example and is not what Trump is doing generally.
What he is doing is economically illiterate and will isolate America. Fortunately for a America, unlike many countries, they can survive isolation pretty well, but it will make them poorer and reduce the availability of goods.
I was just wondering whether the LDs should put in an effort to get a good result rather than the votes from a small taxi, but agree if they did it would boost Reform's chances of winning, by taking votes from Labour.
If on local election day I can't see the LDs bothering.
My view is that next time Putin wibbles on about no NATO troops we immediately deploy a small defensive or logistic formation in western Ukraine, as a way of saying idi na khuy
Which is problematic for Putin because at best he wants time to rearm
SFAICS most of the excitable talk is about Mars colonies; with the idea of habitation of a permanent sort. Whether moon or Mars similar problems arise - the major technical ones; and the human ones of living for long in an environment utterly hostile to everything you were evolved to manage, and socially detached from what gives you meaning. Like tickling the grandchild's toes.
"O world,
Your loves, your chances, are beyond the stretch
Of any hand from here!"
6th-Gen Aircraft: U.S. Explores Joining Euro-Japanese GCAP Fighter Program As Its NGAD Is Heading Nowhere
https://www.eurasiantimes.com/us-eyes-participation-in-euro-japanese-6th-gen-fighter-jet/?amp
Or Labour win because enough LDs/Tories/Greens lend them their votes, as they hate Reform enough and Labour are OK enough.
The million to one outsider is that everyone but Reform voters agree on votiong LD because it'sa by-election.
I think Labour will win; and if Reform win it will be a bad day.
Good Morning everyone. Pleasant and sunny here, if a little cold so far.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifuge_Accommodations_Module
AIUI, a big reason for the module's late cancellation was questions of how vibrations from the large centrifuge would affect long-term zero-G experiments in the rest of the ISS.
If moon missions are 10 billion, once every two years, you’re not going to get more than flags and footprints. Again.
We’ve seen an explosion (ha!) of orbital space usage, driven by reduced costs.
Leclerc for pole, MD ?
https://morrisf1.blogspot.com/2025/03/australian-grand-prix-2025-pre.html
Was quite tempted by Stroll to beat Alonso in qualifying at 3.5 but decided not to tip it.
I don't think human reproduction has ever been tried in Antarctica, has it. At least, not to full term.
Trump possibly has the choice between doing something difficult - negotiation with Russia when he doesn't hold all the cards, and there is no simple outcome, and he can't quite blame Mr Z - or, more likely, acting deranged again.
It’s last day of the Fez 😭
maybe just as well, I feel totally overtired and need an early night.
Just the 4 wins from the 3 days so far. 🤦♀️
I have looked again at my Friday picks, from Tuesdays header, made from jottings in my notebook and sifting a mountain of tips last weekend, and there is still no one I would rather be on today, than those same tips.
Except.
Learning the horses for courses lesson from Il Est Francais, who had never raced at Cheltenham before, Wodhoo goes in the Martin Pipe (5.20) has won on this course at same distance, this season.
And - this is more abstract and debatable - FAIRLY FAMOUS has won course and distance too, but when I first joined this site I got entangled in an argument with Topping (which I know today, isn’t such a surprising thing to occur on PB, but I quickly learnt posting here can become like wrestling a pig in mud before finding the pig enjoying itself so much, whilst you are asking not only how do I extract myself from this, but how did I come to be pointlessly wrestling in mud for so long on such a niche point in the first place) where I had only suggested keep an eye on non rules racing, because how horses pop up from under radar as long odds winners at events like the Fez - and sure enough, where this horse doesn’t appear to have raced much for a while, look closer and it’s won 2 3m point to points in recent months. I still call it under the radar honing for specific target race, and more than happy for mud wrestle on this niche point. So I suggest keep an eye on FAIRLY FAMOUS in the Hunters Chase (4.40).
13:20 The JCB Triumph Hurdle WINNER East India Dock NAP
14:00 The William Hill County Handicap WINNER Absurde
14:40 The Mrs Paddy Power Mares' Steeple Chase WINNER Dinoblue
15:20 The Albert Bartlett Novices’ Hurdle Race WINNER Jet Blue
16:00 The Boodles Cheltenham Gold Cup Steeple Chase WINNER Galopin Des Champs NAP
16:40 The St. James’s Place Festival Hunters Chase WINNER Angel’s Dawn but consider Fairly Famous who has recent distance points wins behind the scenes.
17:20 Martin Pipe Conditional Jockeys’ Handicap Hurdle WINNER Kopeck De Mee but consider Wodhoo who won c&d few months ago.
🙋♀️
Oh go on then, if you insist....
The renting bill has already seen private landlords sell up.
Won’t affect many people anyway
Higher council tax and water bills do
None of the GCAP gang are committing any more than a fraction of the money it would take actually to do it so this would be a convenient out which ingratiates them with DJT. Which they are all keen to do, one way or another... eg the MoD just put Starlink on HMS PoW because of Musk, not despite Musk.
Seriously, I know a child was born to one of the Pilgrim Mothers fairly soon after arrival but was was the neonatal death rate compared with England. For the first five years or so, anyway. Anyone know?
"Rosebud....."
When the Japanese (and others) pointed out mitigations, or even a redesign using active magnetic bearings (even having it as a free flyer was posited), they were told that it still wouldn't happen.
The reason is that the ISS project division has a fundamental belief in "We are only here for micro-gravity research" - anything else is actively not wanted.
Any idea of the 'populations'?
Getting worried now that people think I am tipping a LD win. One can only dream. And that is what it would be - a dream.
If they really are asking to be part of the program (which I somewhat doubt), their lobbying power would be somewhat limited compared to what it would be domestically.
The Kursk region rejoined Ukraine. It has always been part of Ukraine.
If countries wish to rearm, it's not just the finance they need, there is a whole host of items that need to be considered first.
* The actual plan: Japanese tend to be good at this as they are detail conscious. Chinese just throw people at it. The Brits tend to start and get bogged down in the middle as someone hadn't thought to order the screwdrivers.
* The site: You're talking about space and utilities - air, water, power. Bashing metal takes a lot of power so unless there is spare capacity close by, there may be a restriction on how quickly production can be ramped up. Rheinmetall and their 155mm shell plant is close to completion but ramping up production is going to take time.
* Machinery: Usually you'll take any second hand plant that is close by that can be converted quickly if you are wanting to scale up sooner rather than later. New plant that is not sitting in a warehouse somewhere (unlikely) has it's own lead time. If it's on the critical path then someone grabbing it first (see PPE in Covid) will put you back.
*Raw Materials: Is the grade of material you want available. Can you use substitutes? Are the suppliers friendly or not.
Bringing this all together at scale will be for the next war and not this one. The Ukrainian developments of drones (air and sea) will be seen as an impressive response to their lack of resources. But when Russia changed the battlefield to men (they had some) and machines (they had lots), the nature of the fight changed. Especially when no airpower was offered.
So unless Europe has a few plants ready to go (e.g.Volkswagen) it could be all over if the US refuse to supply from their manufacturing base.
The nonsense which applies with the F35 - where individual mission profiles are, de facto, vetted by the US* (unless you're Israel) - is not going to fly.
*It can't actually veto them, but without the tailored mission data files, the capability of the F35 is significantly degraded.
That is, claim that we are ordering an absurd number of aircraft, to get workshare. Then reduce the number, later. And threaten to collapse the project unless we keep the workshare.
Germany did this for both Tornado and Eurofighter.