Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Good luck Casino. As one gets older one gets to the point where one doesn't give a f*** what anyone else thinks.
When I was fourteen and I sounded like Jasper Carrot singing Funky Moped I was told by a very posh boy at Grammar School "you must be very poor and ill educated". It wasn't said with any malice aforethought it was simply an observation, but it f***** me up. 45 years later one of us made the pages of the London Gazette in a pre- bankruptcy notice, and it wasn't me.
There was this kid at my school we used to call Teeds (can't remember why) and if you threw a tennis ball with sufficient accuracy and vim at the back of his neck he would pass out. We used to call this phenomenon 'Teeds Shutdown' and we would keep a running total of how many TS we achieved over the course of the academic year. I rarely troubled the scorers as I was a willowy youth better suited to playing Tatiana in our production of a Midsummer Night's Dream.
Teeds is easily the most succesful of everyone I was at boarding school with and his third wife is an absolute rocket.
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
I'm not sure being a councillor now, for any party, is any fun.
You're severely constrained in what you can do by national policy and hand-me-down budget, and mainly there to take the blame for executing it and trying to square the impossible.
I think (once) Hampshire County Council sent a "what would you cut?" list round as a survey to help guide councillors. I went through it, largely looking at the big line items on social care/support and suggestions on what to trim to balance the budget/invest elsewhere, and got surprising resistance from my very right-wing parents when I suggested qualifying it all.
There is no appetite for it.
Hampshire Tories are in deep trouble, having tried to get permission for an extraordinary 15% council tax increase with something similar again next year, but been held to the national cap of (effectively) 5%. The county is heading the way of Surrey.
Meanwhile Kemi is doing her best to assure everyone that voting Tory means sound financial management….
So much is a statutory responsibility that the council cannot legally cut that bankruptcy is a constant fear.
Farage wants to cut children's services for special educational needs for example. Even if that were desired, it would require national policy change, not local.
Yes, that's the point.
So if Reform do as well as expected and end up running some councils and mayoralities, what happens next?
They will face the same hideous maths as the Uniparty politicians they despise. And the things that seem to be the focus of their campaigning (pro boat stopping, anti solar farms) aren't really going to be in their control.
Serious question: why are Reform against solar farms, that is against cheap energy and energy security?
I'm not sure being a councillor now, for any party, is any fun.
You're severely constrained in what you can do by national policy and hand-me-down budget, and mainly there to take the blame for executing it and trying to square the impossible.
I think (once) Hampshire County Council sent a "what would you cut?" list round as a survey to help guide councillors. I went through it, largely looking at the big line items on social care/support and suggestions on what to trim to balance the budget/invest elsewhere, and got surprising resistance from my very right-wing parents when I suggested qualifying it all.
There is no appetite for it.
Hampshire Tories are in deep trouble, having tried to get permission for an extraordinary 15% council tax increase with something similar again next year, but been held to the national cap of (effectively) 5%. The county is heading the way of Surrey.
Meanwhile Kemi is doing her best to assure everyone that voting Tory means sound financial management….
So much is a statutory responsibility that the council cannot legally cut that bankruptcy is a constant fear.
Farage wants to cut children's services for special educational needs for example. Even if that were desired, it would require national policy change, not local.
Yes, that's the point.
So if Reform do as well as expected and end up running some councils and mayoralities, what happens next?
They will face the same hideous maths as the Uniparty politicians they despise. And the things that seem to be the focus of their campaigning (pro boat stopping, anti solar farms) aren't really going to be in their control.
Serious question: why are Reform against solar farms, that is against cheap energy and energy security?
Renewable energy = woke. The analysis is no more sophisticated than that.
Ed Miliband has the vision to make Britain the global leader in carbon capture and storage technology.
I believe that PBers are united in supporting this bold vision, and recognise that the tens of billions of pounds of public money necessary to kick-start the industry will be money well spent.
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
I'm not sure being a councillor now, for any party, is any fun.
You're severely constrained in what you can do by national policy and hand-me-down budget, and mainly there to take the blame for executing it and trying to square the impossible.
I think (once) Hampshire County Council sent a "what would you cut?" list round as a survey to help guide councillors. I went through it, largely looking at the big line items on social care/support and suggestions on what to trim to balance the budget/invest elsewhere, and got surprising resistance from my very right-wing parents when I suggested qualifying it all.
There is no appetite for it.
Hampshire Tories are in deep trouble, having tried to get permission for an extraordinary 15% council tax increase with something similar again next year, but been held to the national cap of (effectively) 5%. The county is heading the way of Surrey.
Meanwhile Kemi is doing her best to assure everyone that voting Tory means sound financial management….
So much is a statutory responsibility that the council cannot legally cut that bankruptcy is a constant fear.
Farage wants to cut children's services for special educational needs for example. Even if that were desired, it would require national policy change, not local.
Yes, that's the point.
So if Reform do as well as expected and end up running some councils and mayoralities, what happens next?
They will face the same hideous maths as the Uniparty politicians they despise. And the things that seem to be the focus of their campaigning (pro boat stopping, anti solar farms) aren't really going to be in their control.
Serious question: why are Reform against solar farms, that is against cheap energy and energy security?
Are you familiar with the strike price of new solar? It may be cheap to the builders/owners but it is not cheap for the end user. Hence the people calling it a con.
The same goes for all energy in the UK system - it is oddly rigged against energy users and toward enormous profits for providers. Oh wait, I just realised that isn't odd at all.
I'm of the school of thought that says that the key factor in Arm's success was "right business model at the right time" (licensing the CPU to all comers in a way that they could put it into their own chips, at the point where the mobile phone revolution was just starting). The tech was good, which always helps, and there were undoubtedly many points where things could have gone pear shaped, but it's the business model that made them super successful. Similarly, to the extent that they get displaced by RISCV that will also be down to "right business model at the right time" rather than whether it is technically better or worse.
Yes, Robin Saxby should get an honour for the way he shepherded ARM forward as its first CEO and developed its business model. A great man. There was a *lot* of reticence to using ARM up to the mid-1990s, and a heck of a lot of work needed doing, not just on developing new chip versions, but in getting the tools to create chips. And the compilers. Never forget the compilers...
But my point is that ARM could easily have failed, as Acorn did. There was more than a little luck in its success. But you cannot be lucky if you do not try, and that means we need more small groups of people doing something, to borrow Jobs' phrase 'insanely great'. Not because they will make a fortune, but because it is cool. And we need to support those people.
Apple is a good example of persistence in tech. A British equivalent would have folded or been sold, long before the things that made it unique captured huge markets.
Similar story in biotech. Back in the 80s/90s, we were up there with the US as the best in the world. Greg Winter won a Nobel prize for his antibody discoveries. He was one of the developers of phage display technology which enable the generation of massive antibody libraries (analogous to an artificial bit of the immune system which dues something similar). That was then first commercialised by Cambridge Antibody Technology, who developed what became for the best part of a decade, the world's most valuable drug (Humira).
CAT ended up with something like a 1.5% royalty. The US company which commercialised it became a new large pharma - Abbvie. It's now larger then either of the two British pharmas, GSK and AZN. And didn't even exist back then.
I take a Humira bio similar. I owe those guys a lot!
As a mark of the missed opportunity, AZN ended up buying CAT. And is still smaller than the company which commercialised its best selling drug.
We still do great science, but we've fallen a long way down the ranks of the industry leaders.
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Good luck Casino. As one gets older one gets to the point where one doesn't give a f*** what anyone else thinks.
When I was fourteen and I sounded like Jasper Carrot singing Funky Moped I was told by a very posh boy at Grammar School "you must be very poor and ill educated". It wasn't said with any malice aforethought it was simply an observation, but it f***** me up. 45 years later one of us made the pages of the London Gazette in a pre- bankruptcy notice, and it wasn't me.
There was this kid at my school we used to call Teeds (can't remember why) and if you threw a tennis ball with sufficient accuracy and vim at the back of his neck he would pass out. We used to call this phenomenon 'Teeds Shutdown' and we would keep a running total of how many TS we achieved over the course of the academic year. I rarely troubled the scorers as I was a willowy youth better suited to playing Tatiana in our production of a Midsummer Night's Dream.
Teeds is easily the most succesful of everyone I was at boarding school with and his third wife is an absolute rocket.
Was than the Russian version ?
I was Helena. I don't honestly know what any of my fellow inmates are doing now.
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
Interesting. I do strike a very anti-Labour note here, but I am open to silver linings. My impression is that whilst they are (slowly) becoming aware of the problems, they are ideologically incapable of implementing effective solutions. The best I hope for is that they slowly get the journey underway and then Refcon come in and click into a higher gear.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Oddly enough, they're not to me. I'm pretty much a nobody, and I'm pretty much happy with that. I wonder whether introversion vs extroversion character traits play a part?
(Having said that, I do maintain a website. Is that a search for status and recognition?)
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Oddly enough, they're not to me. I'm pretty much a nobody, and I'm pretty much happy with that. I wonder whether introversion vs extroversion character traits play a part?
(Having said that, I do maintain a website. Is that a search for status and recognition?)
Nor me either. I have never sought to measure myself by the opinion of others. Happiness comes from focusing on intrinsic goals rather than extrinsic ones. When I think of the people that I am jealous of, so far as ai can think of anyone to be jealous of, it's people like my friends working in Africa.
It does depend very much on personality though. Most alpha males are doomed to unhappiness, while Sigma or delta males find it easier. It isn't always possible to change though.
Sounds very Stoic to me. I have myself been increasingly attracted to that philosophy as I have grown older. It seems to give me a sound moral and ethical base without the need for religious belief. And it does provide considerable contentment.
I think Stoicism has always been the most attractive of all the ancient pagan belief systems. They never quite got to the point of condemning slavery as an institution, but they did see slaves as human beings, rather than as chattels. Some were even eccentric enough to treat male infidelity as a sin.
Lots of men on here saying they don't care about status and identity without realising they actually do it all the time.
Approximately 10 years ago I applied to become a part time Sheriff. It was a position which I thought I was very well qualified. I didn't get an interview. I was very cross and did not apply to have anything for another decade, being content to make a reasonable living without having to ask anybody for anything.
I now find myself in the uncomfortable position of having 2 significant and different applications outstanding at the same time. It is not making me happy. I generally prefer the mode of not giving a damn what others think. Now I need to care. Sigh.
Lots of men on here saying they don't care about status and identity without realising they actually do it all the time.
I think it's easy to look at the "making piles of cash" or "becoming super famous" status seekers and say to yourself "well, I don't play either of those games so I don't care about status". I don't want to become famous, but I do care about the opinion of others in, for example, the (small) professional/work communities I'm in. Same kind of thing, just a much smaller pond.
Ed Miliband has the vision to make Britain the global leader in carbon capture and storage technology.
I believe that PBers are united in supporting this bold vision, and recognise that the tens of billions of pounds of public money necessary to kick-start the industry will be money well spent.
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
Interesting. I do strike a very anti-Labour note here, but I am open to silver linings. My impression is that whilst they are (slowly) becoming aware of the problems, they are ideologically incapable of implementing effective solutions. The best I hope for is that they slowly get the journey underway and then Refcon come in and click into a higher gear.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
I'll stop. None of that seems serious to me.
I do however approve of the changes to CGT.
On steel - one option would be to dump a billion or 2 into green steel technology. Which actually exists and works. Steel without coal/coke.
Then you could pitch carbon tariffs on imported steel… really pressure the planet to go green.
The boats, the black economy and a good deal of criminality could be solved by my suggestion of huge fines for illegal employment (of all kinds). The reporting person gets half on conviction. And indefinite leave to remain….
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
Interesting. I do strike a very anti-Labour note here, but I am open to silver linings. My impression is that whilst they are (slowly) becoming aware of the problems, they are ideologically incapable of implementing effective solutions. The best I hope for is that they slowly get the journey underway and then Refcon come in and click into a higher gear.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
I'll stop. None of that seems serious to me.
I do however approve of the changes to CGT.
On steel - one option would be to dump a billion or 2 into green steel technology. Which actually exists and works. Steel without coal/coke.
Then you could pitch carbon tariffs on imported steel… really pressure the planet to go green.
Sure. But in the meantime, the coking mine should be opened and the furnaces fed.
Lots of men on here saying they don't care about status and identity without realising they actually do it all the time.
I think it's easy to look at the "making piles of cash" or "becoming super famous" status seekers and say to yourself "well, I don't play either of those games so I don't care about status". I don't want to become famous, but I do care about the opinion of others in, for example, the (small) professional/work communities I'm in. Same kind of thing, just a much smaller pond.
Is it the same thing ? Caring about the opinions of others isn't quite the same thing about caring about status.
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
Interesting. I do strike a very anti-Labour note here, but I am open to silver linings. My impression is that whilst they are (slowly) becoming aware of the problems, they are ideologically incapable of implementing effective solutions. The best I hope for is that they slowly get the journey underway and then Refcon come in and click into a higher gear.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
I'll stop. None of that seems serious to me.
I do however approve of the changes to CGT.
On steel - one option would be to dump a billion or 2 into green steel technology. Which actually exists and works. Steel without coal/coke.
Then you could pitch carbon tariffs on imported steel… really pressure the planet to go green.
Sure. But in the meantime, the coking mine should be opened and the furnaces fed.
It would take several years to get the coking mine up and running.
Building the modified blast furnaces for green steel would be faster.
Not wishing to start last night's debate again, but by chance this Spectator link came up on my phone today. Thought you might be interested @HYUFD even if we don't agree.
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
Interesting. I do strike a very anti-Labour note here, but I am open to silver linings. My impression is that whilst they are (slowly) becoming aware of the problems, they are ideologically incapable of implementing effective solutions. The best I hope for is that they slowly get the journey underway and then Refcon come in and click into a higher gear.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
I'll stop. None of that seems serious to me.
I do however approve of the changes to CGT.
On steel - one option would be to dump a billion or 2 into green steel technology. Which actually exists and works. Steel without coal/coke.
Then you could pitch carbon tariffs on imported steel… really pressure the planet to go green.
The boats, the black economy and a good deal of criminality could be solved by my suggestion of huge fines for illegal employment (of all kinds). The reporting person gets half on conviction. And indefinite leave to remain….
It's notable that the party which benefitted most from this issue, and is currently running the US, strenuously resists any such thing.
Lots of men on here saying they don't care about status and identity without realising they actually do it all the time.
Approximately 10 years ago I applied to become a part time Sheriff. It was a position which I thought I was very well qualified. I didn't get an interview. I was very cross and did not apply to have anything for another decade, being content to make a reasonable living without having to ask anybody for anything.
I now find myself in the uncomfortable position of having 2 significant and different applications outstanding at the same time. It is not making me happy. I generally prefer the mode of not giving a damn what others think. Now I need to care. Sigh.
I've become a Board Trustee only to find it takes up a huge amount of time, and it's very hard to change anything, but i carry lots of accountability and liability.
On the plus side, getting Board experience is great and I'm learning much more about politics and people- which is essentially 90%+ of it.
Lots of men on here saying they don't care about status and identity without realising they actually do it all the time.
I think it's easy to look at the "making piles of cash" or "becoming super famous" status seekers and say to yourself "well, I don't play either of those games so I don't care about status". I don't want to become famous, but I do care about the opinion of others in, for example, the (small) professional/work communities I'm in. Same kind of thing, just a much smaller pond.
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
I think they’ve already ‘followed through’ in several areas. 💩
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
Interesting. I do strike a very anti-Labour note here, but I am open to silver linings. My impression is that whilst they are (slowly) becoming aware of the problems, they are ideologically incapable of implementing effective solutions. The best I hope for is that they slowly get the journey underway and then Refcon come in and click into a higher gear.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
I'll stop. None of that seems serious to me.
I do however approve of the changes to CGT.
On steel - one option would be to dump a billion or 2 into green steel technology. Which actually exists and works. Steel without coal/coke.
Then you could pitch carbon tariffs on imported steel… really pressure the planet to go green.
Sure. But in the meantime, the coking mine should be opened and the furnaces fed.
It would take several years to get the coking mine up and running.
Building the modified blast furnaces for green steel would be faster.
Will take, not would take. The objections will not survive a change in Government.
I still don't see why the two things need to be mutually exclusive. The magnificent progress of the Chinese on green energy has been lauded here by our China-fanciers as an excuse for the fact that they open coal mines like it's going out of fashion, but they don't make the link - China is powering its leadership of green technology with 'dirty' fuel. That's how you become the leader, not refuse to open a single specialist coal mine because you have let the imbeciles gain control of the loony bin.
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
I’d do that. Reform or Tories? Not likely. Their focus is big stuff, telling us what to do, putting people down to feel better about themselves.
My focus would be small changes to empower enthuse and support.
If you look at the people that succeed they generally have something behind them. I’d want to put the whole of society behind us all.
I wonder how SKS’s ‘enable the boats’ strategy gifting five year tenancies for asylum seekers will impact on the rental markets especially in places like London and the South Easr.
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on aand bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Oddly enough, they're not to me. I'm pretty much a nobody, and I'm pretty much happy with that. I wonder whether introversion vs extroversion character traits play a part?
(Having said that, I do maintain a website. Is that a search for status and recognition?)
Status and recognition doesn't necessarily mean publicly, of course.
You could take pride in your walking prowess and achievements, or detailed knowledge of transport or industry, for example.
But you have to have something.
TBF you said "hugely important". I think that's where we differ.
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Oddly enough, they're not to me. I'm pretty much a nobody, and I'm pretty much happy with that. I wonder whether introversion vs extroversion character traits play a part?
(Having said that, I do maintain a website. Is that a search for status and recognition?)
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Oddly enough, they're not to me. I'm pretty much a nobody, and I'm pretty much happy with that. I wonder whether introversion vs extroversion character traits play a part?
(Having said that, I do maintain a website. Is that a search for status and recognition?)
Nor me either. I have never sought to measure myself by the opinion of others. Happiness comes from focusing on intrinsic goals rather than extrinsic ones. When I think of the people that I am jealous of, so far as ai can think of anyone to be jealous of, it's people like my friends working in Africa.
It does depend very much on personality though. Most alpha males are doomed to unhappiness, while Sigma or delta males find it easier. It isn't always possible to change though.
The kind of alpha male who's dining with his much younger girlfriend, in an exclusive waterfront restaurant, and then finds himself worrying about the size of his ... yacht, when another alpha male sails into harbour in a flashier boat, is doomed never to know happiness.
The truth about money and success is this:
It doesn’t make you happy. But my god it makes unhappiness much easier to bear
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
Interesting. I do strike a very anti-Labour note here, but I am open to silver linings. My impression is that whilst they are (slowly) becoming aware of the problems, they are ideologically incapable of implementing effective solutions. The best I hope for is that they slowly get the journey underway and then Refcon come in and click into a higher gear.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
I'll stop. None of that seems serious to me.
I do however approve of the changes to CGT.
On steel - one option would be to dump a billion or 2 into green steel technology. Which actually exists and works. Steel without coal/coke.
Then you could pitch carbon tariffs on imported steel… really pressure the planet to go green.
The boats, the black economy and a good deal of criminality could be solved by my suggestion of huge fines for illegal employment (of all kinds). The reporting person gets half on conviction. And indefinite leave to remain….
I also don't really see the point of this dobbing in incentive on illegal employment. Do you think the police are unaware of where the illegal employers are? I don't. I just don't think they're interested.
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on aand bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Oddly enough, they're not to me. I'm pretty much a nobody, and I'm pretty much happy with that. I wonder whether introversion vs extroversion character traits play a part?
(Having said that, I do maintain a website. Is that a search for status and recognition?)
Status and recognition doesn't necessarily mean publicly, of course.
You could take pride in your walking prowess and achievements, or detailed knowledge of transport or industry, for example.
But you have to have something.
TBF you said "hugely important". I think that's where we differ.
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
Interesting. I do strike a very anti-Labour note here, but I am open to silver linings. My impression is that whilst they are (slowly) becoming aware of the problems, they are ideologically incapable of implementing effective solutions. The best I hope for is that they slowly get the journey underway and then Refcon come in and click into a higher gear.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
I'll stop. None of that seems serious to me.
I do however approve of the changes to CGT.
On steel - one option would be to dump a billion or 2 into green steel technology. Which actually exists and works. Steel without coal/coke.
Then you could pitch carbon tariffs on imported steel… really pressure the planet to go green.
The boats, the black economy and a good deal of criminality could be solved by my suggestion of huge fines for illegal employment (of all kinds). The reporting person gets half on conviction. And indefinite leave to remain….
I also don't really see the point of this dobbing in incentive on illegal employment. Do you think the police are unaware of where the illegal employers are? I don't. I just don't think they're interested.
Police have rather more important things to do then dealing with illegal employment - want to handle that create a specialist team to do so
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
Interesting. I do strike a very anti-Labour note here, but I am open to silver linings. My impression is that whilst they are (slowly) becoming aware of the problems, they are ideologically incapable of implementing effective solutions. The best I hope for is that they slowly get the journey underway and then Refcon come in and click into a higher gear.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
I'll stop. None of that seems serious to me.
I do however approve of the changes to CGT.
On steel - one option would be to dump a billion or 2 into green steel technology. Which actually exists and works. Steel without coal/coke.
Then you could pitch carbon tariffs on imported steel… really pressure the planet to go green.
The boats, the black economy and a good deal of criminality could be solved by my suggestion of huge fines for illegal employment (of all kinds). The reporting person gets half on conviction. And indefinite leave to remain….
I also don't really see the point of this dobbing in incentive on illegal employment. Do you think the police are unaware of where the illegal employers are? I don't. I just don't think they're interested.
Police have rather more important things to do then dealing with illegal employment - want to handle that create a specialist team to do so
Well quite. There are people being unkind on Twitter.
Lots of men on here saying they don't care about status and identity without realising they actually do it all the time.
I think it's easy to look at the "making piles of cash" or "becoming super famous" status seekers and say to yourself "well, I don't play either of those games so I don't care about status". I don't want to become famous, but I do care about the opinion of others in, for example, the (small) professional/work communities I'm in. Same kind of thing, just a much smaller pond.
Just an observation. Being rich and being famous are not the same thing. There are thousands of anonymous accountants on £50K a year. If you earn £50K a year from writing poetry or playing jazz, you will have interviews in the weekend printed supplements and the culture columns of websites.
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
Interesting. I do strike a very anti-Labour note here, but I am open to silver linings. My impression is that whilst they are (slowly) becoming aware of the problems, they are ideologically incapable of implementing effective solutions. The best I hope for is that they slowly get the journey underway and then Refcon come in and click into a higher gear.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
I'll stop. None of that seems serious to me.
I do however approve of the changes to CGT.
On steel - one option would be to dump a billion or 2 into green steel technology. Which actually exists and works. Steel without coal/coke.
Then you could pitch carbon tariffs on imported steel… really pressure the planet to go green.
Sure. But in the meantime, the coking mine should be opened and the furnaces fed.
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
The problem as I see it is that everyone's mental health is different, and so needs different treatment.
I suffered from quite bad anxiety as a teenager, and when i was laying in bed at night unable to sleep, my Dad told me how many people were worse off than me, there were kids dying of cancer in Great Ormond St who would give anything to have my problems etc, and that made it worse... I started hating myself for being so selfish, which made me more anxious, and so on. My Dad is a lovely bloke to be clear, he just comes from a background of tough love, where you don't complain or cry. He thought me realising how I was relatively well off would help. Maybe I could have done with someone telling me it was ok to feel this way etc.
But on the other hand, someone who has been mollycoddled their whole life could probably do with a kick up the arse, get out and get some fresh air, do some hard work, embrace the challenge, toughen up! Diff'rent strokes
As you say, mental health awareness is everywhere now, and it seems to encourage more people to think they have poor mental health, rather than life having ups and downs. I think the "get fit, stop drinking/drugs, get off your phone and get outside" route should be the first port of call to separate the genuinely mentally ill from those who feel down/anxious/sketchy because they're not doing enough exercise
I had a couple of issues when I was a teenager, including significant health issues, and I used to think that I was depressed. Looking back, and having known people suffering from deep depression - including one who took his own life - I realised I have never been depressed. I was just a little down. The Black Dog is unmistakable, and thankfully has never stalked me.
I'd also agree that people are different, and require different approaches. Some people may require different approaches at different times.
But one thing that works for me is that I'm a bit of a Tigger, cheerfully bouncing around. I take little joy in silly little things. Even today, traipsing around fields looking for someone, I took joy in just being out in the fresh air, walking fields I'd probably never get the opportunity to walk again (as "I'm searching for a missing person!" would probably stall even the harshest GOML.) Perhaps taking silly little pieces of joy out of silly little things makes me silly, but I'm thankful that's the way I am.
I suffer quite a lot from anxiety. I've found that exercise, and socialising with other people, is the best way to cope with it, even though instinctively, I just wish to hide away.
Male friendships are more like the parallel play of young children, so develop from an interest in a specific task, with the chats over tea or coffee not part of the formal agenda. Male conversation is also often indirect, so "how are you getting on with those brake pipes?" rather than "how are you getting on?". The intent is the same, but less full on.
Ferry now docked, so clocking off for a bit.
I must have very unusual male friendships because mine are nothing like this, at all. We talk about everything - if we’re lonely, sad, happy, celibate, alcoholic, dying, pathetically in love with someone 30 years younger, hungry, elated, guilty, rich, poor, or deeply worried about our kids
I dont understand the point of friendships if you DON’T discuss this stuff. What do you do? Chat about football for 9 hours?!
I reckon you are discussing an old fashioned kind of male friendship which has evolved for most into something better and deeper
However, in a contest where you have to choose which one of them is more likely to be correct, Xi definitely has the advantage of not obviously suffering from insanity.
Is anyone courageous enough to say nah, Michael Czerny doesn't have the remotest chance of winning the white smoke? Because I've just offered £10 @200 at Smarkets.
It's time for a bearded pope.
I have been in touch with the camerlengo's cleaner, whom I'd earlier supplied with lockpicks. Seriously the logic runs like this: who's to say the Jesuits aren't in a rather stronger position than anyone knows about given how precedent was steamrollered in 2013 when Ratzinger hightailed it, letting their boy in, and as things stand ~80% of cardies are Bergoglio's picks?
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on aand bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Oddly enough, they're not to me. I'm pretty much a nobody, and I'm pretty much happy with that. I wonder whether introversion vs extroversion character traits play a part?
(Having said that, I do maintain a website. Is that a search for status and recognition?)
Status and recognition doesn't necessarily mean publicly, of course.
You could take pride in your walking prowess and achievements, or detailed knowledge of transport or industry, for example.
But you have to have something.
TBF you said "hugely important". I think that's where we differ.
You have a website.
That I do not actively promote, and which has relatively few viewers. And which is so web 1.0 and hacked together it's hardly a positive advertisement for my coding skills. And which I have not updated since 2020, but people still seem to find useful.
Status and recognition are important, perhaps to different levels. For instance, I would hate for someone to genuinely think I was a paedophile, a murderer, a rapist, or an Oxford graduate. 'Status', to that degree, matters.
Perhaps pride is another area: I certainly have pride in some of my accomplishments, even if they lend me f-all status or recognition...
Very good thread by Josias. Something of a tease as it suggests no immediate political solutions, just a pithy summary of the problem and a call to action.
It would be good to see this turned into a series.
It would require political leadership, detailed understanding of risk, hard work on regulation and flexibility thereof, where appropriate, repeal of some silly laws, and more comfort with people taking risk and making decisions and supporting them where they do it (because they will occasionally fail and get it wrong) and not hanging them out to dry instead.
How likely is that?
I think it is likelier than almost at any other time - there is a broad feeling that our economy is in the last chance saloon, and that the next Government will need to take some radical steps to reverse the decline.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
Labour have been shit throughout 2024 but right now, aside from dumb shit like VAT on private schools frees, fleecing family farms and whacking up NI on employers, have the most serious policies of any party.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
Interesting. I do strike a very anti-Labour note here, but I am open to silver linings. My impression is that whilst they are (slowly) becoming aware of the problems, they are ideologically incapable of implementing effective solutions. The best I hope for is that they slowly get the journey underway and then Refcon come in and click into a higher gear.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
I'll stop. None of that seems serious to me.
I do however approve of the changes to CGT.
On steel - one option would be to dump a billion or 2 into green steel technology. Which actually exists and works. Steel without coal/coke.
Then you could pitch carbon tariffs on imported steel… really pressure the planet to go green.
The boats, the black economy and a good deal of criminality could be solved by my suggestion of huge fines for illegal employment (of all kinds). The reporting person gets half on conviction. And indefinite leave to remain….
I also don't really see the point of this dobbing in incentive on illegal employment. Do you think the police are unaware of where the illegal employers are? I don't. I just don't think they're interested.
The point is that private prosecutions would be incredibly profitable.
Say that each offence of employing illegally is £100k, 50k to the witness/reporter.
So if you are an illegal worker on less than minimum wage, you are looking at a huge slice of cash, plus the right to work legally.
There will be a tidal wave of contingency fee lawyers offering to take the case on for 30% of the winnings.
The police wouldn’t need to do anything. Or the CPS.
Not wishing to start last night's debate again, but by chance this Spectator link came up on my phone today. Thought you might be interested @HYUFD even if we don't agree.
Can't believe I am promoting the Spectator!
Thanks, though of course most cyclists I suspect vote Labour, LD or Green, whereas car drivers will be more likely to be Tories or Reform voters and motorbikers probably Reform.
The pressure for this law to equalise existing offences of dangerous and careless driving causing death or injury with similar offences for cyclists came from IDS
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Well done for doing your bit.
Regarding it being disorganised - historically, these things are done in two phases, of which the first is called "hasty search" - on the basis that it's better to get as many bodies out looking as fast as possible, since the faster you find a vulnerable person, the less likely they are to come to harm. The second phase is more systematic - but 90% of missing persons are found by during the hasty search.
Of course, and app could help - but it's a theory that needs testing. It's quite possible that it would result in people spending too much of the time staring at their phones. If the missing one is a small child, it's really important to look hard, as apparently they tend to instinctively hide when lost.
All those types of stone remind me of a memorial in St Martins Church, Stoney Middleton in Derbyshire. IIRC there are dozens of different types in a wall memorial.
It's a very unusual 18C (2 to 4 in England) octagonal church about 3 miles north of Chatsworth, and well worth a visit. I'll make the nave lantern my strictly monitored photo quota for today.
I wonder how SKS’s ‘enable the boats’ strategy gifting five year tenancies for asylum seekers will impact on the rental markets especially in places like London and the South Easr.
Excellent piece highlighting our best prospect of getting out of this low to no growth hell we have been in since 2008. We need innovation and we then need to make sure that UK plc funds it and gains the benefits of it.
One of our best prospects, but I don’t think it’s enough. By “it” I mean encouraging more innovative businesses to scale up here. ARM took decades to build and you’d need dozens of them to scratch the surface.
What we really need now is something even more traditionally British. A good old consumer boom. We used to be masters at spending. We even got good at spending on the never never. Then in 2008 we lost the ability, and we started saving and credit institutions stopped lending. Not because British consumers were a huge risk, but because of some very silly American derivative instruments that nobody understood. Casino’s credit rating story is a small example of the role financial services played in this.
But we never stopped saving. The Eurozone crisis came along, we tightened our belts. Brexit came along, we stopped spending again and saved more. Then Covid, so we stopped spending and saved. Then Ukraine.
We need a consumer splurge, and a construction boom, and a big expansion of credit. We need to bring back boom and bust.
Do you know what the UK's trade balance has been since 2008 ?
A deficit of over £400bn during a period which you think we lost the ability to spend money we didn't have.
UK private net debt since 2009 has fallen consistently, just as in Japan. And as a result, government borrowing has been rising. We really don’t want to become like Japan.
Trade deficits are not the same as fiscal deficits. As Trump is clumsily but very dramatically demonstrating this month.
That private sector debt has fallen is a good thing, that government sector debt has risen is a bad thing.
Having consumption under control and investing your surplus income is a good thing at the individual level, at the business level and at the government level.
What the country does not need is to increase consumption on more imported tat, or more foreign holidays, at the expense of that future investment.
I disagree. I know it seems counterintuitive- we’re always told that we don’t save and invest enough, and that being careful is important, but the economic history of us and our peers doesn’t back up the intuition. And we’re not investing, we’re saving. In low risk assets.
Our long term growth rate has fallen in lock step with our propensity to spend. Same as Japan, France, Italy etc. households have more wealth, more savings, but they’re not spending so they’re bankrupting the government.
When countries go through consumer booms most of the incremental spending is not on “foreign tat” or holidays but on everything including home improvements, extensions, new cars, eating out. And even on imported goods loads of the margin - often half or more - remains with distributors and retailers and installers here in the UK. Even more so if we get some dumping from countries locked out of the US market - they’ll be exporting at a loss which is great news for our retailers.
And it’s not just households. Private debt includes business. UK businesses are cautious asset sweaters just like our households. Less business spending and investment than almost all peer countries.
Ooh. I wonder if that distinction between saving and investing is the key to the matter.
If so, what's the way out? It feels like it may be one of those problems where the sensible thing individually turns out foolish on a wider scale, but that may just be my prejudices speaking.
Most so-called investment these days is in housing (rent or mortgage) which generates almost no additional economic activity.
Housing theory of everything strikes again.
It'd be best for the country if we could get house prices back down to 2-3x income and then keep it stable there - with the BoE having responsibility for ensuring stability of house price to income ratios.
Investments should be on productivity. And investments in housing should be improving the quality of homes, or building new ones, not merely having more of them.
Median UK income is £37,430, so median UK house prices should be in the range of £74,860 - £112,290
Not going to happen unless fewer women work full time, especially after having children so we go back to one earner couples to get mortgages. Also slashed immigration so less demand as well as more new affordable homes being built and the average mortgage bank and building societies give is 4 or 4.5 x salary not 2 to 3 times so even if you saw all the above house prices would only need to be in the range of £149k to £168k (which would be more than half the current average UK house price of £285k anyway) https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/housepriceindex/december2023
There is absolutely no reason why prices need to be the maximum people can borrow and it absolutely should be (and was in the past) possible to pay for a house on a single income.
The second income ought to be able to go on luxuries, holidays, improve quality of life, or choosing to not have one - not just be pissed away on increased costs.
If supply exceeds demand then prices come down. Competition keeps prices down, the problem is a lack of competition and a restricted market drives prices up currently.
In reality they will be, as house prices will equate to the maximum amount the average couple can get from a mortgage.
It was possible to pay for a house on a single income in the past as most women didn't work fulltime, certainly after becoming mothers, so only the salaried father received a mortgage on his income.
You can't force women now working full time to only use their second salaries to pay for holidays and meals out and childcare etc not mortgages for a house either.
Most couples also own a property outright or with a mortgage anyway, so supply already partly equates to demand, house prices are just as much influenced by more 2 full time earner couples than 50 years ago than fewer new homes being built
Excellent piece highlighting our best prospect of getting out of this low to no growth hell we have been in since 2008. We need innovation and we then need to make sure that UK plc funds it and gains the benefits of it.
One of our best prospects, but I don’t think it’s enough. By “it” I mean encouraging more innovative businesses to scale up here. ARM took decades to build and you’d need dozens of them to scratch the surface.
What we really need now is something even more traditionally British. A good old consumer boom. We used to be masters at spending. We even got good at spending on the never never. Then in 2008 we lost the ability, and we started saving and credit institutions stopped lending. Not because British consumers were a huge risk, but because of some very silly American derivative instruments that nobody understood. Casino’s credit rating story is a small example of the role financial services played in this.
But we never stopped saving. The Eurozone crisis came along, we tightened our belts. Brexit came along, we stopped spending again and saved more. Then Covid, so we stopped spending and saved. Then Ukraine.
We need a consumer splurge, and a construction boom, and a big expansion of credit. We need to bring back boom and bust.
Do you know what the UK's trade balance has been since 2008 ?
A deficit of over £400bn during a period which you think we lost the ability to spend money we didn't have.
UK private net debt since 2009 has fallen consistently, just as in Japan. And as a result, government borrowing has been rising. We really don’t want to become like Japan.
Trade deficits are not the same as fiscal deficits. As Trump is clumsily but very dramatically demonstrating this month.
That private sector debt has fallen is a good thing, that government sector debt has risen is a bad thing.
Having consumption under control and investing your surplus income is a good thing at the individual level, at the business level and at the government level.
What the country does not need is to increase consumption on more imported tat, or more foreign holidays, at the expense of that future investment.
I disagree. I know it seems counterintuitive- we’re always told that we don’t save and invest enough, and that being careful is important, but the economic history of us and our peers doesn’t back up the intuition. And we’re not investing, we’re saving. In low risk assets.
Our long term growth rate has fallen in lock step with our propensity to spend. Same as Japan, France, Italy etc. households have more wealth, more savings, but they’re not spending so they’re bankrupting the government.
When countries go through consumer booms most of the incremental spending is not on “foreign tat” or holidays but on everything including home improvements, extensions, new cars, eating out. And even on imported goods loads of the margin - often half or more - remains with distributors and retailers and installers here in the UK. Even more so if we get some dumping from countries locked out of the US market - they’ll be exporting at a loss which is great news for our retailers.
And it’s not just households. Private debt includes business. UK businesses are cautious asset sweaters just like our households. Less business spending and investment than almost all peer countries.
Ooh. I wonder if that distinction between saving and investing is the key to the matter.
If so, what's the way out? It feels like it may be one of those problems where the sensible thing individually turns out foolish on a wider scale, but that may just be my prejudices speaking.
Most so-called investment these days is in housing (rent or mortgage) which generates almost no additional economic activity.
Housing theory of everything strikes again.
It'd be best for the country if we could get house prices back down to 2-3x income and then keep it stable there - with the BoE having responsibility for ensuring stability of house price to income ratios.
Investments should be on productivity. And investments in housing should be improving the quality of homes, or building new ones, not merely having more of them.
Median UK income is £37,430, so median UK house prices should be in the range of £74,860 - £112,290
Not going to happen unless fewer women work full time, especially after having children so we go back to one earner couples to get mortgages. Also slashed immigration so less demand as well as more new affordable homes being built and the average mortgage bank and building societies give is 4 or 4.5 x salary not 2 to 3 times so even if you saw all the above house prices would only need to be in the range of £149k to £168k (which would be more than half the current average UK house price of £285k anyway) https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/housepriceindex/december2023
There is absolutely no reason why prices need to be the maximum people can borrow and it absolutely should be (and was in the past) possible to pay for a house on a single income.
The second income ought to be able to go on luxuries, holidays, improve quality of life, or choosing to not have one - not just be pissed away on increased costs.
If supply exceeds demand then prices come down. Competition keeps prices down, the problem is a lack of competition and a restricted market drives prices up currently.
In reality they will be, as house prices will equate to the maximum amount the average couple can get from a mortgage.
It was possible to pay for a house on a single income in the past as most women didn't work fulltime, certainly after becoming mothers, so only the salaried father received a mortgage on his income.
You can't force women now working full time to only use their second salaries to pay for holidays and meals out and childcare etc not mortgages for a house either.
Most couples also own a property outright or with a mortgage anyway, so supply already partly equates to demand, house prices are just as much influenced by more 2 full time earner couples than 50 years ago
Supply is extremely tightly restricted by means of planning rules.
Lots of men on here saying they don't care about status and identity without realising they actually do it all the time.
I think it's easy to look at the "making piles of cash" or "becoming super famous" status seekers and say to yourself "well, I don't play either of those games so I don't care about status". I don't want to become famous, but I do care about the opinion of others in, for example, the (small) professional/work communities I'm in. Same kind of thing, just a much smaller pond.
Just an observation. Being rich and being famous are not the same thing. There are thousands of anonymous accountants on £50K a year. If you earn £50K a year from writing poetry or playing jazz, you will have interviews in the weekend printed supplements and the culture columns of websites.
Indeed, that's why I said "X or Y" -- I was listing what I think the two most obvious status competitions in modern society, not saying they were the same thing.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains
2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
Excellent piece highlighting our best prospect of getting out of this low to no growth hell we have been in since 2008. We need innovation and we then need to make sure that UK plc funds it and gains the benefits of it.
One of our best prospects, but I don’t think it’s enough. By “it” I mean encouraging more innovative businesses to scale up here. ARM took decades to build and you’d need dozens of them to scratch the surface.
What we really need now is something even more traditionally British. A good old consumer boom. We used to be masters at spending. We even got good at spending on the never never. Then in 2008 we lost the ability, and we started saving and credit institutions stopped lending. Not because British consumers were a huge risk, but because of some very silly American derivative instruments that nobody understood. Casino’s credit rating story is a small example of the role financial services played in this.
But we never stopped saving. The Eurozone crisis came along, we tightened our belts. Brexit came along, we stopped spending again and saved more. Then Covid, so we stopped spending and saved. Then Ukraine.
We need a consumer splurge, and a construction boom, and a big expansion of credit. We need to bring back boom and bust.
Do you know what the UK's trade balance has been since 2008 ?
A deficit of over £400bn during a period which you think we lost the ability to spend money we didn't have.
UK private net debt since 2009 has fallen consistently, just as in Japan. And as a result, government borrowing has been rising. We really don’t want to become like Japan.
Trade deficits are not the same as fiscal deficits. As Trump is clumsily but very dramatically demonstrating this month.
That private sector debt has fallen is a good thing, that government sector debt has risen is a bad thing.
Having consumption under control and investing your surplus income is a good thing at the individual level, at the business level and at the government level.
What the country does not need is to increase consumption on more imported tat, or more foreign holidays, at the expense of that future investment.
I disagree. I know it seems counterintuitive- we’re always told that we don’t save and invest enough, and that being careful is important, but the economic history of us and our peers doesn’t back up the intuition. And we’re not investing, we’re saving. In low risk assets.
Our long term growth rate has fallen in lock step with our propensity to spend. Same as Japan, France, Italy etc. households have more wealth, more savings, but they’re not spending so they’re bankrupting the government.
When countries go through consumer booms most of the incremental spending is not on “foreign tat” or holidays but on everything including home improvements, extensions, new cars, eating out. And even on imported goods loads of the margin - often half or more - remains with distributors and retailers and installers here in the UK. Even more so if we get some dumping from countries locked out of the US market - they’ll be exporting at a loss which is great news for our retailers.
And it’s not just households. Private debt includes business. UK businesses are cautious asset sweaters just like our households. Less business spending and investment than almost all peer countries.
Ooh. I wonder if that distinction between saving and investing is the key to the matter.
If so, what's the way out? It feels like it may be one of those problems where the sensible thing individually turns out foolish on a wider scale, but that may just be my prejudices speaking.
Most so-called investment these days is in housing (rent or mortgage) which generates almost no additional economic activity.
Housing theory of everything strikes again.
It'd be best for the country if we could get house prices back down to 2-3x income and then keep it stable there - with the BoE having responsibility for ensuring stability of house price to income ratios.
Investments should be on productivity. And investments in housing should be improving the quality of homes, or building new ones, not merely having more of them.
Median UK income is £37,430, so median UK house prices should be in the range of £74,860 - £112,290
Not going to happen unless fewer women work full time, especially after having children so we go back to one earner couples to get mortgages. Also slashed immigration so less demand as well as more new affordable homes being built and the average mortgage bank and building societies give is 4 or 4.5 x salary not 2 to 3 times so even if you saw all the above house prices would only need to be in the range of £149k to £168k (which would be more than half the current average UK house price of £285k anyway) https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/housepriceindex/december2023
There is absolutely no reason why prices need to be the maximum people can borrow and it absolutely should be (and was in the past) possible to pay for a house on a single income.
The second income ought to be able to go on luxuries, holidays, improve quality of life, or choosing to not have one - not just be pissed away on increased costs.
If supply exceeds demand then prices come down. Competition keeps prices down, the problem is a lack of competition and a restricted market drives prices up currently.
In reality they will be, as house prices will equate to the maximum amount the average couple can get from a mortgage.
It was possible to pay for a house on a single income in the past as most women didn't work fulltime, certainly after becoming mothers, so only the salaried father received a mortgage on his income.
You can't force women now working full time to only use their second salaries to pay for holidays and meals out and childcare etc not mortgages for a house either.
Most couples also own a property outright or with a mortgage anyway, so supply already partly equates to demand, house prices are just as much influenced by more 2 full time earner couples than 50 years ago
Supply is extremely tightly restricted by means of planning rules.
To protect the greenbelt as most voters want, even Labour is only proposing to allow some of what it calls 'grey belt' to have new homes built on not the entire greenbelt
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or amount of money and wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay faithfully married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains
2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
I think you're way off-base.
After all, you're not someone with sexual or marital success, are you? And how much were you around your kids when they were kids? Yet you like to show off your 'status' and 'success' on here every effing day...
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Why is that 'very clear' ?
As it is based on their interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and Paul
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains
2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
He hasn't had sex since the brief ans perfunctory coitus he had in 1976 and he's thrashed himself ever since with birch-leaves for this "sin", particularly the chronic embarrassment he feels for his vinegar strokes.
His life is now a mixture of the puritanical and Gladstonian thrills from commenting and judging the sexual lives of others.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or amount of money and wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay faithfully married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
What about monks who aren't priests and who have taken vows of chastity?
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Why is that 'very clear' ?
As it is based on their interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and Paul
It rather neglects homosexuals, does it not? And that's just one argument against it.
And why those people be excepted? Priests and bishops can be married in your church.
Is anyone courageous enough to say nah, Michael Czerny doesn't have the remotest chance of winning the white smoke? Because I've just offered £10 @200 at Smarkets.
It's time for a bearded pope.
I have been in touch with the camerlengo's cleaner, whom I'd earlier supplied with lockpicks. Seriously the logic runs like this: who's to say the Jesuits aren't in a rather stronger position than anyone knows about given how precedent was steamrollered in 2013 when Ratzinger hightailed it, letting their boy in, and as things stand ~80% of cardies are Bergoglio's picks?
Seems like a long shot but it's a fun bet. The conventional strikes against Czerny are his lack of pastoral experience, he's never even been a parish priest and the fact he's a Jesuit - the last time a Pope of one order was succeeded by a Pope of the same order was in the 12th century. There's over 108 Francis-picked Cardinal Electors, but only 4 (including Czerny) are Jesuits.
It's a fascinating market, I feel like the betting is more generated by wishing than fact. I think there's enough conservative cardinals to block Tagle and enough progressive cardinals to block Sarah or Erdö. Someone on here said it'll depend on what the Cardinals want from the next Pope, if it's someone to get to grips with the Curia in a way that Francis tried (and arguably failed) then Parolin might be the best choice (though his odds are unbackable), If it's more an evangelism type Pope they want then Turkson would be the front runner.
Ultimately it might just boil down to social connections, does someone feel comfortable enough to enough cardinals that they would be happy to see him be Pope?
I wonder how SKS’s ‘enable the boats’ strategy gifting five year tenancies for asylum seekers will impact on the rental markets especially in places like London and the South Easr.
This is a five year guarantee to landlords not to asylum seekers. Basically they are trying to book accommodation on a long term rate, on the basis that they guarantee rent and no voids - even if they actually have voids. Despite all the noise and fury, there are not actually enough asylum seekers for this to make a difference to the market.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Why is that 'very clear' ?
As it is based on their interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and Paul
It rather neglects homosexuals, does it not? And that's just one argument against it.
And why those people be excepted? Priests and bishops can be married in your church.
In practical morality non-dogmatic RCs are usually there or thereabouts.
Rome catches up eventually - which in one sense is fair enough as they have a very diverse population to lead. But they tend not to come to their conclusions for one to perhaps five centuries, approximately.
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Oddly enough, they're not to me. I'm pretty much a nobody, and I'm pretty much happy with that. I wonder whether introversion vs extroversion character traits play a part?
(Having said that, I do maintain a website. Is that a search for status and recognition?)
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Oddly enough, they're not to me. I'm pretty much a nobody, and I'm pretty much happy with that. I wonder whether introversion vs extroversion character traits play a part?
(Having said that, I do maintain a website. Is that a search for status and recognition?)
Nor me either. I have never sought to measure myself by the opinion of others. Happiness comes from focusing on intrinsic goals rather than extrinsic ones. When I think of the people that I am jealous of, so far as ai can think of anyone to be jealous of, it's people like my friends working in Africa.
It does depend very much on personality though. Most alpha males are doomed to unhappiness, while Sigma or delta males find it easier. It isn't always possible to change though.
The kind of alpha male who's dining with his much younger girlfriend, in an exclusive waterfront restaurant, and then finds himself worrying about the size of his ... yacht, when another alpha male sails into harbour in a flashier boat, is doomed never to know happiness.
The truth about money and success is this:
It doesn’t make you happy. But my god it makes unhappiness much easier to bear
"Let me tell you something. There's no nobility in poverty. I have been a rich man and I have been a poor man. And I choose rich every f*ckin' time. Because, at least as a rich man, when I have to face my problems, I show up in the back of the limo, wearing a $2000 suit and a $40,000 gold f*ckin' watch."
Lack of money is without doubt, a source of anxiety, and possessing enough of it, a source of contentment.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or amount of money and wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay faithfully married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Loyalty, kindness, and decency in life also count for a very great deal, which rules out any of those three. Essentially, they've no intention of remaining faithful, and will happily trade in the wife/girlfriend of the day for a younger model.
Lots of men on here saying they don't care about status and identity without realising they actually do it all the time.
Approximately 10 years ago I applied to become a part time Sheriff. It was a position which I thought I was very well qualified. I didn't get an interview. I was very cross and did not apply to have anything for another decade, being content to make a reasonable living without having to ask anybody for anything.
I now find myself in the uncomfortable position of having 2 significant and different applications outstanding at the same time. It is not making me happy. I generally prefer the mode of not giving a damn what others think. Now I need to care. Sigh.
Hard for me to talk about this but - deep breath - an incident at school when I was 14 eats me up to this day.
I was picked for the cricket team. Not as a key player (down to bat at eight and didn't bowl) but nevertheless picked. Big thing.
We batted first, score well, the sixth wicket falls and it's my turn. I only have a few balls to face then it's "tea". As I walk out the teacher says to me, "Ok Kunty we'll be declaring at tea so just have a slog."
Ever obedient I do. First ball I charge down the pitch and swipe wildly at the ball. I miss and get stumped, about a yard out of my crease. It's an ugly dismissal, but we're declaring so it doesn't matter, right?
Wrong. At tea there's a rethink and we choose to bat on. My sacrifice was pointless. All I've done is make myself look a talentless plonker. I'm consumed by a cocktail of misery and grievance. I can't even eat my egg and cress sandwiches.
After tea the boy at number nine (Colin Swain) makes a decent knock, THEN we declare and we end up winning the match. I get dropped and am never selected again.
I'm 64 now, so we've reached the golden anniversary of the above event. It feels like yesterday.
Anyway, for anyone interested, the reference to "Everybody wants to rule the world" is because that song was #2 when the chip first powered up.
Tge reference to "a switch was not flipped" is because the first chip powered up before the power supply to the development board was powered up, because there was enough leakage from other chips on the board to power the ARM chip.
The reference to "Like many monsters from lore, it eventually ate its creator," is because in 1998 the value of the ARM shares Acorn still held was much greater than the value of Acorn, so people bought Acorn, sold the ARM shares, and split the remnants of Acorn several ways (some to Broadcom, some to Pace), via a holding company called Element 14. I believe I technically worked for three different companies in one week, whilst sitting at the same desk doing the same work, as the various sales went through. A sad time, as it meant the end for what had been a truly brilliant company, tech-wise.
O/T, and far be it from me to defend Trump, but it does appear that Judge Hannah Dugan, really was breaking the law, by trying to obstruct the course of justice.
Not wishing to start last night's debate again, but by chance this Spectator link came up on my phone today. Thought you might be interested @HYUFD even if we don't agree.
Can't believe I am promoting the Spectator!
Thanks, though of course most cyclists I suspect vote Labour, LD or Green, whereas car drivers will be more likely to be Tories or Reform voters and motorbikers probably Reform.
The pressure for this law to equalise existing offences of dangerous and careless driving causing death or injury with similar offences for cyclists came from IDS
No problem. Yep I knew it was IDS. Of course I have no objection to what the new law is intending, it is just my liberal/libertarian view of not legislating when I view it unnecessarily.
Out of interest where do I fit. I have 3 cars and 2 bikes. I like to think I view this from both sides and try to be considerate whether driving or cycling. Cycling does help you make a better driver, particularly when you know what it is like being passed close by. It makes you more respectful of horses as well.
Excellent piece highlighting our best prospect of getting out of this low to no growth hell we have been in since 2008. We need innovation and we then need to make sure that UK plc funds it and gains the benefits of it.
One of our best prospects, but I don’t think it’s enough. By “it” I mean encouraging more innovative businesses to scale up here. ARM took decades to build and you’d need dozens of them to scratch the surface.
What we really need now is something even more traditionally British. A good old consumer boom. We used to be masters at spending. We even got good at spending on the never never. Then in 2008 we lost the ability, and we started saving and credit institutions stopped lending. Not because British consumers were a huge risk, but because of some very silly American derivative instruments that nobody understood. Casino’s credit rating story is a small example of the role financial services played in this.
But we never stopped saving. The Eurozone crisis came along, we tightened our belts. Brexit came along, we stopped spending again and saved more. Then Covid, so we stopped spending and saved. Then Ukraine.
We need a consumer splurge, and a construction boom, and a big expansion of credit. We need to bring back boom and bust.
Do you know what the UK's trade balance has been since 2008 ?
A deficit of over £400bn during a period which you think we lost the ability to spend money we didn't have.
UK private net debt since 2009 has fallen consistently, just as in Japan. And as a result, government borrowing has been rising. We really don’t want to become like Japan.
Trade deficits are not the same as fiscal deficits. As Trump is clumsily but very dramatically demonstrating this month.
That private sector debt has fallen is a good thing, that government sector debt has risen is a bad thing.
Having consumption under control and investing your surplus income is a good thing at the individual level, at the business level and at the government level.
What the country does not need is to increase consumption on more imported tat, or more foreign holidays, at the expense of that future investment.
I disagree. I know it seems counterintuitive- we’re always told that we don’t save and invest enough, and that being careful is important, but the economic history of us and our peers doesn’t back up the intuition. And we’re not investing, we’re saving. In low risk assets.
Our long term growth rate has fallen in lock step with our propensity to spend. Same as Japan, France, Italy etc. households have more wealth, more savings, but they’re not spending so they’re bankrupting the government.
When countries go through consumer booms most of the incremental spending is not on “foreign tat” or holidays but on everything including home improvements, extensions, new cars, eating out. And even on imported goods loads of the margin - often half or more - remains with distributors and retailers and installers here in the UK. Even more so if we get some dumping from countries locked out of the US market - they’ll be exporting at a loss which is great news for our retailers.
And it’s not just households. Private debt includes business. UK businesses are cautious asset sweaters just like our households. Less business spending and investment than almost all peer countries.
Ooh. I wonder if that distinction between saving and investing is the key to the matter.
If so, what's the way out? It feels like it may be one of those problems where the sensible thing individually turns out foolish on a wider scale, but that may just be my prejudices speaking.
Most so-called investment these days is in housing (rent or mortgage) which generates almost no additional economic activity.
Housing theory of everything strikes again.
It'd be best for the country if we could get house prices back down to 2-3x income and then keep it stable there - with the BoE having responsibility for ensuring stability of house price to income ratios.
Investments should be on productivity. And investments in housing should be improving the quality of homes, or building new ones, not merely having more of them.
Median UK income is £37,430, so median UK house prices should be in the range of £74,860 - £112,290
Not going to happen unless fewer women work full time, especially after having children so we go back to one earner couples to get mortgages. Also slashed immigration so less demand as well as more new affordable homes being built and the average mortgage bank and building societies give is 4 or 4.5 x salary not 2 to 3 times so even if you saw all the above house prices would only need to be in the range of £149k to £168k (which would be more than half the current average UK house price of £285k anyway) https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/housepriceindex/december2023
There is absolutely no reason why prices need to be the maximum people can borrow and it absolutely should be (and was in the past) possible to pay for a house on a single income.
The second income ought to be able to go on luxuries, holidays, improve quality of life, or choosing to not have one - not just be pissed away on increased costs.
If supply exceeds demand then prices come down. Competition keeps prices down, the problem is a lack of competition and a restricted market drives prices up currently.
In reality they will be, as house prices will equate to the maximum amount the average couple can get from a mortgage.
It was possible to pay for a house on a single income in the past as most women didn't work fulltime, certainly after becoming mothers, so only the salaried father received a mortgage on his income.
You can't force women now working full time to only use their second salaries to pay for holidays and meals out and childcare etc not mortgages for a house either.
Most couples also own a property outright or with a mortgage anyway, so supply already partly equates to demand, house prices are just as much influenced by more 2 full time earner couples than 50 years ago
Supply is extremely tightly restricted by means of planning rules.
Total and utter bollocks.
The developer community work to the ‘absorption rate’. If you can’t sell it at a 17% profit you don’t build it.
There are 1.4m houses unbuilt with planning permission sitting there waiting to be turned into profit by a rising tide.
And then there’s hundreds of hectares of land owned and waiting to be brought into the system.
Until we tax that wealth lurking unbuilt, forcing the builders to build, we will never see housing become affordable.
Blaming the planning system is ‘useful idiot’ at the kindest. I’m sorry for being so blunt but I keep seeing this canard on here. It’s lazy and it’s wrong.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or amount of money and wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay faithfully married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Loyalty, kindness, and decency in life also count for a very great deal, which rules out any of those three. Essentially, they've no intention of remaining faithful, and will happily trade in the wife/girlfriend of the day for a younger model.
In the past three-quarters of a century, I've been the brunt of advice from practically every different kind of influencer in the Catholic church - from Irish grandparents who only just escaped the Famine, through every kind of nun and Jesuit, to a fully-fledged Cardinal who may be Pope in a fortnight or so. Not one's even hinted I "should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children".
Where do you professional bigots get your delusions from?
Lots of men on here saying they don't care about status and identity without realising they actually do it all the time.
Approximately 10 years ago I applied to become a part time Sheriff. It was a position which I thought I was very well qualified. I didn't get an interview. I was very cross and did not apply to have anything for another decade, being content to make a reasonable living without having to ask anybody for anything.
I now find myself in the uncomfortable position of having 2 significant and different applications outstanding at the same time. It is not making me happy. I generally prefer the mode of not giving a damn what others think. Now I need to care. Sigh.
Hard for me to talk about this but - deep breath - an incident at school when I was 14 eats me up to this day.
I was picked for the cricket team. Not as a key player (down to bat at eight and didn't bowl) but nevertheless picked. Big thing.
We batted first, score well, the sixth wicket falls and it's my turn. I only have a few balls to face then it's "tea". As I walk out the teacher says to me, "Ok Kunty we'll be declaring at tea so just have a slog."
Ever obedient I do. First ball I charge down the pitch and swipe wildly at the ball. I miss and get stumped, about a yard out of my crease. It's an ugly dismissal, but we're declaring so it doesn't matter, right?
Wrong. At tea there's a rethink and we choose to bat on. My sacrifice was pointless. All I've done is make myself look a talentless plonker. I'm consumed by a cocktail of misery and grievance. I can't even eat my egg and cress sandwiches.
After tea the boy at number nine (Colin Swain) makes a decent knock, THEN we declare and we end up winning the match. I get dropped and am never selected again.
I'm 64 now, so we've reached the golden anniversary of the above event. It feels like yesterday.
Seneca: "“No person has the power to have everything they want, but it is in their power not to want what they don’t have, and to cheerfully put to good use what they do have.”
Lots of men on here saying they don't care about status and identity without realising they actually do it all the time.
Approximately 10 years ago I applied to become a part time Sheriff. It was a position which I thought I was very well qualified. I didn't get an interview. I was very cross and did not apply to have anything for another decade, being content to make a reasonable living without having to ask anybody for anything.
I now find myself in the uncomfortable position of having 2 significant and different applications outstanding at the same time. It is not making me happy. I generally prefer the mode of not giving a damn what others think. Now I need to care. Sigh.
Hard for me to talk about this but - deep breath - an incident at school when I was 14 eats me up to this day.
I was picked for the cricket team. Not as a key player (down to bat at eight and didn't bowl) but nevertheless picked. Big thing.
We batted first, score well, the sixth wicket falls and it's my turn. I only have a few balls to face then it's "tea". As I walk out the teacher says to me, "Ok Kunty we'll be declaring at tea so just have a slog."
Ever obedient I do. First ball I charge down the pitch and swipe wildly at the ball. I miss and get stumped, about a yard out of my crease. It's an ugly dismissal, but we're declaring so it doesn't matter, right?
Wrong. At tea there's a rethink and we choose to bat on. My sacrifice was pointless. All I've done is make myself look a talentless plonker. I'm consumed by a cocktail of misery and grievance. I can't even eat my egg and cress sandwiches.
After tea the boy at number nine (Colin Swain) makes a decent knock, THEN we declare and we end up winning the match. I get dropped and am never selected again.
I'm 64 now, so we've reached the golden anniversary of the above event. It feels like yesterday.
Seneca: "“No person has the power to have everything they want, but it is in their power not to want what they don’t have, and to cheerfully put to good use what they do have.”
Lots of men on here saying they don't care about status and identity without realising they actually do it all the time.
It depends on where you get the status and identity from. I work with veterans at a MH charity and they all seem to benefit from meeting each other and swapping 'war' stories. There are different levels of respect given depending on which service and which campaigns, but each draw comfort from being able to discuss shared experiences.
Some talk about 'inclusiveness' being woke - but inclusiveness is the basis for most sources of status and identity.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or amount of money and wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay faithfully married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Loyalty, kindness, and decency in life also count for a very great deal, which rules out any of those three. Essentially, they've no intention of remaining faithful, and will happily trade in the wife/girlfriend of the day for a younger model.
In the past three-quarters of a century, I've been the brunt of advice from practically every different kind of influencer in the Catholic church - from Irish grandparents who only just escaped the Famine, through every kind of nun and Jesuit, to a fully-fledged Cardinal who may be Pope in a fortnight or so. Not one's even hinted I "should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children".
Where do you professional bigots get your delusions from?
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or amount of money and wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay faithfully married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Loyalty, kindness, and decency in life also count for a very great deal, which rules out any of those three. Essentially, they've no intention of remaining faithful, and will happily trade in the wife/girlfriend of the day for a younger model.
In the past three-quarters of a century, I've been the brunt of advice from practically every different kind of influencer in the Catholic church - from Irish grandparents who only just escaped the Famine, through every kind of nun and Jesuit, to a fully-fledged Cardinal who may be Pope in a fortnight or so. Not one's even hinted I "should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children".
Where do you professional bigots get your delusions from?
I don't see what I've written to merit that kind of response.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or amount of money and wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay faithfully married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Loyalty, kindness, and decency in life also count for a very great deal, which rules out any of those three. Essentially, they've no intention of remaining faithful, and will happily trade in the wife/girlfriend of the day for a younger model.
In the past three-quarters of a century, I've been the brunt of advice from practically every different kind of influencer in the Catholic church - from Irish grandparents who only just escaped the Famine, through every kind of nun and Jesuit, to a fully-fledged Cardinal who may be Pope in a fortnight or so. Not one's even hinted I "should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children".
Where do you professional bigots get your delusions from?
Full of interesting stuff: "Last week, the pontiff said that hitting a child was an acceptable form of discipline, although it was important to maintain their “dignity” in the process."
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains
2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
I think that is too simplistic. I certainly had internal conflicts during my career between ambition and quality of life. I think to the determent of both, but definitely came down on the quality of life side. I also don't seek power for myself, but prefer to work behind the scenes for others, but enjoy being in charge. I was also a keen squash player when younger and I much preferred to lose a 3-2 game than win s 3-0 game. Far more satisfying, although not normal I guess.
It is complicated.
And just one final demonstration that it isn't that straightforward, having a cute dog attracts women, whereas my Cobra attracts men. The cute dog doesn't exude power and success whereas the Cobra does.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Why is that 'very clear' ?
As it is based on their interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and Paul
It rather neglects homosexuals, does it not? And that's just one argument against it.
And why those people be excepted? Priests and bishops can be married in your church.
The Vatican also opposes same sex relations and marriage.
Yes priests and bishops can be married in the Anglican church and female as well as male now too but RC priests and bishops are required to be male and celibate
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Why is that 'very clear' ?
As it is based on their interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and Paul
As written down hundreds of years after the event and selectively translated and edited over centuries since. It would be idiotic to give such ancient ramblings any modern day credence.
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Oddly enough, they're not to me. I'm pretty much a nobody, and I'm pretty much happy with that. I wonder whether introversion vs extroversion character traits play a part?
(Having said that, I do maintain a website. Is that a search for status and recognition?)
Thanks for all the kind comments, everyone. I shall try to respond later this afternoon.
Apologies for not being here for my own threader, but it might be interesting to know why I was not here.
Earlier this week, a 17 year old lad went missing from a nearby village. This morning, at least 100 of us - possibly up to 200 - met up for an official police search. I joined a group of six other strangers, and we drove off to search a nearby village. After walking four miles over two hours, around muddy fields and searching ditches and culverts, I met another group who said the search had been called off. I've heard nothing official, but it looks like bad news.
I have several things to say about this.
Obviously, condolences to the lad's family. It must be a hideous time. But on a slight bright side, it's good to see so many people turn up to try to help. And it sounds as though one group did help. Making a few assumptions: we need to talk more about mental health, especially for boys and men. Life can be tough for everyone, and the 'traditional' way men are meant to be - stiff upper lip, never crying, never talking about emotions - might well be quite harmful. If you feel low, talk to someone. It's not unmanly. And we need to teach our kids that as well.
Finally, it was all slightly disorganised. Each group was given a set area to search, but there was no connection back to base. This seems an ideal job for there to be an app that would automatically show the police where you are, and where you have searched, and allow them to give you updates. Once I heard the news about the search being called off, there was no way, aside from calling one of my group who I had the number of, to tell them about it. I'm sure it could be better done.
But thanks again to everyone who turned out. There are many, many good people out there in society.
Apols for the rant.
Agree. But. We've been talking more about mental health gradually throughout the whole of my adult life. More and more people are doing it more often than ever before. The stigma is declining. And yet...mental health isn't improving. What we haven't done is train enough professionals or spend the money. Crucially. We haven't asked why with all the material advances we aren't any happier? And where does this epidemic of misery, anger and dissatisfaction come from?
"And yet...mental health isn't improving."
Perhaps it is, but because people talk about it more, we get to see more people who are deeply unhappy, whereas before they would be invisible?
Agree with much of the rest of your comment.
My mental health has been the worst when my self-esteem has been hit and I don't think I'm appreciated or valued enough, and you can spiral down.
Status and recognition is hugely important to men.
Oddly enough, they're not to me. I'm pretty much a nobody, and I'm pretty much happy with that. I wonder whether introversion vs extroversion character traits play a part?
(Having said that, I do maintain a website. Is that a search for status and recognition?)
Nor me either. I have never sought to measure myself by the opinion of others. Happiness comes from focusing on intrinsic goals rather than extrinsic ones. When I think of the people that I am jealous of, so far as ai can think of anyone to be jealous of, it's people like my friends working in Africa.
It does depend very much on personality though. Most alpha males are doomed to unhappiness, while Sigma or delta males find it easier. It isn't always possible to change though.
The kind of alpha male who's dining with his much younger girlfriend, in an exclusive waterfront restaurant, and then finds himself worrying about the size of his ... yacht, when another alpha male sails into harbour in a flashier boat, is doomed never to know happiness.
The truth about money and success is this:
It doesn’t make you happy. But my god it makes unhappiness much easier to bear
"Let me tell you something. There's no nobility in poverty. I have been a rich man and I have been a poor man. And I choose rich every f*ckin' time. Because, at least as a rich man, when I have to face my problems, I show up in the back of the limo, wearing a $2000 suit and a $40,000 gold f*ckin' watch."
Lack of money is without doubt, a source of anxiety, and possessing enough of it, a source of contentment.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or amount of money and wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay faithfully married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Loyalty, kindness, and decency in life also count for a very great deal, which rules out any of those three. Essentially, they've no intention of remaining faithful, and will happily trade in the wife/girlfriend of the day for a younger model.
In the past three-quarters of a century, I've been the brunt of advice from practically every different kind of influencer in the Catholic church - from Irish grandparents who only just escaped the Famine, through every kind of nun and Jesuit, to a fully-fledged Cardinal who may be Pope in a fortnight or so. Not one's even hinted I "should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children".
Where do you professional bigots get your delusions from?
Full of interesting stuff: "Last week, the pontiff said that hitting a child was an acceptable form of discipline, although it was important to maintain their “dignity” in the process."
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Why is that 'very clear' ?
As it is based on their interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and Paul
As written down hundreds of years after the event and selectively translated and edited over centuries since. It would be idiotic to give such ancient ramblings any modern day credence.
Well as you are not Catholic why should they give a toss what you think about it?
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains
2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
He hasn't had sex since the brief ans perfunctory coitus he had in 1976 and he's thrashed himself ever since with birch-leaves for this "sin", particularly the chronic embarrassment he feels for his vinegar strokes.
It’s not worth it, you just end up with bits of dried leaf all over the sauna floor. Which you then have to hoover up later.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Why is that 'very clear' ?
As it is based on their interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and Paul
As written down hundreds of years after the event and selectively translated and edited over centuries since. It would be idiotic to give such ancient ramblings any modern day credence.
Well as you are not Catholic why should they give a toss what you think about it?
Were it not for the Catholic Church being the institution that has wreaked the most death, destruction, misery, ignorance, disease, abuse, and stunted lives upon counted millions of humanity from its earliest days right through to our current time, I wouldn’t care at all.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Why is that 'very clear' ?
As it is based on their interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and Paul
As written down hundreds of years after the event and selectively translated and edited over centuries since. It would be idiotic to give such ancient ramblings any modern day credence.
Well as you are not Catholic why should they give a toss what you think about it?
Were it not for the Catholic Church being the institution that has wreaked the most death, destruction, misery, ignorance, disease, abuse, and stunted lives upon counted millions of humanity from its earliest days right through to our current time, I wouldn’t care at all.
What a load of crap, nationalism, civil wars, Communism, Nazism, militant Islam, have done far worse.
Most of our oldest universities, cathedrals and churches, many of our schools, hospitals, charities, foodbanks, homeless shelters, orphanages etc were also founded by the RC church and many of our most famous artists funded by them.
Of course militant atheist woke leftists like you are one of the biggest threats to western civilisation in human history so you are hardly one to talk!
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or amount of money and wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay faithfully married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Loyalty, kindness, and decency in life also count for a very great deal, which rules out any of those three. Essentially, they've no intention of remaining faithful, and will happily trade in the wife/girlfriend of the day for a younger model.
In the past three-quarters of a century, I've been the brunt of advice from practically every different kind of influencer in the Catholic church - from Irish grandparents who only just escaped the Famine, through every kind of nun and Jesuit, to a fully-fledged Cardinal who may be Pope in a fortnight or so. Not one's even hinted I "should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children".
Where do you professional bigots get your delusions from?
I don't see what I've written to merit that kind of response.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains
2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
He hasn't had sex since the brief ans perfunctory coitus he had in 1976 and he's thrashed himself ever since with birch-leaves for this "sin", particularly the chronic embarrassment he feels for his vinegar strokes.
It’s not worth it, you just end up with bits of dried leaf all over the sauna floor. Which you then have to hoover up later.
Suddenly, your sex life sounds much more interesting @IanB2
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Why is that 'very clear' ?
As it is based on their interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and Paul
As written down hundreds of years after the event and selectively translated and edited over centuries since. It would be idiotic to give such ancient ramblings any modern day credence.
Well as you are not Catholic why should they give a toss what you think about it?
Were it not for the Catholic Church being the institution that has wreaked the most death, destruction, misery, ignorance, disease, abuse, and stunted lives upon counted millions of humanity from its earliest days right through to our current time, I wouldn’t care at all.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Why is that 'very clear' ?
As it is based on their interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and Paul
As written down hundreds of years after the event and selectively translated and edited over centuries since. It would be idiotic to give such ancient ramblings any modern day credence.
Well as you are not Catholic why should they give a toss what you think about it?
Were it not for the Catholic Church being the institution that has wreaked the most death, destruction, misery, ignorance, disease, abuse, and stunted lives upon counted millions of humanity from its earliest days right through to our current time, I wouldn’t care at all.
The Chinese and Soviet Communist Parties say hello. As do the Manchu and Taiping.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains
2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
I think you're way off-base.
After all, you're not someone with sexual or marital success, are you? And how much were you around your kids when they were kids? Yet you like to show off your 'status' and 'success' on here every effing day...
I don’t want to get into crude and vulgar boasting games about sex, I find them distasteful in the extreme, indicative of sociopathy - and likely to drive the few remaining female PBers off the site. And we need them. So I will restrict myself to observing that I have fucked about 350-400 women
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains hat 2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
So Boris and Elon Musk and Trump are ideal mates for women then, no wonder they have had so many kids and different wives!
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
Why is that 'very clear' ?
As it is based on their interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and Paul
As written down hundreds of years after the event and selectively translated and edited over centuries since. It would be idiotic to give such ancient ramblings any modern day credence.
Well as you are not Catholic why should they give a toss what you think about it?
Were it not for the Catholic Church being the institution that has wreaked the most death, destruction, misery, ignorance, disease, abuse, and stunted lives upon counted millions of humanity from its earliest days right through to our current time, I wouldn’t care at all.
What a load of crap, nationalism, civil wars, Communism, Nazism, militant Islam, have done far worse.
Most of our oldest universities, cathedrals and churches, many of our schools, hospitals, charities, foodbanks, homeless shelters, orphanages etc were also founded by the RC church and many of our most famous artists funded by them.
Of course militant atheist woke leftists like you are one of the biggest threats to western civilisation in human history so you are hardly one to talk!
That church instigated and sanctified massive wars of conquest and violence across Europe and the Middle East, leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, cloaked in religious language.
That church established judicial systems to root out heresy, which led to torture, executions, and widespread fear. Inquisitions (especially the Spanish Inquisition) are seen as prime examples of religious authority suppressing dissent with brutality.
That church deliberately suppressed scientific inquiry and intellectual freedom for centuries. Galileo’s persecution is often held up as symbolic of a broader hostility toward scientific advancement.
During the European colonisation of the Americas, Africa, and Asia, Catholic missionaries often played a role in forced conversions, the destruction of indigenous cultures, and complicity in colonial violence. The church sometimes justified or turned a blind eye to atrocities committed by European powers.
In modern times, the Catholic church has faced enormous scandal over systemic sexual abuse of minors by clergy — and the institutional cover-up of these crimes over decades, even centuries in some areas.
At various points (e.g., Franco's Spain, Mussolini's Italy), that church has supported or collaborated with authoritarian regimes that committed violence and repression. This shows a consistent prioritisation of institutional power over human dignity.
That church has historically opposed advances in medicine and human rights — from resisting vaccinations to opposing birth control and abortion rights — which has led to suffering, disease, and preventable deaths.
Because the Catholic church has been one of the oldest, richest, and most powerful institutions in human history — stretching across continents and centuries — its influence has had extraordinarily wide consequences. And when it erred, it erred on a massive scale, leading to misery for countless millions.
I wonder how SKS’s ‘enable the boats’ strategy gifting five year tenancies for asylum seekers will impact on the rental markets especially in places like London and the South Easr.
This is a five year guarantee to landlords not to asylum seekers. Basically they are trying to book accommodation on a long term rate, on the basis that they guarantee rent and no voids - even if they actually have voids. Despite all the noise and fury, there are not actually enough asylum seekers for this to make a difference to the market.
It's b***ocks. Unless there are a high number of freehold properties about, can't see Freeholders agreeing for some of their leasehold properties being turned into HMO's There are so many hurdles to setting these up that the outcome is likely to be very small. Seems more of a PR exercise to show they are 'doing something' about these bills just prior to local elections.
Men who claim “status and success” don’t matter to me are either liars, idiotic liars, or saints. Because the crude truth is - women want men with status and success. With power and money. For very good Darwinian reasons:
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains
2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
I think you're way off-base.
After all, you're not someone with sexual or marital success, are you? And how much were you around your kids when they were kids? Yet you like to show off your 'status' and 'success' on here every effing day...
I don’t want to get into crude and vulgar boasting games about sex, I find them distasteful in the extreme, indicative of sociopathy - and likely to drive the few remaining female PBers off the site. And we need them. So I will restrict myself to observing that I have fucked about 350-400 women
Comments
Teeds is easily the most succesful of everyone I was at boarding school with and his third wife is an absolute rocket.
But either Reform or the Tories or both (I'm not fussy) need some serious policies.
I believe that PBers are united in supporting this bold vision, and recognise that the tens of billions of pounds of public money necessary to kick-start the industry will be money well spent.
Not that that's saying much. And it pains me to say it.
Let's see if they follow through.
The same goes for all energy in the UK system - it is oddly rigged against energy users and toward enormous profits for providers. Oh wait, I just realised that isn't odd at all.
We still do great science, but we've fallen a long way down the ranks of the industry leaders.
I was Helena. I don't honestly know what any of my fellow inmates are doing now.
Examples:
Crappy welfare reforms that will save a paltry amount whilst upsetting the genuinely disabled.
Crappy piffling compromise on Net Zero for carmarkers that goes nowhere near what's needed.
Just starting from scratch on overseas solutions for boats when all the work on Rwanda was done.
Crappy rescue of British Steel for strategical reasons but no plan to get the coal except import it, defeating the entire object.
I'll stop. None of that seems serious to me.
I do however approve of the changes to CGT.
I now find myself in the uncomfortable position of having 2 significant and different applications outstanding at the same time. It is not making me happy. I generally prefer the mode of not giving a damn what others think. Now I need to care. Sigh.
Then you could pitch carbon tariffs on imported steel… really pressure the planet to go green.
The boats, the black economy and a good deal of criminality could be solved by my suggestion of huge fines for illegal employment (of all kinds). The reporting person gets half on conviction. And indefinite leave to remain….
Caring about the opinions of others isn't quite the same thing about caring about status.
Building the modified blast furnaces for green steel would be faster.
Not wishing to start last night's debate again, but by chance this Spectator link came up on my phone today. Thought you might be interested @HYUFD even if we don't agree.
Can't believe I am promoting the Spectator!
On the plus side, getting Board experience is great and I'm learning much more about politics and people- which is essentially 90%+ of it.
💩
I still don't see why the two things need to be mutually exclusive. The magnificent progress of the Chinese on green energy has been lauded here by our China-fanciers as an excuse for the fact that they open coal mines like it's going out of fashion, but they don't make the link - China is powering its leadership of green technology with 'dirty' fuel. That's how you become the leader, not refuse to open a single specialist coal mine because you have let the imbeciles gain control of the loony bin.
My focus would be small changes to empower enthuse and support.
If you look at the people that succeed they generally have something behind them. I’d want to put the whole of society behind us all.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/property/buy-to-let/labour-rent-migrant-plan-no-brainer-for-landlords/
It doesn’t make you happy. But my god it makes unhappiness much easier to bear
https://x.com/wartranslated/status/1916101253525885150
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyw9qjeq8po
So far it's all he said, Xi said.
There are thousands of anonymous accountants on £50K a year.
If you earn £50K a year from writing poetry or playing jazz, you will have interviews in the weekend printed supplements and the culture columns of websites.
I dont understand the point of friendships if you DON’T discuss this stuff. What do you do? Chat about football for 9 hours?!
I reckon you are discussing an old fashioned kind of male friendship which has evolved for most into something better and deeper
Trump is also a nasty piece of work and a liar.
However, in a contest where you have to choose which one of them is more likely to be correct, Xi definitely has the advantage of not obviously suffering from insanity.
Closest they got was Francis' Italian ancestry
It's time for a bearded pope.
I have been in touch with the camerlengo's cleaner, whom I'd earlier supplied with lockpicks. Seriously the logic runs like this: who's to say the Jesuits aren't in a rather stronger position than anyone knows about given how precedent was steamrollered in 2013 when Ratzinger hightailed it, letting their boy in, and as things stand ~80% of cardies are Bergoglio's picks?
Status and recognition are important, perhaps to different levels. For instance, I would hate for someone to genuinely think I was a paedophile, a murderer, a rapist, or an Oxford graduate. 'Status', to that degree, matters.
Perhaps pride is another area: I certainly have pride in some of my accomplishments, even if they lend me f-all status or recognition...
Say that each offence of employing illegally is £100k, 50k to the witness/reporter.
So if you are an illegal worker on less than minimum wage, you are looking at a huge slice of cash, plus the right to work legally.
There will be a tidal wave of contingency fee lawyers offering to take the case on for 30% of the winnings.
The police wouldn’t need to do anything. Or the CPS.
The pressure for this law to equalise existing offences of dangerous and careless driving causing death or injury with similar offences for cyclists came from IDS
Regarding it being disorganised - historically, these things are done in two phases, of which the first is called "hasty search" - on the basis that it's better to get as many bodies out looking as fast as possible, since the faster you find a vulnerable person, the less likely they are to come to harm. The second phase is more systematic - but 90% of missing persons are found by during the hasty search.
Of course, and app could help - but it's a theory that needs testing. It's quite possible that it would result in people spending too much of the time staring at their phones. If the missing one is a small child, it's really important to look hard, as apparently they tend to instinctively hide when lost.
It's a very unusual 18C (2 to 4 in England) octagonal church about 3 miles north of Chatsworth, and well worth a visit. I'll make the nave lantern my strictly monitored photo quota for today.
There's also a Grade II* listed Toll Booth and a "Roman Bath" in the village. Their well dressing week this year starts from July 25, which is a good time to visit.
Credit: https://www.robschurches.com/stoney-middleton-the-longstones
“Just get to Britain and they give you a free house”. Thats it. That’s literally their plan
It was possible to pay for a house on a single income in the past as most women didn't work fulltime, certainly after becoming mothers, so only the salaried father received a mortgage on his income.
You can't force women now working full time to only use their second salaries to pay for holidays and meals out and childcare etc not mortgages for a house either.
Most couples also own a property outright or with a mortgage anyway, so supply already partly equates to demand, house prices are just as much influenced by more 2 full time earner couples than 50 years ago than fewer new homes being built
1. These attributes prove that the man is fit in evolutionary terms - likely to have kids with equal ambition and drive and brains
2. If the man is rich and powerful he’s in a much better position to look after those kids
So if you really believe status and success don’t matter to you then you are saying sexual/marital success don’t really matter to you. Such men exist but they are rare
Of course on the day of the Pope's burial the Roman Catholic church is very clear that each man regardless of status or income or amount of money and wealth or power should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children and stay faithfully married to that same woman for life. The only exceptions being those called to be Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes
After all, you're not someone with sexual or marital success, are you? And how much were you around your kids when they were kids? Yet you like to show off your 'status' and 'success' on here every effing day...
He hasn't had sex since the brief ans perfunctory coitus he had in 1976 and he's thrashed himself ever since with birch-leaves for this "sin", particularly the chronic embarrassment he feels for his vinegar strokes.
His life is now a mixture of the puritanical and Gladstonian thrills from commenting and judging the sexual lives of others.
And why those people be excepted? Priests and bishops can be married in your church.
It's a fascinating market, I feel like the betting is more generated by wishing than fact. I think there's enough conservative cardinals to block Tagle and enough progressive cardinals to block Sarah or Erdö. Someone on here said it'll depend on what the Cardinals want from the next Pope, if it's someone to get to grips with the Curia in a way that Francis tried (and arguably failed) then Parolin might be the best choice (though his odds are unbackable), If it's more an evangelism type Pope they want then Turkson would be the front runner.
Ultimately it might just boil down to social connections, does someone feel comfortable enough to enough cardinals that they would be happy to see him be Pope?
Rome catches up eventually - which in one sense is fair enough as they have a very diverse population to lead. But they tend not to come to their conclusions for one to perhaps five centuries, approximately.
Lack of money is without doubt, a source of anxiety, and possessing enough of it, a source of contentment.
I was picked for the cricket team. Not as a key player (down to bat at eight and didn't bowl) but nevertheless picked. Big thing.
We batted first, score well, the sixth wicket falls and it's my turn. I only have a few balls to face then it's "tea". As I walk out the teacher says to me, "Ok Kunty we'll be declaring at tea so just have a slog."
Ever obedient I do. First ball I charge down the pitch and swipe wildly at the ball. I miss and get stumped, about a yard out of my crease. It's an ugly dismissal, but we're declaring so it doesn't matter, right?
Wrong. At tea there's a rethink and we choose to bat on. My sacrifice was pointless. All I've done is make myself look a talentless plonker. I'm consumed by a cocktail of misery and grievance. I can't even eat my egg and cress sandwiches.
After tea the boy at number nine (Colin Swain) makes a decent knock, THEN we declare and we end up winning the match. I get dropped and am never selected again.
I'm 64 now, so we've reached the golden anniversary of the above event. It feels like yesterday.
Tge reference to "a switch was not flipped" is because the first chip powered up before the power supply to the development board was powered up, because there was enough leakage from other chips on the board to power the ARM chip.
The reference to "Like many monsters from lore, it eventually ate its creator," is because in 1998 the value of the ARM shares Acorn still held was much greater than the value of Acorn, so people bought Acorn, sold the ARM shares, and split the remnants of Acorn several ways (some to Broadcom, some to Pace), via a holding company called Element 14. I believe I technically worked for three different companies in one week, whilst sitting at the same desk doing the same work, as the various sales went through. A sad time, as it meant the end for what had been a truly brilliant company, tech-wise.
Out of interest where do I fit. I have 3 cars and 2 bikes. I like to think I view this from both sides and try to be considerate whether driving or cycling. Cycling does help you make a better driver, particularly when you know what it is like being passed close by. It makes you more respectful of horses as well.
The developer community work to the ‘absorption rate’. If you can’t sell it at a 17% profit you don’t build it.
There are 1.4m houses unbuilt with planning permission sitting there waiting to be turned into
profit by a rising tide.
And then there’s hundreds of hectares of land owned and waiting to be brought into the system.
Until we tax that wealth lurking unbuilt, forcing the builders to build, we will never see housing become affordable.
Blaming the planning system is ‘useful idiot’ at the kindest. I’m sorry for being so blunt but I keep seeing this canard on here. It’s lazy and it’s wrong.
Not one's even hinted I "should marry a woman if they can and avoid contraception and abortion to have plenty of children".
Where do you professional bigots get your delusions from?
Easier said than done, I admit.
Some talk about 'inclusiveness' being woke - but inclusiveness is the basis for most sources of status and identity.
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/249172/pope-francis-abortion-statements
https://thecatholicherald.com/pope-francis-upholds-catholic-ban-on-contraception/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/11/pope-francis-the-choice-to-not-have-children-is-selfish
'Married love is also faithful and exclusive of all other, and this until death. This is how husband and wife understood it on the day on which, fully aware of what they were doing, they freely vowed themselves to one another in marriage'
https://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html
"Last week, the pontiff said that hitting a child was an acceptable form of discipline, although it was important to maintain their “dignity” in the process."
It is complicated.
And just one final demonstration that it isn't that straightforward, having a cute dog attracts women, whereas my Cobra attracts men. The cute dog doesn't exude power and success whereas the Cobra does.
Yes priests and bishops can be married in the Anglican church and female as well as male now too but RC priests and bishops are required to be male and celibate
Most of our oldest universities, cathedrals and churches, many of our schools, hospitals, charities, foodbanks, homeless shelters, orphanages etc were also founded by the RC church and many of our most famous artists funded by them.
Of course militant atheist woke leftists like you are one of the biggest threats to western civilisation in human history so you are hardly one to talk!
That church established judicial systems to root out heresy, which led to torture, executions, and widespread fear. Inquisitions (especially the Spanish Inquisition) are seen as prime examples of religious authority suppressing dissent with brutality.
That church deliberately suppressed scientific inquiry and intellectual freedom for centuries. Galileo’s persecution is often held up as symbolic of a broader hostility toward scientific advancement.
During the European colonisation of the Americas, Africa, and Asia, Catholic missionaries often played a role in forced conversions, the destruction of indigenous cultures, and complicity in colonial violence. The church sometimes justified or turned a blind eye to atrocities committed by European powers.
In modern times, the Catholic church has faced enormous scandal over systemic sexual abuse of minors by clergy — and the institutional cover-up of these crimes over decades, even centuries in some areas.
At various points (e.g., Franco's Spain, Mussolini's Italy), that church has supported or collaborated with authoritarian regimes that committed violence and repression. This shows a consistent prioritisation of institutional power over human dignity.
That church has historically opposed advances in medicine and human rights — from resisting vaccinations to opposing birth control and abortion rights — which has led to suffering, disease, and preventable deaths.
Because the Catholic church has been one of the oldest, richest, and most powerful institutions in human history — stretching across continents and centuries — its influence has had extraordinarily wide consequences. And when it erred, it erred on a massive scale, leading to misery for countless millions.