I mean, FFS. Mine is on 'do not disturb' from 9.30pm to 7am. And that means I am healthier and more productive when I'm awake.
And, as it turns out, he wasn't needed. Which is the way it should be as if safety depends on one individual that's about as unsafe as it's possible to be.
Maybe he could have an emergency pager by his bed, but really.
I'm being serious when I say this is one of the useful purposes of a traditional house phone. When it rings in the middle of the night you know that something important is going on. (Of course he may not have been at home).
I mean, FFS. Mine is on 'do not disturb' from 9.30pm to 7am. And that means I am healthier and more productive when I'm awake.
And, as it turns out, he wasn't needed. Which is the way it should be as if safety depends on one individual that's about as unsafe as it's possible to be.
Maybe he could have an emergency pager by his bed, but really.
It's a story about the rank stupidity of Net Zero and this silly scapegoating of an individual is designed to distract from that.
It won't work.
Hang on, I think I've missed this theory. Did someone's heat pump short Heathrow out or something?
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
He couldn’t really,given the ‘experts’ lining up against it, including diet SAGE, given a lot of,prominence by the media
Course he could. He was the PM during a national emergency. It's about as powerful as anyone can be in the UK system.
Could he have persuaded the public and convinced parliament? Perhaps not.
He could not sell us what he was doing so I think it highly unlikely he could have persuaded either ourselves or parliament especially given the so called expert advice from the likes of Diet Sage.
Don’t want to stereotype, but sounds like the type whose son might stab a girl if he gets the brush off
The man arrested on suspicion of mowing down dozens of people with a car during a Liverpool Football Club victory parade is a middle-class father who lives in a detached suburban home.
The driver who RAN OVER the fans outside Espanyol's stadium was A WOMAN.
She got nervous when people started hitting her car, and tried to get out of there, running over dozens of fans in the process.
Bit of an unfair comparison there.
One was the result of a coked up dickhead who accelerated at people who should be done for attempted murder, the other is the tragic result of letting women drive.
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
The advisers who were ready to brief the press and condemn the politicians any time they deviated from "the plan" to lock everyone up. No, it was the "scientists" and the politicians were just along for the ride. As I said yesterday handing over effective control of the country to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats was an error. I blame the Tories for that but the scientists are responsible for the lockdowns and forcing the politicians into it.
I mean, FFS. Mine is on 'do not disturb' from 9.30pm to 7am. And that means I am healthier and more productive when I'm awake.
And, as it turns out, he wasn't needed. Which is the way it should be as if safety depends on one individual that's about as unsafe as it's possible to be.
Maybe he could have an emergency pager by his bed, but really.
It's a story about the rank stupidity of Net Zero and this silly scapegoating of an individual is designed to distract from that.
It won't work.
Hang on, I think I've missed this theory. Did someone's heat pump short Heathrow out or something?
Lucky now believes every power outage can be blamed on renewables. I’ll leave it to you to comment on the rank stupidity of that.
It's bloody good. Not only does Rod Steiger look like Napoleon and Christopher Plummer look like Wellington, but Ney looks like Ney and Blucher just like Blucher.
Only criticism is that dubbing Soviet troops (15,000 of them, utterly immense) to speak English is somewhat stilted and everyone on Wellington's side looks British, whereas only half were in reality.
Other than that. Brilliant. And they even bulldozed hundreds of thousands of tons of earth in Ukraine for weeks and built new buildings to recreate the battlefield properly.
I mean, FFS. Mine is on 'do not disturb' from 9.30pm to 7am. And that means I am healthier and more productive when I'm awake.
And, as it turns out, he wasn't needed. Which is the way it should be as if safety depends on one individual that's about as unsafe as it's possible to be.
Maybe he could have an emergency pager by his bed, but really.
It's a story about the rank stupidity of Net Zero and this silly scapegoating of an individual is designed to distract from that.
It won't work.
It’s the story about someone having proper limits between work and home life, with no override system on his phone.
If it was that important they could have got someone in HR to get his home address and sent someone junior to wake him up.
I really think it’s a none story - because what exactly could he do.
But I wouldn’t call it a net zero story - Heathrow is a story about a lack of disaster planning
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
The advisers who were ready to brief the press and condemn the politicians any time they deviated from "the plan" to lock everyone up. No, it was the "scientists" and the politicians were just along for the ride. As I said yesterday handing over effective control of the country to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats was an error. I blame the Tories for that but the scientists are responsible for the lockdowns and forcing the politicians into it.
So what?
In other countries politicians had advice from scientific advisors and were able to make their own decisions.
And you know what, we fucked up. But so - in different ways - did everyone else. Nowhere got it perfect.
Here in California, I think we did a much better job than the UK did. Could California have been better? Sure: in particular, I think they could have done a better job in LA of getting schools open. (Other cities were much better, but the LA teachers union was shit.)
But - to repeat - nowhere got it perfect, not even the Swedes.
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
The advisers who were ready to brief the press and condemn the politicians any time they deviated from "the plan" to lock everyone up. No, it was the "scientists" and the politicians were just along for the ride. As I said yesterday handing over effective control of the country to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats was an error. I blame the Tories for that but the scientists are responsible for the lockdowns and forcing the politicians into it.
So what?
In other countries politicians had advice from scientific advisors and were able to make their own decisions.
And you know what, we fucked up. But so - in different ways - did everyone else. Nowhere got it perfect.
Here in California, I think we did a much better job than the UK did. Could California have been better? Sure: in particular, I think they could have done a better job in LA of getting schools open. (Other cities were much better, but the LA teachers union was shit.)
But - to repeat - nowhere got it perfect, not even the Swedes.
Life's not perfect, perfect doesn't exist.
Thankfully we have an inquiry looking into what lessons we can learn from nations that handled things better, like Sweden.
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
The advisers who were ready to brief the press and condemn the politicians any time they deviated from "the plan" to lock everyone up. No, it was the "scientists" and the politicians were just along for the ride. As I said yesterday handing over effective control of the country to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats was an error. I blame the Tories for that but the scientists are responsible for the lockdowns and forcing the politicians into it.
So what?
In other countries politicians had advice from scientific advisors and were able to make their own decisions.
And you know what, we fucked up. But so - in different ways - did everyone else. Nowhere got it perfect.
Here in California, I think we did a much better job than the UK did. Could California have been better? Sure: in particular, I think they could have done a better job in LA of getting schools open. (Other cities were much better, but the LA teachers union was shit.)
But - to repeat - nowhere got it perfect, not even the Swedes.
So what? Well we now have the worst productivity in Europe, we have the worst school attendance in history, we have the worst rate of "sickness" benefit since the early 00s.
All of this can be traced back to lockdowns and the subsequent actions. We should never have allowed people to sit at home doing nothing and getting £2.5k per month to do it. Furlough was the biggest disaster for the country we've had in the post war era, it's changed the country's attitude towards work and entitlement.
Don’t want to stereotype, but sounds like the type whose son might stab a girl if he gets the brush off
The man arrested on suspicion of mowing down dozens of people with a car during a Liverpool Football Club victory parade is a middle-class father who lives in a detached suburban home.
The driver who RAN OVER the fans outside Espanyol's stadium was A WOMAN.
She got nervous when people started hitting her car, and tried to get out of there, running over dozens of fans in the process.
Bit of an unfair comparison there.
One was the result of a coked up dickhead who accelerated at people who should be done for attempted murder, the other is the tragic result of letting women drive.
I'll get my coat.
letting them drive was a mistake hell teaching them how to speak was a mistake....ducks down behind you in your foxhole
I mean, FFS. Mine is on 'do not disturb' from 9.30pm to 7am. And that means I am healthier and more productive when I'm awake.
And, as it turns out, he wasn't needed. Which is the way it should be as if safety depends on one individual that's about as unsafe as it's possible to be.
Maybe he could have an emergency pager by his bed, but really.
I'm being serious when I say this is one of the useful purposes of a traditional house phone. When it rings in the middle of the night you know that something important is going on. (Of course he may not have been at home).
Not necessarily last time I had a house phone and one of the reasons I got rid of it was it rang every night at 4am and it was someone trying to send a fax
BBC Radio 4 News: the Liverpool suspect lives in a £300,000 detached house in the West Derby area of Liverpool. (Not sure why or how they know this information).
BBC Radio 4 News: the Liverpool suspect lives in a £300,000 detached house in the West Derby area of Liverpool. (Not sure why or how they know this information).
BBC Radio 4 News: the Liverpool suspect lives in a £300,000 detached house in the West Derby area of Liverpool.
Doesnt tell us much. Cases like this can be rich or poor or pretending to be loaded. As I mentioned the other night though, fair chance was coked up or on some kind of drug and lo and behold appears to be so. We still await to find out if they have had run ins with the law already and my money is they have.
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
The advisers who were ready to brief the press and condemn the politicians any time they deviated from "the plan" to lock everyone up. No, it was the "scientists" and the politicians were just along for the ride. As I said yesterday handing over effective control of the country to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats was an error. I blame the Tories for that but the scientists are responsible for the lockdowns and forcing the politicians into it.
So what?
In other countries politicians had advice from scientific advisors and were able to make their own decisions.
And you know what, we fucked up. But so - in different ways - did everyone else. Nowhere got it perfect.
Here in California, I think we did a much better job than the UK did. Could California have been better? Sure: in particular, I think they could have done a better job in LA of getting schools open. (Other cities were much better, but the LA teachers union was shit.)
But - to repeat - nowhere got it perfect, not even the Swedes.
So what? Well we now have the worst productivity in Europe, we have the worst school attendance in history, we have the worst rate of "sickness" benefit since the early 00s.
All of this can be traced back to lockdowns and the subsequent actions. We should never have allowed people to sit at home doing nothing and getting £2.5k per month to do it. Furlough was the biggest disaster for the country we've had in the post war era, it's changed the country's attitude towards work and entitlement.
I'm staggered that someone as obviously smart as you just wrote such absolute rubbish.
If the lockdown was the biggest contributor to all these elements, how come some countries that had even more severe lockdowns have done better than us?
The UK had - by European standards - a pretty average lockdown experience. Now, should we have had fewer restrictions? Yes, obviously. But if severity of lockdown was the major driver of economic success relative to peers, then Sweden would have been top of the pops, we'd have been middle of the pack, while some of the continental economies would have lagged even more than they did previously.
That's not what happened: Denmark has been the clear standout winner (due to good risk stratification), while we've done about 5% better than Sweden despite massively more invasive restrictions.
(Sweden's GDP per capita growth between 2019 and 2024 was 5.1%; the UK's 10.7%, while Denmark and Switzerland managed more than 20%.)
The U.S. will begin revoking visas of Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.
The U.S. will begin revoking visas of Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.
Great news for British universities. The number of people applying to US universities from China and the like is going to collapse.
I'm not sure she's helping their cause, but it seems implausible anyone else would do noticeably better.
Whatever they say, there simply is no answer to the inevitable response of "you had 14 years in power, why didn't you do it".
Farage has come and eaten their lunch by stealing their only remaining USP of "at least we're not Starmer".
I can't say I'm sympathetic. They aren't being punished for 14 years where they took tough but unpopular decisions in the best interests of the country. They are being punished for 14 years of being pretty well useless, other than (sort of) getting Brexit done (after wasting several years on infighting first).
Trump tariffs ruled illegal by Federal Judicial Panel
A panel of federal judges on Wednesday blocked President Trump from imposing some of his steepest tariffs on China and other U.S. trading partners, finding in two cases that he vastly overstepped his ability to issue those expansive duties under federal law.
Inventor of self-cooling drinks can contrasts British bureaucracy with American and Middle East welcome for entrepreneurs.
Reading his complaints, note that it's a private as well as public sector failing - and government advice on this stuff in the end comes from established players in the private sector.
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
The advisers who were ready to brief the press and condemn the politicians any time they deviated from "the plan" to lock everyone up. No, it was the "scientists" and the politicians were just along for the ride. As I said yesterday handing over effective control of the country to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats was an error. I blame the Tories for that but the scientists are responsible for the lockdowns and forcing the politicians into it.
I know that 2020 and Covid lockdown was a long time ago but my timestamped pics suggest I was watching the sun rise in Corfu at the time. I travelled there there from Italy Was it really that bad or do we create false memories to justify a point of view.
The GOP in Congress aren't just a shitshow - some of them might be beginning to realise that.
It was, of course, widely pointed out in the media that the final draft of this mega bill was rushed through on a timescale that allowed almost no scrutiny of measures slipped in without discussion.
But there's zero excuse for not knowing what you voted for, when these provisions were flagged in the media beforehand.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5321756-nebraska-republican-mike-flood-trump-megabill-town-hall/ ...The language, which is a small paragraph in the 1,000-plus-page bill, was slipped in and went largely unnoticed. Asked why he voted in favor of the bill with that provision, Flood — who graduated from University of Nebraska’s law school — said the language was “unknown” to him when he voted for the bill, noting he is not in favor of it. “I do not agree with that section that was added to that bill,” Floor said, prompting a cry of “you voted for all of it” from the audience. “Why? I will tell you this: I believe in the rule of law,” he continued. “I’ve taken an oath as an attorney, I’ve taken an oath as a state senator, I’ve taken an oath as a member of Congress, and I support our court system and I do believe that the federal district courts when issuing an injunction, it should have legal effect. In fact, I relied upon that when the Biden administration was in place, the federal courts did a tremendous amount of good work.” “This provision was unknown to me when I voted for the bill,” he added...
I 100% agree that the rise in National Insurance - which hits the poorest and discourages employment - is monumentally stupid.
We want to maximize the number of people in work, and reduce the barriers to employment for those with the fewest skills, and NI is a disastrous tax on this group.
No - employer's National Insurance doesn't hit the poorest disproportionately, if at all. The poorest, those on benefits, don't feel it except very indirectly and partially through a generalised rise in prices. Those in informal employment may actually benefit from an increase in demand for their services as formal employment becomes more expensive. And those on very low, part-time wages won't feel it at all and again may experience an increase in employment because it doesn't kick in until £5,000-12,000/year, depending on your national insurance category.
It's everybody else, not the poorest, that will mostly suffer from it.
I 100% agree that the rise in National Insurance - which hits the poorest and discourages employment - is monumentally stupid.
We want to maximize the number of people in work, and reduce the barriers to employment for those with the fewest skills, and NI is a disastrous tax on this group.
No - employer's National Insurance doesn't hit the poorest disproportionately, if at all. The poorest, those on benefits, don't feel it except very indirectly and partially through a generalised rise in prices. Those in informal employment may actually benefit from an increase in demand for their services as formal employment becomes more expensive. And those on very low, part-time wages won't feel it at all and again may experience an increase in employment because it doesn't kick in until £5,000-12,000/year, depending on your national insurance category.
It's everybody else, not the poorest, that will mostly suffer from it.
Wait.
So, you are seriously telling me that increasing employer's NIC from 13.8% to 15%, and reducing the threshold to £5,000/year doesn’t massively affect the likelihood of low-productivity workers finding gainful employment? That defies basic economic logic.
Firms hire based on whether the value a worker adds exceeds their total cost. For low-productivity workers (those in roles with marginal economic output), then raising the non-wage cost of employment makes them less attractive to hire. (This can easily be seen by looking at the fact that countries like France, with high social charges, effectively create an underclass of the unemployable, because their cost of employment can't possible equal their economic output.)
So no, it’s not "everybody else" that suffers: it’s disproportionately the people trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder.
Scoop: Trump’s AF1 deal with Qatar has not been finalized despite the administration's claims. Qatar is asking the US to clarify that the deal for the luxury jet was initiated by the US and that Qatar is not responsible for any future transfers of the plane
The GOP in Congress aren't just a shitshow - some of them might be beginning to realise that.
It was, of course, widely pointed out in the media that the final draft of this mega bill was rushed through on a timescale that allowed almost no scrutiny of measures slipped in without discussion.
But there's zero excuse for not knowing what you voted for, when these provisions were flagged in the media beforehand.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5321756-nebraska-republican-mike-flood-trump-megabill-town-hall/ ...The language, which is a small paragraph in the 1,000-plus-page bill, was slipped in and went largely unnoticed. Asked why he voted in favor of the bill with that provision, Flood — who graduated from University of Nebraska’s law school — said the language was “unknown” to him when he voted for the bill, noting he is not in favor of it. “I do not agree with that section that was added to that bill,” Floor said, prompting a cry of “you voted for all of it” from the audience. “Why? I will tell you this: I believe in the rule of law,” he continued. “I’ve taken an oath as an attorney, I’ve taken an oath as a state senator, I’ve taken an oath as a member of Congress, and I support our court system and I do believe that the federal district courts when issuing an injunction, it should have legal effect. In fact, I relied upon that when the Biden administration was in place, the federal courts did a tremendous amount of good work.” “This provision was unknown to me when I voted for the bill,” he added...
Learned helplessness. "It's not my fault I voted for it". He's a child.
And the Mad King's tariffs have been blocked by a panel of judges
Starmer looks like a bit of a fool for his eagerness to kiss Trump's behind & quickly do a tariff deal. If he had shown some patience then the UK wouldn't have needed to make any concessions to Trump.
I have high confidence that the Supreme Court will side with the panel of judges & continue the block on the tariffs. The US Constitution explictly gives Congress the power to levy "duties, imposts & excises". It's absurd for Trump to lay claim on this power.
And the Mad King's tariffs have been blocked by a panel of judges
Starmer looks like a bit of a fool for his eagerness to kiss Trump's behind & quickly do a tariff deal. If he had shown some patience then the UK wouldn't have needed to make any concessions to Trump.
I have high confidence that the Supreme Court will side with the panel of judges & continue the block on the tariffs. The US Constitution explictly gives Congress the power to levy "duties, imposts & excises". It's absurd for Trump to lay claim on this power.
Apparently the ruling doesn’t effect steel or cars which was the main part of that deal .
I posted this in response to @isam 's question about his mum's hip replacement yesterday, and a further PM that may be of more general interest. It's in 2 halves because I waffle. If it's not useful, feel free to ignore.
Home adaptations are the responsibility of the local authority aiui. I think It's called a Disabled Facilities Grant. They cover things like moving around the house.
It's possible there may be edge cases around "elderly or disabled?", but you find out by asking.
For basic equipment that comes in a van eg bath board, high loo seat, toilet support frames, maybe standalone shower seat, walking frame or wheelchair, you get them on loan (not the loo seat - they don't want those back) from the British Red Cross service. They should send someone out to do an assessment.
I'm not sure what they are on about with their "talk to Buckinghamshire".
(There may I suppose be anomalies by area, and Havering is Havering.)
My suggested contact is the Age UK helpline: Age UK Advice Line - 0800 678 1602
To add a little.
The category of things like grab handles outside the door, or in the shower, a wall mounted shower seat, taps with lever handles not screws, a shower with rainfall and handset, and that type of small job are probably best tackled from own money by a handyman with common sense in perhaps a day (eg use long screws - 70mm in the wright-supporting block work or bricks for handles that will bear weight, which may not be supplied).
For anything that gets wet, fluted plastic for grab handles is important; you cannot compromise on that. For other places stainless steel or chrome seems less institutional. And making showers non slip is important - even now I use stick on patches from Amazon. Croydex are a reliable brand, and Screwfix "Trade Rated" a sound recommendation.
You can get that done in days or weeks, for low hundreds all in, but take time to think carefully. With my mum we spent half an hour chatting and thinking with her sitting on the loo about where she wanted grab handles etc. That type of approach also helps to bring it all into the open.
The grants tend to address things that are more like building work eg adding a downstairs loo or shower in a new subdivided room. They take longer, but you may get thousands. I know someone who had a lift installed in a 2 bed terrace on a grant under a council obligation.
At best they take years, just had infirm relative get told they needed it but as they had no budget then tough luck, including a care package.
Mine was an account from the late 2010s. It was also in England - so "post code" differences are more likely wrt Scotland. On this one I do not know how the underlying budgets work.
And the Mad King's tariffs have been blocked by a panel of judges
Starmer looks like a bit of a fool for his eagerness to kiss Trump's behind & quickly do a tariff deal. If he had shown some patience then the UK wouldn't have needed to make any concessions to Trump.
I have high confidence that the Supreme Court will side with the panel of judges & continue the block on the tariffs. The US Constitution explictly gives Congress the power to levy "duties, imposts & excises". It's absurd for Trump to lay claim on this power.
Apparently the ruling doesn’t effect steel or cars which was the main part of that deal .
Have we covered Toyota moving a smidge of production to the UK. +10k cars to Burnaston? It's a tidal flow, and in timescales that could be reversed.
And the Mad King's tariffs have been blocked by a panel of judges
Starmer looks like a bit of a fool for his eagerness to kiss Trump's behind & quickly do a tariff deal. If he had shown some patience then the UK wouldn't have needed to make any concessions to Trump.
I have high confidence that the Supreme Court will side with the panel of judges & continue the block on the tariffs. The US Constitution explictly gives Congress the power to levy "duties, imposts & excises". It's absurd for Trump to lay claim on this power.
Apparently the ruling doesn’t effect steel or cars which was the main part of that deal .
Have we covered Toyota moving a smidge of production to the UK. +10k cars to Burnaston? It's a tidal flow, and in timescales that could be reversed.
That big because we don't even get the GR Corolla in the UK which we should because it's fully sick, especially the Morizo Edition. We get the Corolla GR Sport but that's an anodyne Waitrose-mobile.
I 100% agree that the rise in National Insurance - which hits the poorest and discourages employment - is monumentally stupid.
We want to maximize the number of people in work, and reduce the barriers to employment for those with the fewest skills, and NI is a disastrous tax on this group.
No - employer's National Insurance doesn't hit the poorest disproportionately, if at all. The poorest, those on benefits, don't feel it except very indirectly and partially through a generalised rise in prices. Those in informal employment may actually benefit from an increase in demand for their services as formal employment becomes more expensive. And those on very low, part-time wages won't feel it at all and again may experience an increase in employment because it doesn't kick in until £5,000-12,000/year, depending on your national insurance category.
It's everybody else, not the poorest, that will mostly suffer from it.
Wait.
So, you are seriously telling me that increasing employer's NIC from 13.8% to 15%, and reducing the threshold to £5,000/year doesn’t massively affect the likelihood of low-productivity workers finding gainful employment? That defies basic economic logic.
Firms hire based on whether the value a worker adds exceeds their total cost. For low-productivity workers (those in roles with marginal economic output), then raising the non-wage cost of employment makes them less attractive to hire. (This can easily be seen by looking at the fact that countries like France, with high social charges, effectively create an underclass of the unemployable, because their cost of employment can't possible equal their economic output.)
So no, it’s not "everybody else" that suffers: it’s disproportionately the people trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder.
No.
You need to read how employer's NI works. It's the lowest productivity workers, mostly those that are trying to take the first step on the employment ladder (those in NI categories H, M and Z) that get the £12,500 thresholds, not the £5,000 allowances that everybody else gets, precisely for this reason. So it affects them proportionately much less, if at all.
And as I say, the poorest, those on benefits, won't suffer much.
So it's absolutely everybody else who suffers, and the low productivity workers, though they will no doubt suffer, will suffer proportionately less. And as I say may benefit marginally if they're in the black economy.
The best thing the government can do to help the most vulnerable into employment is scrap the scandalously high minimum wage.
I 100% agree that the rise in National Insurance - which hits the poorest and discourages employment - is monumentally stupid.
We want to maximize the number of people in work, and reduce the barriers to employment for those with the fewest skills, and NI is a disastrous tax on this group.
No - employer's National Insurance doesn't hit the poorest disproportionately, if at all. The poorest, those on benefits, don't feel it except very indirectly and partially through a generalised rise in prices. Those in informal employment may actually benefit from an increase in demand for their services as formal employment becomes more expensive. And those on very low, part-time wages won't feel it at all and again may experience an increase in employment because it doesn't kick in until £5,000-12,000/year, depending on your national insurance category.
It's everybody else, not the poorest, that will mostly suffer from it.
Wait.
So, you are seriously telling me that increasing employer's NIC from 13.8% to 15%, and reducing the threshold to £5,000/year doesn’t massively affect the likelihood of low-productivity workers finding gainful employment? That defies basic economic logic.
Firms hire based on whether the value a worker adds exceeds their total cost. For low-productivity workers (those in roles with marginal economic output), then raising the non-wage cost of employment makes them less attractive to hire. (This can easily be seen by looking at the fact that countries like France, with high social charges, effectively create an underclass of the unemployable, because their cost of employment can't possible equal their economic output.)
So no, it’s not "everybody else" that suffers: it’s disproportionately the people trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder.
Everyone else's salary can get squeezed too, while that's not possible for minimum wage earners, so that translates into higher unemployment all else held equal.
There's lots of other moving parts though - the value of the minimum wage, immigration etc. And the (unintended?) consequence is a boost in productivity because those who remain in work will be those who can contribute more, while capital investment for basic functions becomes relatively more attractive (particularly for large employers of low wage staff, like Tesco).
I 100% agree that the rise in National Insurance - which hits the poorest and discourages employment - is monumentally stupid.
We want to maximize the number of people in work, and reduce the barriers to employment for those with the fewest skills, and NI is a disastrous tax on this group.
No - employer's National Insurance doesn't hit the poorest disproportionately, if at all. The poorest, those on benefits, don't feel it except very indirectly and partially through a generalised rise in prices. Those in informal employment may actually benefit from an increase in demand for their services as formal employment becomes more expensive. And those on very low, part-time wages won't feel it at all and again may experience an increase in employment because it doesn't kick in until £5,000-12,000/year, depending on your national insurance category.
It's everybody else, not the poorest, that will mostly suffer from it.
Wait.
So, you are seriously telling me that increasing employer's NIC from 13.8% to 15%, and reducing the threshold to £5,000/year doesn’t massively affect the likelihood of low-productivity workers finding gainful employment? That defies basic economic logic.
Firms hire based on whether the value a worker adds exceeds their total cost. For low-productivity workers (those in roles with marginal economic output), then raising the non-wage cost of employment makes them less attractive to hire. (This can easily be seen by looking at the fact that countries like France, with high social charges, effectively create an underclass of the unemployable, because their cost of employment can't possible equal their economic output.)
So no, it’s not "everybody else" that suffers: it’s disproportionately the people trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder.
Everyone else's salary can get squeezed too, while that's not possible for minimum wage earners, so that translates into higher unemployment all else held equal.
There's lots of other moving parts though - the value of the minimum wage, immigration etc. And the (unintended?) consequence is a boost in productivity because those who remain in work will be those who can contribute more, while capital investment for basic functions becomes relatively more attractive (particularly for large employers of low wage staff, like Tesco).
If you think that one of the UK's problems is that employers would rather throw cheap bodies at problems than spend on training or automation, then taxing such employment more might help.
(I guess the question is how many of those jobs are really first rung on a ladder, and how many are bottom rung forever, with poor pay topped up by benefits. That's way beyond my competence to judge.)
lol. Back in February, around the time of the chainsaw and Nazi salute, I dropped Tesla UK a short, polite note expressing disapproval of their founder’s antics and suggesting it wouldn’t go down well for their UK and EU sales.
I never expected a reply, merely wanting to add another straw to their negative feedback. But yesterday their UK HQ sent me an email, apologising for the delay, insisting the company is only interested in green energy and autonomous vehicles, and pleading with me to ignore any other factors when forming an opinion of them! With more than a hint of desperation.
BBC Radio 4 News: the Liverpool suspect lives in a £300,000 detached house in the West Derby area of Liverpool. (Not sure why or how they know this information).
It tells the victims that he is worth suing for compensation. They should get on that.
I 100% agree that the rise in National Insurance - which hits the poorest and discourages employment - is monumentally stupid.
We want to maximize the number of people in work, and reduce the barriers to employment for those with the fewest skills, and NI is a disastrous tax on this group.
No - employer's National Insurance doesn't hit the poorest disproportionately, if at all. The poorest, those on benefits, don't feel it except very indirectly and partially through a generalised rise in prices. Those in informal employment may actually benefit from an increase in demand for their services as formal employment becomes more expensive. And those on very low, part-time wages won't feel it at all and again may experience an increase in employment because it doesn't kick in until £5,000-12,000/year, depending on your national insurance category.
It's everybody else, not the poorest, that will mostly suffer from it.
Wait.
So, you are seriously telling me that increasing employer's NIC from 13.8% to 15%, and reducing the threshold to £5,000/year doesn’t massively affect the likelihood of low-productivity workers finding gainful employment? That defies basic economic logic.
Firms hire based on whether the value a worker adds exceeds their total cost. For low-productivity workers (those in roles with marginal economic output), then raising the non-wage cost of employment makes them less attractive to hire. (This can easily be seen by looking at the fact that countries like France, with high social charges, effectively create an underclass of the unemployable, because their cost of employment can't possible equal their economic output.)
So no, it’s not "everybody else" that suffers: it’s disproportionately the people trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder.
Another reason for thinking that those "trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder" won't suffer disproportionately. Employers of apprentices or under 21s are essentially exempt from Employer's NI (at least until their apprentices earn more than £4,200 per month, which never happens).
But even for those who aren't apprentices or under 21s, but still under 25, I've crunched some numbers, which you apparently didn't, and the impact of the changes on the employer of somebody earning £100,000 is 1.2%, much greater than that an under-25 on £15,000, which is 0.3% - proportionately FOUR TIMES as high.
In fact, if anything, because I think the government left the thresholds for apprentices and under-21s unchanged, while reducing everybody else's, it may slightly increase the incentive to employ those "trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder".
So, contrary to what you said, the impact is disproportionately greater on the most productive and highly-skilled, than on those trying to enter employment.
And the Mad King's tariffs have been blocked by a panel of judges
Starmer looks like a bit of a fool for his eagerness to kiss Trump's behind & quickly do a tariff deal. If he had shown some patience then the UK wouldn't have needed to make any concessions to Trump.
I have high confidence that the Supreme Court will side with the panel of judges & continue the block on the tariffs. The US Constitution explictly gives Congress the power to levy "duties, imposts & excises". It's absurd for Trump to lay claim on this power.
Apparently the ruling doesn’t effect steel or cars which was the main part of that deal .
Have we covered Toyota moving a smidge of production to the UK. +10k cars to Burnaston? It's a tidal flow, and in timescales that could be reversed.
Are these just going to be assembled in the UK from kits sent from Japan or will there be local manufactured content as opposed to local suppliers assembling kits of parts from Japan to get around localisation rules as happened when Nissan first came to the UK.
The U.S. will begin revoking visas of Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.
Great news for British universities. The number of people applying to US universities from China and the like is going to collapse.
If only the British universities could accept them because of the new(ish) Government quotas on foreign students.
And the Mad King's tariffs have been blocked by a panel of judges
Starmer looks like a bit of a fool for his eagerness to kiss Trump's behind & quickly do a tariff deal. If he had shown some patience then the UK wouldn't have needed to make any concessions to Trump.
I have high confidence that the Supreme Court will side with the panel of judges & continue the block on the tariffs. The US Constitution explictly gives Congress the power to levy "duties, imposts & excises". It's absurd for Trump to lay claim on this power.
Apparently the ruling doesn’t effect steel or cars which was the main part of that deal .
Have we covered Toyota moving a smidge of production to the UK. +10k cars to Burnaston? It's a tidal flow, and in timescales that could be reversed.
Are these just going to be assembled in the UK from kits sent from Japan or will there be local manufactured content as opposed to local suppliers assembling kits of parts from Japan to get around localisation rules as happened when Nissan first came to the UK.
I don't know - it's an overflow from a plant in Japan aiui. Reported investment of £41m over a period to construct a new line, for cars for export to the USA. So it's partly that there is space, some sort of positive for the reputation of the plant, and also that we have a 10% tariff. That's why I said JLR would not be happy.
But I'd say that like everything wrt or reacting to Trump, it's 80% tactical - like managing the time between people saying "there, there" to the mad grandma, who demands 106 times per day that there is a saltwater crocodile in the cupboard of the Welsh Dresser that just ate her lunch.
It's a game of pelmanism until the mad king is removed, locked up or dead.
Putin's condition for a ceasefire is that he be given the opportunity to have another go.
Russian President Vladimir Putin will demand a written promise from Western leaders that NATO will not expand eastward, Reuters reports, citing its own sources. https://x.com/Hromadske/status/1927699132203889013
Putin's condition for a ceasefire is that he be given the opportunity to have another go.
Russian President Vladimir Putin will demand a written promise from Western leaders that NATO will not expand eastward, Reuters reports, citing its own sources. https://x.com/Hromadske/status/1927699132203889013
How about, 'we will not offer membership to Belarus or Ukraine while the current Presidents are in charge?'
Don’t want to stereotype, but sounds like the type whose son might stab a girl if he gets the brush off
The man arrested on suspicion of mowing down dozens of people with a car during a Liverpool Football Club victory parade is a middle-class father who lives in a detached suburban home.
Putin's condition for a ceasefire is that he be given the opportunity to have another go.
Russian President Vladimir Putin will demand a written promise from Western leaders that NATO will not expand eastward, Reuters reports, citing its own sources. https://x.com/Hromadske/status/1927699132203889013
How about, 'we will not offer membership to Belarus or Ukraine while the current Presidents are in charge?'
So in 18 months they will be in NATO...
Didn't Ukraine get written guarantees from Russia and US when it reluctantly gave up nuclear weapons in 90s?
Putin's condition for a ceasefire is that he be given the opportunity to have another go.
Russian President Vladimir Putin will demand a written promise from Western leaders that NATO will not expand eastward, Reuters reports, citing its own sources. https://x.com/Hromadske/status/1927699132203889013
How about, 'we will not offer membership to Belarus or Ukraine while the current Presidents are in charge?'
So in 18 months they will be in NATO...
Didn't Ukraine get written guarantees from Russia and US when it reluctantly gave up nuclear weapons in 90s?
Well, yes, but we're not talking about Russian guarantees.
And the Mad King's tariffs have been blocked by a panel of judges
Starmer looks like a bit of a fool for his eagerness to kiss Trump's behind & quickly do a tariff deal. If he had shown some patience then the UK wouldn't have needed to make any concessions to Trump.
I have high confidence that the Supreme Court will side with the panel of judges & continue the block on the tariffs. The US Constitution explictly gives Congress the power to levy "duties, imposts & excises". It's absurd for Trump to lay claim on this power.
Apparently the ruling doesn’t effect steel or cars which was the main part of that deal .
Have we covered Toyota moving a smidge of production to the UK. +10k cars to Burnaston? It's a tidal flow, and in timescales that could be reversed.
Are these just going to be assembled in the UK from kits sent from Japan or will there be local manufactured content as opposed to local suppliers assembling kits of parts from Japan to get around localisation rules as happened when Nissan first came to the UK.
I don't know - it's an overflow from a plant in Japan aiui. Reported investment of £41m over a period to construct a new line, for cars for export to the USA. So it's partly that there is space, some sort of positive for the reputation of the plant, and also that we have a 10% tariff. That's why I said JLR would not be happy.
But I'd say that like everything wrt or reacting to Trump, it's 80% tactical - like managing the time between people saying "there, there" to the mad grandma, who demands 106 times per day that there is a saltwater crocodile in the cupboard of the Welsh Dresser that just ate her lunch.
It's a game of pelmanism until the mad king is removed, locked up or dead.
A new line ?
I worked at Magna in Barton for a while supplying Toyota. They had two lines and only used one. I’d have thought all they’d need to do would be to upgrade the existing one.
The excess pollution emitted as a result of the Dieselgate scandal has killed about 16,000 people in the UK and caused 30,000 cases of asthma in children, according to a new analysis. A further 6,000 premature deaths will occur in coming years without action, the researchers said.
The Dieselgate scandal erupted in 2015 when diesel cars were found to be emitting far more toxic air pollution on the roads than when they passed regulatory tests, due to the use of illegal “defeat devices”.
Large fines and compulsory recalls of vehicles to remove or disable the defeat devices took place in the US. But experts say the UK and most EU countries have lagged far behind, leading to devastating impacts on health, and urge immediate action. Many millions of highly polluting diesel vehicles remain on the roads in the UK and EU.
Putin's condition for a ceasefire is that he be given the opportunity to have another go.
Russian President Vladimir Putin will demand a written promise from Western leaders that NATO will not expand eastward, Reuters reports, citing its own sources. https://x.com/Hromadske/status/1927699132203889013
How about, 'we will not offer membership to Belarus or Ukraine while the current Presidents are in charge?'
So in 18 months they will be in NATO...
Didn't Ukraine get written guarantees from Russia and US when it reluctantly gave up nuclear weapons in 90s?
Well, yes, but we're not talking about Russian guarantees.
A polite fuck off would be the most diplomatic response, IMO.
BBC Radio 4 News: the Liverpool suspect lives in a £300,000 detached house in the West Derby area of Liverpool. (Not sure why or how they know this information).
It tells the victims that he is worth suing for compensation. They should get on that.
I haven't seen it reported that he was uninsured - though wouldn't be a surprise if he was uninsured / disqualified. If the car is insured then the insurer is likely to pay out for 3rd party injuries and they'll go for his house. (If they're quick enough because he'll be transferring the title asap).
Trump Media to raise $2.5 billion to invest in bitcoin https://www.reuters.com/business/trump-media-raise-25-billion-fund-bitcoin-treasury-2025-05-27/ .."We view bitcoin as an apex instrument of financial freedom," Trump Media CEO Devin Nunes said, hailing the move as a "big step forward" in the company's plan to acquire "crown jewel assets consistent with America First principles."..
The U.S. will begin revoking visas of Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.
Great news for British universities. The number of people applying to US universities from China and the like is going to collapse.
If only the British universities could accept them because of the new(ish) Government quotas on foreign students.
Every day there seems to be a story about another university going on strike over job cuts.
Universities and the Union, unless there’s a change of course, will need to accept the new reality of what fewer students, and fewer students paying high fees too, actually means.
I suspect the best the Union can do is get enhanced pay off terms.
The excess pollution emitted as a result of the Dieselgate scandal has killed about 16,000 people in the UK and caused 30,000 cases of asthma in children, according to a new analysis. A further 6,000 premature deaths will occur in coming years without action, the researchers said.
The Dieselgate scandal erupted in 2015 when diesel cars were found to be emitting far more toxic air pollution on the roads than when they passed regulatory tests, due to the use of illegal “defeat devices”.
Large fines and compulsory recalls of vehicles to remove or disable the defeat devices took place in the US. But experts say the UK and most EU countries have lagged far behind, leading to devastating impacts on health, and urge immediate action. Many millions of highly polluting diesel vehicles remain on the roads in the UK and EU.
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
Indeed. The government was, at all times, the decision maker. As a minor adviser, we were never in any doubt about that. For clarity, while I was on a couple of SAGE subcommittees (mostly SPI-B), I was not involved in advising on when to lockdown: the key advice relating to those decisions came out of SPI-M.
BBC Radio 4 News: the Liverpool suspect lives in a £300,000 detached house in the West Derby area of Liverpool. (Not sure why or how they know this information).
It tells the victims that he is worth suing for compensation. They should get on that.
Another interesting one. Does the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme go after these funds (and any insurer) or is it up to the victims to make out a civil case?
I 100% agree that the rise in National Insurance - which hits the poorest and discourages employment - is monumentally stupid.
We want to maximize the number of people in work, and reduce the barriers to employment for those with the fewest skills, and NI is a disastrous tax on this group.
No - employer's National Insurance doesn't hit the poorest disproportionately, if at all. The poorest, those on benefits, don't feel it except very indirectly and partially through a generalised rise in prices. Those in informal employment may actually benefit from an increase in demand for their services as formal employment becomes more expensive. And those on very low, part-time wages won't feel it at all and again may experience an increase in employment because it doesn't kick in until £5,000-12,000/year, depending on your national insurance category.
It's everybody else, not the poorest, that will mostly suffer from it.
Wait.
So, you are seriously telling me that increasing employer's NIC from 13.8% to 15%, and reducing the threshold to £5,000/year doesn’t massively affect the likelihood of low-productivity workers finding gainful employment? That defies basic economic logic.
Firms hire based on whether the value a worker adds exceeds their total cost. For low-productivity workers (those in roles with marginal economic output), then raising the non-wage cost of employment makes them less attractive to hire. (This can easily be seen by looking at the fact that countries like France, with high social charges, effectively create an underclass of the unemployable, because their cost of employment can't possible equal their economic output.)
So no, it’s not "everybody else" that suffers: it’s disproportionately the people trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder.
Another reason for thinking that those "trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder" won't suffer disproportionately. Employers of apprentices or under 21s are essentially exempt from Employer's NI (at least until their apprentices earn more than £4,200 per month, which never happens).
But even for those who aren't apprentices or under 21s, but still under 25, I've crunched some numbers, which you apparently didn't, and the impact of the changes on the employer of somebody earning £100,000 is 1.2%, much greater than that an under-25 on £15,000, which is 0.3% - proportionately FOUR TIMES as high.
In fact, if anything, because I think the government left the thresholds for apprentices and under-21s unchanged, while reducing everybody else's, it may slightly increase the incentive to employ those "trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder".
So, contrary to what you said, the impact is disproportionately greater on the most productive and highly-skilled, than on those trying to enter employment.
It really depends on whether the employer has a classic pyramid of employees, with many more at the bottom than the top. Large retailers do, in fact they have a very wide pyramid with thousands at or near minimum wage and few on high salaries. Their wage bill is predominantly made up of the low paid. But others like financial services have more of a waistline bulge than a pyramid. Generally the most labour-cost sensitive are those with wide pyramids.
Don’t rule out further hikes though. Our employers NI rate remains one of the lowest in the OECD.
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
The advisers who were ready to brief the press and condemn the politicians any time they deviated from "the plan" to lock everyone up. No, it was the "scientists" and the politicians were just along for the ride. As I said yesterday handing over effective control of the country to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats was an error. I blame the Tories for that but the scientists are responsible for the lockdowns and forcing the politicians into it.
So what?
In other countries politicians had advice from scientific advisors and were able to make their own decisions.
And you know what, we fucked up. But so - in different ways - did everyone else. Nowhere got it perfect.
Here in California, I think we did a much better job than the UK did. Could California have been better? Sure: in particular, I think they could have done a better job in LA of getting schools open. (Other cities were much better, but the LA teachers union was shit.)
But - to repeat - nowhere got it perfect, not even the Swedes.
Life's not perfect, perfect doesn't exist.
Thankfully we have an inquiry looking into what lessons we can learn from nations that handled things better, like Sweden.
Right?
Yes and hundreds of millions will be squandered , lots of lawyers , toffs etc enriched , forests cut down and politicians will mouth "lessons will be learned" yet again.
‘As part of the voluntary agreement, known as the Mansion House accord, agreed earlier in May, the 17 firms involved committed to investing 10% of their assets in things other than publicly traded shares, so that more money would flow into home-building, infrastructure projects and start-up businesses in fast-growing sectors.’
Good luck with that. I’ll keep my pension pots in my SIPPs
The U.S. will begin revoking visas of Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.
Great news for British universities. The number of people applying to US universities from China and the like is going to collapse.
If only the British universities could accept them because of the new(ish) Government quotas on foreign students.
Word on the street is that overseas student applications are notably down across many courses and institutions, so we could accommodate more from students unable now to go to the US, although deadlines for applications are coming up soon, so would-be students will have to move fast.
The excess pollution emitted as a result of the Dieselgate scandal has killed about 16,000 people in the UK and caused 30,000 cases of asthma in children, according to a new analysis. A further 6,000 premature deaths will occur in coming years without action, the researchers said.
The Dieselgate scandal erupted in 2015 when diesel cars were found to be emitting far more toxic air pollution on the roads than when they passed regulatory tests, due to the use of illegal “defeat devices”.
Large fines and compulsory recalls of vehicles to remove or disable the defeat devices took place in the US. But experts say the UK and most EU countries have lagged far behind, leading to devastating impacts on health, and urge immediate action. Many millions of highly polluting diesel vehicles remain on the roads in the UK and EU.
Reparations? A verse I'd rather not hear said again.
#subtlepunning.
Talking of which an academic has demanded Scottish Universities, not exactly flush with cash, hand over millions in reparations for their links to slavery.
Sky reporting Starmer is to give a speech today attacking Farage and Reform
All this does is give another day's headlines to Farage and the impression Starmer is running scared ( which he probably is)
Starmer is PM with a huge majority and he should get on with government, though to be fair he is not very good at that
They're all mad. Farage gave a speech with crayon policies - we'll raise tens of billions scrapping Net Zero and DEI! Not remotely serious, but being taken as gospel by the people wanting a plan.
What Labour need to do is do a speech with their own plan. Not "we're going to cut benefits for the disabled again" but what their vision for the future is. Farage said he will transform working people's lives by giving £20k tax free. How will Labour transform them? This time with policies that add up?
The excess pollution emitted as a result of the Dieselgate scandal has killed about 16,000 people in the UK and caused 30,000 cases of asthma in children, according to a new analysis. A further 6,000 premature deaths will occur in coming years without action, the researchers said.
The Dieselgate scandal erupted in 2015 when diesel cars were found to be emitting far more toxic air pollution on the roads than when they passed regulatory tests, due to the use of illegal “defeat devices”.
Large fines and compulsory recalls of vehicles to remove or disable the defeat devices took place in the US. But experts say the UK and most EU countries have lagged far behind, leading to devastating impacts on health, and urge immediate action. Many millions of highly polluting diesel vehicles remain on the roads in the UK and EU.
Reparations? A verse I'd rather not hear said again.
#subtlepunning.
Talking of which an academic has demanded Scottish Universities, not exactly flush with cash, hand over millions in reparations for their links to slavery.
I don't think anyone linked with Cambridge is in a position to accuse anyone else of profiting from slavery, but in any case I'm not sure why people bother to give self-important windbags airtime.
The excess pollution emitted as a result of the Dieselgate scandal has killed about 16,000 people in the UK and caused 30,000 cases of asthma in children, according to a new analysis. A further 6,000 premature deaths will occur in coming years without action, the researchers said.
The Dieselgate scandal erupted in 2015 when diesel cars were found to be emitting far more toxic air pollution on the roads than when they passed regulatory tests, due to the use of illegal “defeat devices”.
Large fines and compulsory recalls of vehicles to remove or disable the defeat devices took place in the US. But experts say the UK and most EU countries have lagged far behind, leading to devastating impacts on health, and urge immediate action. Many millions of highly polluting diesel vehicles remain on the roads in the UK and EU.
A report from a clean air group commissioned by a legal organisation, an environmental law group. Hmmm. Well colour me sceptical. Where’s there’s blame there’s a claim. 🤔
The excess pollution emitted as a result of the Dieselgate scandal has killed about 16,000 people in the UK and caused 30,000 cases of asthma in children, according to a new analysis. A further 6,000 premature deaths will occur in coming years without action, the researchers said.
The Dieselgate scandal erupted in 2015 when diesel cars were found to be emitting far more toxic air pollution on the roads than when they passed regulatory tests, due to the use of illegal “defeat devices”.
Large fines and compulsory recalls of vehicles to remove or disable the defeat devices took place in the US. But experts say the UK and most EU countries have lagged far behind, leading to devastating impacts on health, and urge immediate action. Many millions of highly polluting diesel vehicles remain on the roads in the UK and EU.
Reparations? A verse I'd rather not hear said again.
#subtlepunning.
Talking of which an academic has demanded Scottish Universities, not exactly flush with cash, hand over millions in reparations for their links to slavery.
I don't think anyone linked with Cambridge is in a position to accuse anyone else of profiting from slavery, but in any case I'm not sure why people bother to give self-important windbags airtime.
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
The advisers who were ready to brief the press and condemn the politicians any time they deviated from "the plan" to lock everyone up. No, it was the "scientists" and the politicians were just along for the ride. As I said yesterday handing over effective control of the country to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats was an error. I blame the Tories for that but the scientists are responsible for the lockdowns and forcing the politicians into it.
So what?
In other countries politicians had advice from scientific advisors and were able to make their own decisions.
And you know what, we fucked up. But so - in different ways - did everyone else. Nowhere got it perfect.
Here in California, I think we did a much better job than the UK did. Could California have been better? Sure: in particular, I think they could have done a better job in LA of getting schools open. (Other cities were much better, but the LA teachers union was shit.)
But - to repeat - nowhere got it perfect, not even the Swedes.
Life's not perfect, perfect doesn't exist.
Thankfully we have an inquiry looking into what lessons we can learn from nations that handled things better, like Sweden.
Right?
As per my earlier post, Sweden had a higher mortality rate than its neighbours and modelling suggests their approach applied to the UK would have doubled the mortality rate here.
Putin's condition for a ceasefire is that he be given the opportunity to have another go.
Russian President Vladimir Putin will demand a written promise from Western leaders that NATO will not expand eastward, Reuters reports, citing its own sources. https://x.com/Hromadske/status/1927699132203889013
How about, 'we will not offer membership to Belarus or Ukraine while the current Presidents are in charge?'
So in 18 months they will be in NATO...
Didn't Ukraine get written guarantees from Russia and US when it reluctantly gave up nuclear weapons in 90s?
Well, yes, but we're not talking about Russian guarantees.
A polite fuck off would be the most diplomatic response, IMO.
No.
The correct diplomatic response would be to agree.
Then Ukraine joins NATO and the EU the next day. And holds a parade to show off the nukes they’ve accidentally acquired.
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
The advisers who were ready to brief the press and condemn the politicians any time they deviated from "the plan" to lock everyone up. No, it was the "scientists" and the politicians were just along for the ride. As I said yesterday handing over effective control of the country to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats was an error. I blame the Tories for that but the scientists are responsible for the lockdowns and forcing the politicians into it.
So what?
In other countries politicians had advice from scientific advisors and were able to make their own decisions.
And you know what, we fucked up. But so - in different ways - did everyone else. Nowhere got it perfect.
Here in California, I think we did a much better job than the UK did. Could California have been better? Sure: in particular, I think they could have done a better job in LA of getting schools open. (Other cities were much better, but the LA teachers union was shit.)
But - to repeat - nowhere got it perfect, not even the Swedes.
Life's not perfect, perfect doesn't exist.
Thankfully we have an inquiry looking into what lessons we can learn from nations that handled things better, like Sweden.
Right?
As per my earlier post, Sweden had a higher mortality rate than its neighbours and modelling suggests their approach applied to the UK would have doubled the mortality rate here.
Indeed. For some reason I've been reading a fair bit about the First World War and one of the delights and pitfalls about reading history is that the mind starts to apply what's being read to the present day. One of the books I've been reading is Attrition by William Philpott which has a very gripping account of the Spring Offensive and the 100 Days. He vividly shows how this fighting was fucking awful, a million people died. Nonetheless, he also makes a convincing case that this was the British Army's finest hour, that it had been forged into a fighting force that the Germans were unable to withstand and the latter months of the war involved the British Army smashing the German Army from pillar to post in a feat of combined arms not previously seen. Then it's all mostly forgotten, and only the memories of the slaughter remain.
I think a similar thing happened with COVID. It was shit. The lockdowns were imposed at great cost to many. But there were also benefits. Collectively, we effectively fought COVID. The United Kingdom played a leading role in the development of a vaccine, that was largely safe (and much safer than the virus) in record time. COVID didn't just fuck off, it was beaten. The tide of illness rose and threatened to swamp us, but it did not overtake our capacity to deal with it. It did not do that because of the collective effort. Despite the deaths, and mistakes and the costs, how we collectively dealt with COVID is one of Britain's (and, generally, The West more broadly) finest hours. It's very much an already forgotten victory, hard won and coming at great cost as it did.
Putin's condition for a ceasefire is that he be given the opportunity to have another go.
Russian President Vladimir Putin will demand a written promise from Western leaders that NATO will not expand eastward, Reuters reports, citing its own sources. https://x.com/Hromadske/status/1927699132203889013
How about, 'we will not offer membership to Belarus or Ukraine while the current Presidents are in charge?'
So in 18 months they will be in NATO...
Didn't Ukraine get written guarantees from Russia and US when it reluctantly gave up nuclear weapons in 90s?
Well, yes, but we're not talking about Russian guarantees.
A polite fuck off would be the most diplomatic response, IMO.
No.
The correct diplomatic response would be to agree.
Then Ukraine joins NATO and the EU the next day. And holds a parade to show off the nukes they’ve accidentally acquired.
When asked, just shrug.
We'll, yes. I really don't understand why we don't just adopt a policy of lying to the Russians.
Oh no you can't have Taurus, oh no you can't do long strikes, and then shrug when a military installation near Moscow explodes
Infectious diseases are the classic challenge to a liberalism based on individualism. Because one person’s right to roam freely leads to a higher disease risk for everyone else. The way to square the circle is to have such a good public health response that you don’t need to make the choice, but that’s not where we were in March 2020.
We could’ve done more carrot and less stick - that would be the more liberal solution - but the Johnson administration was wedded to stick and disliked carrots.
And who was it that advised the government to be wedded to the illiberal solution, oh right, it was you. You pushed the country into lockdowns and now you're blaming everyone else having seen how damaging it's been. Sorry, there's no forgiveness from me. You condemned millions of kids to a substandard education and life chances because you couldn't make the hard decisions.
Johnson did, Max. Advisers advise.
He could have sold us a lockdown that left kids free to go to school and the playpark. But he didn't.
The advisers who were ready to brief the press and condemn the politicians any time they deviated from "the plan" to lock everyone up. No, it was the "scientists" and the politicians were just along for the ride. As I said yesterday handing over effective control of the country to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats was an error. I blame the Tories for that but the scientists are responsible for the lockdowns and forcing the politicians into it.
So what?
In other countries politicians had advice from scientific advisors and were able to make their own decisions.
And you know what, we fucked up. But so - in different ways - did everyone else. Nowhere got it perfect.
Here in California, I think we did a much better job than the UK did. Could California have been better? Sure: in particular, I think they could have done a better job in LA of getting schools open. (Other cities were much better, but the LA teachers union was shit.)
But - to repeat - nowhere got it perfect, not even the Swedes.
Life's not perfect, perfect doesn't exist.
Thankfully we have an inquiry looking into what lessons we can learn from nations that handled things better, like Sweden.
Right?
As per my earlier post, Sweden had a higher mortality rate than its neighbours and modelling suggests their approach applied to the UK would have doubled the mortality rate here.
Indeed. For some reason I've been reading a fair bit about the First World War and one of the delights and pitfalls about reading history is that the mind starts to apply what's being read to the present day. One of the books I've been reading is Attrition by William Philpott which has a very gripping account of the Spring Offensive and the 100 Days. He vividly shows how this fighting was fucking awful, a million people died. Nonetheless, he also makes a convincing case that this was the British Army's finest hour, that it had been forged into a fighting force that the Germans were unable to withstand and the latter months of the war involved the British Army smashing the German Army from pillar to post in a feat of combined arms not previously seen. Then it's all mostly forgotten, and only the memories of the slaughter remain.
I think a similar thing happened with COVID. It was shit. The lockdowns were imposed at great cost to many. But there were also benefits. Collectively, we effectively fought COVID. The United Kingdom played a leading role in the development of a vaccine, that was largely safe (and much safer than the virus) in record time. COVID didn't just fuck off, it was beaten. The tide of illness rose and threatened to swamp us, but it did not overtake our capacity to deal with it. It did not do that because of the collective effort. Despite the deaths, and mistakes and the costs, how we collectively dealt with COVID is one of Britain's (and, generally, The West more broadly) finest hours. It's very much an already forgotten victory, hard won and coming at great cost as it did.
On the first point didn't German military tacticians base Blitzkrieg largely on the British Army's performance in the 100 Days? To flog an aready creaking metaphor, let's hope pandemics aren't similarly adaptive.
'Christ, we've got to do it all again, and it'll be much worse this time.'
Comments
https://x.com/all90saltrock/status/1927493206217830761?s=61
I’ll leave it to you to comment on the rank stupidity of that.
It's bloody good. Not only does Rod Steiger look like Napoleon and Christopher Plummer look like Wellington, but Ney looks like Ney and Blucher just like Blucher.
Only criticism is that dubbing Soviet troops (15,000 of them, utterly immense) to speak English is somewhat stilted and everyone on Wellington's side looks British, whereas only half were in reality.
Other than that. Brilliant. And they even bulldozed hundreds of thousands of tons of earth in Ukraine for weeks and built new buildings to recreate the battlefield properly.
Epic.
If it was that important they could have got someone in HR to get his home address and sent someone junior to wake him up.
I really think it’s a none story - because what exactly could he do.
But I wouldn’t call it a net zero story - Heathrow is a story about a lack of disaster planning
In other countries politicians had advice from scientific advisors and were able to make their own decisions.
And you know what, we fucked up. But so - in different ways - did everyone else. Nowhere got it perfect.
Here in California, I think we did a much better job than the UK did. Could California have been better? Sure: in particular, I think they could have done a better job in LA of getting schools open. (Other cities were much better, but the LA teachers union was shit.)
But - to repeat - nowhere got it perfect, not even the Swedes.
Thankfully we have an inquiry looking into what lessons we can learn from nations that handled things better, like Sweden.
Right?
All of this can be traced back to lockdowns and the subsequent actions. We should never have allowed people to sit at home doing nothing and getting £2.5k per month to do it. Furlough was the biggest disaster for the country we've had in the post war era, it's changed the country's attitude towards work and entitlement.
https://x.com/neildotobrien/status/1927764282080448887
Honestly, there's a comprehensive breakdown of low-level order in London now.
My firm's office was smashed up (for the third time) on Monday night, and that's on top of the graffiti, the chronic shoplifting etc.
Yesterday I went for lunch in Sheekey’s. The fucking state of Soho when I emerged. Fucksake
Get them GONE
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2endrywk4o
If the lockdown was the biggest contributor to all these elements, how come some countries that had even more severe lockdowns have done better than us?
The UK had - by European standards - a pretty average lockdown experience. Now, should we have had fewer restrictions? Yes, obviously. But if severity of lockdown was the major driver of economic success relative to peers, then Sweden would have been top of the pops, we'd have been middle of the pack, while some of the continental economies would have lagged even more than they did previously.
That's not what happened: Denmark has been the clear standout winner (due to good risk stratification), while we've done about 5% better than Sweden despite massively more invasive restrictions.
(Sweden's GDP per capita growth between 2019 and 2024 was 5.1%; the UK's 10.7%, while Denmark and Switzerland managed more than 20%.)
The U.S. will begin revoking visas of Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.
Whatever they say, there simply is no answer to the inevitable response of "you had 14 years in power, why didn't you do it".
Farage has come and eaten their lunch by stealing their only remaining USP of "at least we're not Starmer".
I can't say I'm sympathetic. They aren't being punished for 14 years where they took tough but unpopular decisions in the best interests of the country. They are being punished for 14 years of being pretty well useless, other than (sort of) getting Brexit done (after wasting several years on infighting first).
A panel of federal judges on Wednesday blocked President Trump from imposing some of his steepest tariffs on China and other U.S. trading partners, finding in two cases that he vastly overstepped his ability to issue those expansive duties under federal law.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/28/business/trump-tariffs-blocked-federal-court.html?unlocked_article_code=1.K08.wC-q.cxSSqUFogfIE&smid=url-share
https://www.lbc.co.uk/opinion/views/forced-to-take-world-first-invention-abroad-uk-failing-founders-tech/
Inventor of self-cooling drinks can contrasts British bureaucracy with American and Middle East welcome for entrepreneurs.
It was, of course, widely pointed out in the media that the final draft of this mega bill was rushed through on a timescale that allowed almost no scrutiny of measures slipped in without discussion.
But there's zero excuse for not knowing what you voted for, when these provisions were flagged in the media beforehand.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5321756-nebraska-republican-mike-flood-trump-megabill-town-hall/
...The language, which is a small paragraph in the 1,000-plus-page bill, was slipped in and went largely unnoticed. Asked why he voted in favor of the bill with that provision, Flood — who graduated from University of Nebraska’s law school — said the language was “unknown” to him when he voted for the bill, noting he is not in favor of it.
“I do not agree with that section that was added to that bill,” Floor said, prompting a cry of “you voted for all of it” from the audience.
“Why? I will tell you this: I believe in the rule of law,” he continued. “I’ve taken an oath as an attorney, I’ve taken an oath as a state senator, I’ve taken an oath as a member of Congress, and I support our court system and I do believe that the federal district courts when issuing an injunction, it should have legal effect. In fact, I relied upon that when the Biden administration was in place, the federal courts did a tremendous amount of good work.”
“This provision was unknown to me when I voted for the bill,” he added...
This is a VTVL hop test from Chinese company Space Epoch with what appears to be a controlled splashdown
https://x.com/DrChrisCombs/status/1927861439609405583
Europe needs to get its act together.
It's everybody else, not the poorest, that will mostly suffer from it.
Not only has Elon left, he has apparently taken Stephen Miller's wife with him
And the Mad King's tariffs have been blocked by a panel of judges
Could be a fun day ahead
So, you are seriously telling me that increasing employer's NIC from 13.8% to 15%, and reducing the threshold to £5,000/year doesn’t massively affect the likelihood of low-productivity workers finding gainful employment? That defies basic economic logic.
Firms hire based on whether the value a worker adds exceeds their total cost. For low-productivity workers (those in roles with marginal economic output), then raising the non-wage cost of employment makes them less attractive to hire. (This can easily be seen by looking at the fact that countries like France, with high social charges, effectively create an underclass of the unemployable, because their cost of employment can't possible equal their economic output.)
So no, it’s not "everybody else" that suffers: it’s disproportionately the people trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder.
Scoop: Trump’s AF1 deal with Qatar has not been finalized despite the administration's claims. Qatar is asking the US to clarify that the deal for the luxury jet was initiated by the US and that Qatar is not responsible for any future transfers of the plane
https://x.com/John_Hudson/status/1927872569895510117
I have high confidence that the Supreme Court will side with the panel of judges & continue the block on the tariffs. The US Constitution explictly gives Congress the power to levy "duties, imposts & excises". It's absurd for Trump to lay claim on this power.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/may/27/toyota-to-move-some-gr-corolla-production-to-uk-from-japan
You need to read how employer's NI works. It's the lowest productivity workers, mostly those that are trying to take the first step on the employment ladder (those in NI categories H, M and Z) that get the £12,500 thresholds, not the £5,000 allowances that everybody else gets, precisely for this reason. So it affects them proportionately much less, if at all.
And as I say, the poorest, those on benefits, won't suffer much.
So it's absolutely everybody else who suffers, and the low productivity workers, though they will no doubt suffer, will suffer proportionately less. And as I say may benefit marginally if they're in the black economy.
The best thing the government can do to help the most vulnerable into employment is scrap the scandalously high minimum wage.
There's lots of other moving parts though - the value of the minimum wage, immigration etc. And the (unintended?) consequence is a boost in productivity because those who remain in work will be those who can contribute more, while capital investment for basic functions becomes relatively more attractive (particularly for large employers of low wage staff, like Tesco).
(I guess the question is how many of those jobs are really first rung on a ladder, and how many are bottom rung forever, with poor pay topped up by benefits. That's way beyond my competence to judge.)
I never expected a reply, merely wanting to add another straw to their negative feedback. But yesterday their UK HQ sent me an email, apologising for the delay, insisting the company is only interested in green energy and autonomous vehicles, and pleading with me to ignore any other factors when forming an opinion of them! With more than a hint of desperation.
But even for those who aren't apprentices or under 21s, but still under 25, I've crunched some numbers, which you apparently didn't, and the impact of the changes on the employer of somebody earning £100,000 is 1.2%, much greater than that an under-25 on £15,000, which is 0.3% - proportionately FOUR TIMES as high.
In fact, if anything, because I think the government left the thresholds for apprentices and under-21s unchanged, while reducing everybody else's, it may slightly increase the incentive to employ those "trying to take the first rung on the employment ladder".
So, contrary to what you said, the impact is disproportionately greater on the most productive and highly-skilled, than on those trying to enter employment.
But I'd say that like everything wrt or reacting to Trump, it's 80% tactical - like managing the time between people saying "there, there" to the mad grandma, who demands 106 times per day that there is a saltwater crocodile in the cupboard of the Welsh Dresser that just ate her lunch.
It's a game of pelmanism until the mad king is removed, locked up or dead.
Russian President Vladimir Putin will demand a written promise from Western leaders that NATO will not expand eastward, Reuters reports, citing its own sources.
https://x.com/Hromadske/status/1927699132203889013
So in 18 months they will be in NATO...
I worked at Magna in Barton for a while supplying Toyota. They had two lines and only used one. I’d have thought all they’d need to do would be to upgrade the existing one.
The excess pollution emitted as a result of the Dieselgate scandal has killed about 16,000 people in the UK and caused 30,000 cases of asthma in children, according to a new analysis. A further 6,000 premature deaths will occur in coming years without action, the researchers said.
The Dieselgate scandal erupted in 2015 when diesel cars were found to be emitting far more toxic air pollution on the roads than when they passed regulatory tests, due to the use of illegal “defeat devices”.
Large fines and compulsory recalls of vehicles to remove or disable the defeat devices took place in the US. But experts say the UK and most EU countries have lagged far behind, leading to devastating impacts on health, and urge immediate action. Many millions of highly polluting diesel vehicles remain on the roads in the UK and EU.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/may/28/dieselgate-pollution-killed-16000-people-in-uk-study-estimates
When does Germany pay reparations for this ?
If the car is insured then the insurer is likely to pay out for 3rd party injuries and they'll go for his house. (If they're quick enough because he'll be transferring the title asap).
Trump Media to raise $2.5 billion to invest in bitcoin
https://www.reuters.com/business/trump-media-raise-25-billion-fund-bitcoin-treasury-2025-05-27/
.."We view bitcoin as an apex instrument of financial freedom," Trump Media CEO Devin Nunes said, hailing the move as a "big step forward" in the company's plan to acquire "crown jewel assets consistent with America First principles."..
Apart possibly from the bit about him being genuinely popular at one time, which Trump never has been.
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2025/1/25/lukashenko-ahead-of-2025-election-still-afraid-of-the-people
Yesterday it was Bradford.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn8zelyx44zo
Universities and the Union, unless there’s a change of course, will need to accept the new reality of what fewer students, and fewer students paying high fees too, actually means.
I suspect the best the Union can do is get enhanced pay off terms.
#subtlepunning.
Don’t rule out further hikes though. Our employers NI rate remains one of the lowest in the OECD.
Sky reporting Starmer is to give a speech today attacking Farage and Reform
All this does is give another day's headlines to Farage and the impression Starmer is running scared ( which he probably is)
Starmer is PM with a huge majority and he should get on with government, though to be fair he is not very good at that
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjrn0rz2dpgo
‘As part of the voluntary agreement, known as the Mansion House accord, agreed earlier in May, the 17 firms involved committed to investing 10% of their assets in things other than publicly traded shares, so that more money would flow into home-building, infrastructure projects and start-up businesses in fast-growing sectors.’
Good luck with that. I’ll keep my pension pots in my SIPPs
What a twat.
https://x.com/grahamggrant/status/1927105703740641577?s=61
What Labour need to do is do a speech with their own plan. Not "we're going to cut benefits for the disabled again" but what their vision for the future is. Farage said he will transform working people's lives by giving £20k tax free. How will Labour transform them? This time with policies that add up?
NEW THREAD
In this case, Dale Benkenstein.
Couldn't understand why they appointed him, although I was very pleased when they did.
The correct diplomatic response would be to agree.
Then Ukraine joins NATO and the EU the next day. And holds a parade to show off the nukes they’ve accidentally acquired.
When asked, just shrug.
I think a similar thing happened with COVID. It was shit. The lockdowns were imposed at great cost to many. But there were also benefits. Collectively, we effectively fought COVID. The United Kingdom played a leading role in the development of a vaccine, that was largely safe (and much safer than the virus) in record time. COVID didn't just fuck off, it was beaten. The tide of illness rose and threatened to swamp us, but it did not overtake our capacity to deal with it. It did not do that because of the collective effort. Despite the deaths, and mistakes and the costs, how we collectively dealt with COVID is one of Britain's (and, generally, The West more broadly) finest hours. It's very much an already forgotten victory, hard won and coming at great cost as it did.
Oh no you can't have Taurus, oh no you can't do long strikes, and then shrug when a military installation near Moscow explodes
'Christ, we've got to do it all again, and it'll be much worse this time.'