Last in, first out? – politicalbetting.com

System · August 26

Last in, first out? – politicalbetting.com

The odds in this betting market from Ladbrokes seem right to me. My expectation remains that after the next May’s elections as England, Scotland, and Wales unite to extirpate the Tories then Kemi Badenoch will be ousted.

Read the full story here

MaxPB · August 26

Let's see what happens after the budget. If it's badly received by the markets and Starmer needs to sack Reeves then the countdown timer has started for him too.

rcs1000 · August 26

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

LostPassword said:

moonshine said:

Leon said:

Battlebus said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:
OK this is interesting. Farage admitting that the ECHR is embedded into the Good Friday Agreement and that the required renegotiation of that won't be "quick". Does that mean that we can't do any of this without it? Because unless we quit ECHR and the UN treaties none of this is legal.
No, Parliament is sovereign.

Just quit the ECHR and then renegotiate the GFA as per the new circumstances.

The GFA has been tweaked many times already. If it were Ireland wanting to quit they wouldn't let the tail wag the dog and neither should we.
When Lord Blumkett and others in Labour want to leave the ECHR then consensus appears to be broadening

Those who do not want Farage need to realise the status quo is only going to increase that likelihood
I advocate changing much of the status quo, so I don't care much for the "we can't do x" arguments. We can, the valid question is whether we should and if so, how?

The simple truth is that the populist right spin a picture that only Britain is under siege by "fighting age men". Incorrect. We get fewer than many of our neighbours. There is no need for us to abrogate agreements that many now look to amend, and any "just send them home" plan by definition needs a counterparty to agree to receive them. As Farage stated.

So the solution is international cooperation, not WE ARE BRITAIN WE MAKE THE RULES displays.
We are sovereign, we absolutely can make the rules.

If people want to cooperate, great.

If people don't, that's fine too.
It isn't fine too when you are trying to land RAF planes full of people into their sovereign territory.

They are sovereign and absolutely can make their own rules...

I have no doubt that deals will be done. Some deals. A load of people will have (a) no paperwork and (b) no country willing to take them as they are "fighting age males"

We have more chance of doing deals if we don't act like a limp-dicked beta male whining on about how we absolutely get to make the rules dictating to foreigners what happens in their country.
Some deals is enough.

For those countries willing to take people back (and that we are willing to send them to), send them there.

For those unwilling, or where we are unwilling to send them to, have a Plan B. Eg like Rwanda.

Rwanda didn't work under the Tories due to issues on our side, not theirs.

That is workable, whether you like it or not. Bilateral agreements requiring only our agreement and the other parties agreement.

What's not required is a multilateral treaty requiring unanimity and the lowest common denominator.
We're importing our food, our energy and even our monarchy in the past. We've just moved onto importing our people as we don't allow the young the financial base to plan and have a family. As another PB'er said, we are here by choice.
This is a misframing

Yes uk birthrates are falling - but they are falling almost everywhere outside Africa (and drifting down even there). They are falling in religious countries and secular countries, empty countries and crowded countries, countries with cheap houses and countries with expensive houses

No one is entirely sure why
I think the answers pretty obvious to be honest but you get told off for saying it out loud. The places with very high birth rates correlate with there being very little personal independence for women. As the opportunity cost to women of having children rises, they have fewer children. Ultimately to the level where fertility rates fall well below replacement rate.
I believe survey evidence shows that women in England have on average one child fewer than they want.

A key factor seems to be in not finding a suitable and willing man to act as the father before it's too late. The government should put money into a match-making website - all commercial dating apps have an interest in you failing to find someone, and to continue to use the app to keep looking.

I'm only half-joking.
I always find it ironic that those people who are most opposed to abortion, also seem to be most opposed to the government spending money on things that would support low income parents, like subsidised childcare.
I don't think that follows. Roman Catholics for example are more pro big government on average and big child benefit spending but also anti abortion.

It is right wing laissez fair libertarians most opposed to subsidised childcare and increased child benefit but they also tend to be pro choice on abortion up to a point

I know it's not true of you: but in the US, it certainly is true. The States with the most restrictive abortion laws - Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and South Dakota - all rank at the bottom of child well being and support indices.

Now, I don't think this is because religious people have some objection to helping others. I think it's that there is a natural suspicion of government spending, and this is government spending.

SandyRentool · August 26

Sir Ed Davey such a prominent figure that he doesn't even feature in the market.

TheScreamingEagles · August 26

Thoughts and prayers for me as I am Headingley forced to watch The Hundred.

Taz · August 26

SandyRentool said:
Sir Ed Davey such a prominent figure that he doesn't even feature in the market.

Too busy twatting about on a hoverboard while encouraging his party to oppose any new developments

rcs1000 · August 26

SandyRentool said:
Sir Ed Davey such a prominent figure that he doesn't even feature in the market.

Who?

Taz · August 26

MaxPB said:
Let's see what happens after the budget. If it's badly received by the markets and Starmer needs to sack Reeves then the countdown timer has started for him too.

Reeves out, Bell in. That will make the bond markets happy.

Taz · August 26

rcs1000 said:

SandyRentool said:
Sir Ed Davey such a prominent figure that he doesn't even feature in the market.
Who?

The Hammer of the Sub Postmasters.

Dopermean · August 26

TheScreamingEagles said:
Thoughts and prayers for me as I am Headingley forced to watch The Hundred.

No blanket BBC commentary for the County 50 overs, only Glou Vs Hants on Radio 5 extra 3.
Who cares about the Hundred?

rcs1000 · August 26

SandyRentool said:

JohnLilburne said:

HYUFD said:

JohnLilburne said:

rcs1000 said:

LostPassword said:

moonshine said:

Leon said:

Battlebus said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:
OK this is interesting. Farage admitting that the ECHR is embedded into the Good Friday Agreement and that the required renegotiation of that won't be "quick". Does that mean that we can't do any of this without it? Because unless we quit ECHR and the UN treaties none of this is legal.
No, Parliament is sovereign.

Just quit the ECHR and then renegotiate the GFA as per the new circumstances.

The GFA has been tweaked many times already. If it were Ireland wanting to quit they wouldn't let the tail wag the dog and neither should we.
When Lord Blumkett and others in Labour want to leave the ECHR then consensus appears to be broadening

Those who do not want Farage need to realise the status quo is only going to increase that likelihood
I advocate changing much of the status quo, so I don't care much for the "we can't do x" arguments. We can, the valid question is whether we should and if so, how?

The simple truth is that the populist right spin a picture that only Britain is under siege by "fighting age men". Incorrect. We get fewer than many of our neighbours. There is no need for us to abrogate agreements that many now look to amend, and any "just send them home" plan by definition needs a counterparty to agree to receive them. As Farage stated.

So the solution is international cooperation, not WE ARE BRITAIN WE MAKE THE RULES displays.
We are sovereign, we absolutely can make the rules.

If people want to cooperate, great.

If people don't, that's fine too.
It isn't fine too when you are trying to land RAF planes full of people into their sovereign territory.

They are sovereign and absolutely can make their own rules...

I have no doubt that deals will be done. Some deals. A load of people will have (a) no paperwork and (b) no country willing to take them as they are "fighting age males"

We have more chance of doing deals if we don't act like a limp-dicked beta male whining on about how we absolutely get to make the rules dictating to foreigners what happens in their country.
Some deals is enough.

For those countries willing to take people back (and that we are willing to send them to), send them there.

For those unwilling, or where we are unwilling to send them to, have a Plan B. Eg like Rwanda.

Rwanda didn't work under the Tories due to issues on our side, not theirs.

That is workable, whether you like it or not. Bilateral agreements requiring only our agreement and the other parties agreement.

What's not required is a multilateral treaty requiring unanimity and the lowest common denominator.
We're importing our food, our energy and even our monarchy in the past. We've just moved onto importing our people as we don't allow the young the financial base to plan and have a family. As another PB'er said, we are here by choice.
This is a misframing

Yes uk birthrates are falling - but they are falling almost everywhere outside Africa (and drifting down even there). They are falling in religious countries and secular countries, empty countries and crowded countries, countries with cheap houses and countries with expensive houses

No one is entirely sure why
I think the answers pretty obvious to be honest but you get told off for saying it out loud. The places with very high birth rates correlate with there being very little personal independence for women. As the opportunity cost to women of having children rises, they have fewer children. Ultimately to the level where fertility rates fall well below replacement rate.
I believe survey evidence shows that women in England have on average one child fewer than they want.

A key factor seems to be in not finding a suitable and willing man to act as the father before it's too late. The government should put money into a match-making website - all commercial dating apps have an interest in you failing to find someone, and to continue to use the app to keep looking.

I'm only half-joking.
I always find it ironic that those people who are most opposed to abortion, also seem to be most opposed to the government spending money on things that would support low income parents, like subsidised childcare.
Surely it would be better to support people not actually having children. As far as I can work out, child poverty would be eliminated if poor people stop having children
No, that is eugenics on a border line Nazi level.

And most poor people still do jobs rich and middle class people don't want to
Not eugenics. You should live to your means. My parents' generation got married "wnen you could afford to" which basically meant when you could afford to have a family.
Absolutely. If you cannot afford to bring up children, don't have children. Don't expect the rest of the population to support your desire to procreate.

While I obviously agree with you, this tangentially raises a separate point.

You would have expected that countries where housing is expensive relative to incomes would see bigger drops in fertility ratios. Indeed, you might expect that there'd be something of a natural balancing motion here: lower birthrates, lower houseprices, higher birthrates.

But that doesn't seem to be the case at all.

European countries where house prices have fallen, and now cost remarkably little relative to incomes (like Italy or Eastern Europe) haven't seen any improvement in their birthrates, despite also being more religious.

ydoethur · August 26

TheScreamingEagles said:
Thoughts and prayers for me as I am Headingley forced to watch The Hundred.

Could be worse, you could be a Gloucestershire supporter at Bristol watching Hampshire massacre us.

BartholomewRoberts · August 26

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say

I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

ydoethur · August 26

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

So if VPNs are banned, that's two ways it might raise the birthrate?

SirNorfolkPassmore · August 26

Those seem pretty generous odds for Badenoch, even at 4/7.

Hard to see how Farage goes imminently given his polling and control over the party organisation. Meanwhile, the mechanism to get Starmer out is tricky even with discontent over his performance. With Badenoch, she's a bad set of local elections away from the door, and that's pretty likely to happen.

As mentioned, it's odd that Ladbrokes don't list Davey, although the odds would be fairly long - there are moans on lack of impact, but he did secure the Lib Dems' best ever seat return in the General Election and a very solid set of local election results in May.

RobD · August 26

@ydoethur thanks for the trivia on the last thread. What was the quirk concerning the Lord Chief Justice?

rcs1000 · August 26

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

That's one of two xkcd tshirts I own

ydoethur · August 26

RobD said:
@ydoethur thanks for the trivia on the last thread. What was the quirk concerning the Lord Chief Justice?

Because there have to be two Lords of the Treasury, if the post of Chancellor is vacant for more than a few hours the Lord Chief Justice will hold the office pro tempore.

Hasn't happened since the Wellington caretaker government of 1834, but still theoretically exists.

HYUFD · August 26

If Reform and Labour beat the Tories in England, Scotland and Wales in the local and Holyrood and Senedd elections next year hard to see Kemi surviving. Though she might see a few Tory gains in London in Westminster and Barnet for example where Reform are weaker but Labour still less popular than they were. Jenrick, Cleverly or Stride would probably replace her, I suspect most Tory MPs would pick one of the latter 2 for the moment even if Jenrick might win the members vote now despite Kemi beating him in the Tory MPs and members votes last year. Jenrick probably doesn't have enough MPs supporting him to prevent a Cleverly or Stride coronation though.

Otherwise Farage is secure, as probably is Starmer unless Burnham returns to Parliament or Corbyn's new party starts making inroads into Labour votes as well as Green votes

ydoethur · August 26

HYUFD said:
If Reform and Labour beat the Tories in England, Scotland and Wales in the local and Holyrood and Senedd elections next year hard to see Kemi surviving. Though she might see a few Tory gains in London in Westminster and Barnet for example where Reform are weaker but Labour still less popular than they were. Jenrick, Cleverly or Stride would probably replace her, I suspect most Tory MPs would pick one of the latter 2 for the moment even if Jenrick might win the members vote now despite Kemi beating him in the Tory MPs and members votes last year. Jenrick probably doesn't have enough MPs supporting him to prevent a Cleverly or Stride coronation though.

Otherwise Farage is secure, as probably is Starmer unless Burnham returns to Parliament or Corbyn's new party starts making inroads into Labour votes as well as Green votes

Farage of course might just ~~decide to rake in the cash in America~~ get bored and walk away.

HYUFD · August 26

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

That and more women working full time and middle class women graduates especially putting careers first and only having 1 child later in life in their 30s or even 40s.

Plus fewer are religious and it is Muslims and evangelical Christians who have the highest birthrates

Battlebus · August 26

I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.

fox327 · August 26

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

It seems to be a case of which will happen first:

a) the human population declines so much that production of computers and phones ends and we all go offline, or

b) AI robots take control of human societies and make the computers all by themselves, and possibly human beings using artificial womb technologies.

If it is a) then we will all have to go back to learning farming, hunting, and gathering again.

HYUFD · August 26

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:
If Reform and Labour beat the Tories in England, Scotland and Wales in the local and Holyrood and Senedd elections next year hard to see Kemi surviving. Though she might see a few Tory gains in London in Westminster and Barnet for example where Reform are weaker but Labour still less popular than they were. Jenrick, Cleverly or Stride would probably replace her, I suspect most Tory MPs would pick one of the latter 2 for the moment even if Jenrick might win the members vote now despite Kemi beating him in the Tory MPs and members votes last year. Jenrick probably doesn't have enough MPs supporting him to prevent a Cleverly or Stride coronation though.

Otherwise Farage is secure, as probably is Starmer unless Burnham returns to Parliament or Corbyn's new party starts making inroads into Labour votes as well as Green votes
Farage of course might just ~~decide to rake in the cash in America~~ get bored and walk away.

If he loses next time maybe, Farage said at an interview at the weekend the next general election was his best and also his last chance to become PM.

If not and he fails to win a majority or at least Reform most seats then he likely walks and goes off to the US lecture circuit.

Certainly if Reform have failed to even overtake the Tories on seats he is gone and likely leaves the populist right to Jenrick, who is 20 years his junior

JohnLilburne · August 26

ydoethur said:

RobD said:
@ydoethur thanks for the trivia on the last thread. What was the quirk concerning the Lord Chief Justice?
Because there have to be two Lords of the Treasury, if the post of Chancellor is vacant for more than a few hours the Lord Chief Justice will hold the office pro tempore.

Hasn't happened since the Wellington caretaker government of 1834, but still theoretically exists.

Presumably the same happens if First Lord of the Treasury is vacant.

They could always take the Treasury out of commission and reappoint a Lord High Treasurer. Although that might give the "Chancellor" ideas above her station!

Sunil_Prasannan · August 26

ydoethur said:

RobD said:
@ydoethur thanks for the trivia on the last thread. What was the quirk concerning the Lord Chief Justice?
Because there have to be two Lords of the Treasury, if the post of Chancellor is vacant for more than a few hours the Lord Chief Justice will hold the office pro tempore.

Hasn't happened since the Wellington caretaker government of 1834, but still theoretically exists.

It's been given the Boot?

HYUFD · August 26

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

LostPassword said:

moonshine said:

Leon said:

Battlebus said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:
OK this is interesting. Farage admitting that the ECHR is embedded into the Good Friday Agreement and that the required renegotiation of that won't be "quick". Does that mean that we can't do any of this without it? Because unless we quit ECHR and the UN treaties none of this is legal.
No, Parliament is sovereign.

Just quit the ECHR and then renegotiate the GFA as per the new circumstances.

The GFA has been tweaked many times already. If it were Ireland wanting to quit they wouldn't let the tail wag the dog and neither should we.
When Lord Blumkett and others in Labour want to leave the ECHR then consensus appears to be broadening

Those who do not want Farage need to realise the status quo is only going to increase that likelihood
I advocate changing much of the status quo, so I don't care much for the "we can't do x" arguments. We can, the valid question is whether we should and if so, how?

The simple truth is that the populist right spin a picture that only Britain is under siege by "fighting age men". Incorrect. We get fewer than many of our neighbours. There is no need for us to abrogate agreements that many now look to amend, and any "just send them home" plan by definition needs a counterparty to agree to receive them. As Farage stated.

So the solution is international cooperation, not WE ARE BRITAIN WE MAKE THE RULES displays.
We are sovereign, we absolutely can make the rules.

If people want to cooperate, great.

If people don't, that's fine too.
It isn't fine too when you are trying to land RAF planes full of people into their sovereign territory.

They are sovereign and absolutely can make their own rules...

I have no doubt that deals will be done. Some deals. A load of people will have (a) no paperwork and (b) no country willing to take them as they are "fighting age males"

We have more chance of doing deals if we don't act like a limp-dicked beta male whining on about how we absolutely get to make the rules dictating to foreigners what happens in their country.
Some deals is enough.

For those countries willing to take people back (and that we are willing to send them to), send them there.

For those unwilling, or where we are unwilling to send them to, have a Plan B. Eg like Rwanda.

Rwanda didn't work under the Tories due to issues on our side, not theirs.

That is workable, whether you like it or not. Bilateral agreements requiring only our agreement and the other parties agreement.

What's not required is a multilateral treaty requiring unanimity and the lowest common denominator.
We're importing our food, our energy and even our monarchy in the past. We've just moved onto importing our people as we don't allow the young the financial base to plan and have a family. As another PB'er said, we are here by choice.
This is a misframing

Yes uk birthrates are falling - but they are falling almost everywhere outside Africa (and drifting down even there). They are falling in religious countries and secular countries, empty countries and crowded countries, countries with cheap houses and countries with expensive houses

No one is entirely sure why
I think the answers pretty obvious to be honest but you get told off for saying it out loud. The places with very high birth rates correlate with there being very little personal independence for women. As the opportunity cost to women of having children rises, they have fewer children. Ultimately to the level where fertility rates fall well below replacement rate.
I believe survey evidence shows that women in England have on average one child fewer than they want.

A key factor seems to be in not finding a suitable and willing man to act as the father before it's too late. The government should put money into a match-making website - all commercial dating apps have an interest in you failing to find someone, and to continue to use the app to keep looking.

I'm only half-joking.
I always find it ironic that those people who are most opposed to abortion, also seem to be most opposed to the government spending money on things that would support low income parents, like subsidised childcare.
I don't think that follows. Roman Catholics for example are more pro big government on average and big child benefit spending but also anti abortion.

It is right wing laissez fair libertarians most opposed to subsidised childcare and increased child benefit but they also tend to be pro choice on abortion up to a point
I know it's not true of you: but in the US, it certainly is true. The States with the most restrictive abortion laws - Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and South Dakota - all rank at the bottom of child well being and support indices.

Now, I don't think this is because religious people have some objection to helping others. I think it's that there is a natural suspicion of government spending, and this is government spending.

They also have plenty of libertarian low tax conservatives who hold their noses and vote GOP even despite its social conservatism.

The Vatican for instance is firmly pro big spending on children and anti abortion, Meloni is similar and even Farage opposes the 2 child benefit cap.

Trump also allowed childcare expenses to be deducted from income tax as part of his campaign

JohnLilburne · August 26

HYUFD said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

That and more women working full time and middle class women graduates especially putting careers first and only having 1 child later in life in their 30s or even 40s.

Plus fewer are religious and it is Muslims and evangelical Christians who have the highest birthrates

And people just enjoying travelling and going out on the piss.

viewcode · August 26

FPT

RochdalePioneers said:
Amongst the more interesting ideas Farage has is that cabinet ministers can be appointed without sitting in parliament...

It's not a new idea and it's been tried several times in history: from memory Jan Smuts was in the British cabinet during WWI, Robert Menzies in WWI/2, another Australian in another Ministry during WW2, and it's been floated several times in latter years. Such appoinments are referred to as "GOATS" (from "Government of all the talents") if actually ministers, or "Tsars" if another non-ministerial position. Arrangements are made for them to be accountable to Parliament during their tenure.

It has also been discussed on PB comments but I can't find the link.

viewcode · August 26

rcs1000 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

That's one of two xkcd tshirts I own

(insert obvious question here)

Sunil_Prasannan · August 26

HYUFD said:

The Vatican for instance is firmly pro big spending on children and anti abortion, Meloni is similar and even Farage opposes the 2 child benefit cap.

What's the Vatican's birth rate, please?

ydoethur · August 26

JohnLilburne said:

ydoethur said:

RobD said:
@ydoethur thanks for the trivia on the last thread. What was the quirk concerning the Lord Chief Justice?
Because there have to be two Lords of the Treasury, if the post of Chancellor is vacant for more than a few hours the Lord Chief Justice will hold the office pro tempore.

Hasn't happened since the Wellington caretaker government of 1834, but still theoretically exists.
Presumably the same happens if First Lord of the Treasury is vacant.

They could always take the Treasury out of commission and reappoint a Lord High Treasurer. Although that might give the "Chancellor" ideas above her station!

If the First Lord of the Treasury is vacant it reverts to the Sovereign, who will either discharge the functions himself or immediately appoint somebody to carry out that office.

The Second Lord, being subordinate to the First Lord, cannot revert to the Sovereign as that would make the Sovereign subordinate to the First Lord or the First Lord subordinate to the Second Lord...

Taz · August 26

rcs1000 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

That's one of two xkcd tshirts I own

I first saw this around 2006. Great to see it’s being recycled.

ydoethur · August 26

FFS. Gloucestershire having absolutely dominated the group stage with six wins from six matches are about to come third in the table and have an away quarter final.

That is really, really typical of Gloucestershire.

Fairliered · August 26

TheScreamingEagles said:
Thoughts and prayers for me as I am Headingley forced to watch The Hundred.

Commiserations. You can’t even drown your sorrows in alcohol.

MightyAlex · August 26

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.

Yes, we've chosen migratory analgesia for our economic pain and to the detriment of the average youth. Most will not be going to fancy institutions and thus will have to compete with a consistent flow of trained labour. Hard to get you foot in the door when its also open to a good part of the educated world.

rcs1000 · August 26

viewcode said:

rcs1000 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

That's one of two xkcd tshirts I own
(insert obvious question here)

https://xkcd.com/149/

Fairliered · August 26

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

I wonder which PBer that is?

rcs1000 · August 26

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

LostPassword said:

moonshine said:

Leon said:

Battlebus said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:
OK this is interesting. Farage admitting that the ECHR is embedded into the Good Friday Agreement and that the required renegotiation of that won't be "quick". Does that mean that we can't do any of this without it? Because unless we quit ECHR and the UN treaties none of this is legal.
No, Parliament is sovereign.

Just quit the ECHR and then renegotiate the GFA as per the new circumstances.

The GFA has been tweaked many times already. If it were Ireland wanting to quit they wouldn't let the tail wag the dog and neither should we.
When Lord Blumkett and others in Labour want to leave the ECHR then consensus appears to be broadening

Those who do not want Farage need to realise the status quo is only going to increase that likelihood
I advocate changing much of the status quo, so I don't care much for the "we can't do x" arguments. We can, the valid question is whether we should and if so, how?

The simple truth is that the populist right spin a picture that only Britain is under siege by "fighting age men". Incorrect. We get fewer than many of our neighbours. There is no need for us to abrogate agreements that many now look to amend, and any "just send them home" plan by definition needs a counterparty to agree to receive them. As Farage stated.

So the solution is international cooperation, not WE ARE BRITAIN WE MAKE THE RULES displays.
We are sovereign, we absolutely can make the rules.

If people want to cooperate, great.

If people don't, that's fine too.
It isn't fine too when you are trying to land RAF planes full of people into their sovereign territory.

They are sovereign and absolutely can make their own rules...

I have no doubt that deals will be done. Some deals. A load of people will have (a) no paperwork and (b) no country willing to take them as they are "fighting age males"

We have more chance of doing deals if we don't act like a limp-dicked beta male whining on about how we absolutely get to make the rules dictating to foreigners what happens in their country.
Some deals is enough.

For those countries willing to take people back (and that we are willing to send them to), send them there.

For those unwilling, or where we are unwilling to send them to, have a Plan B. Eg like Rwanda.

Rwanda didn't work under the Tories due to issues on our side, not theirs.

That is workable, whether you like it or not. Bilateral agreements requiring only our agreement and the other parties agreement.

What's not required is a multilateral treaty requiring unanimity and the lowest common denominator.
We're importing our food, our energy and even our monarchy in the past. We've just moved onto importing our people as we don't allow the young the financial base to plan and have a family. As another PB'er said, we are here by choice.
This is a misframing

Yes uk birthrates are falling - but they are falling almost everywhere outside Africa (and drifting down even there). They are falling in religious countries and secular countries, empty countries and crowded countries, countries with cheap houses and countries with expensive houses

No one is entirely sure why
I think the answers pretty obvious to be honest but you get told off for saying it out loud. The places with very high birth rates correlate with there being very little personal independence for women. As the opportunity cost to women of having children rises, they have fewer children. Ultimately to the level where fertility rates fall well below replacement rate.
I believe survey evidence shows that women in England have on average one child fewer than they want.

A key factor seems to be in not finding a suitable and willing man to act as the father before it's too late. The government should put money into a match-making website - all commercial dating apps have an interest in you failing to find someone, and to continue to use the app to keep looking.

I'm only half-joking.
I always find it ironic that those people who are most opposed to abortion, also seem to be most opposed to the government spending money on things that would support low income parents, like subsidised childcare.
I don't think that follows. Roman Catholics for example are more pro big government on average and big child benefit spending but also anti abortion.

It is right wing laissez fair libertarians most opposed to subsidised childcare and increased child benefit but they also tend to be pro choice on abortion up to a point
I know it's not true of you: but in the US, it certainly is true. The States with the most restrictive abortion laws - Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and South Dakota - all rank at the bottom of child well being and support indices.

Now, I don't think this is because religious people have some objection to helping others. I think it's that there is a natural suspicion of government spending, and this is government spending.
They also have plenty of libertarian low tax conservatives who hold their noses and vote GOP even despite its social conservatism.

The Vatican for instance is firmly pro big spending on children and anti abortion, Meloni is similar and even Farage opposes the 2 child benefit cap.

Trump also allowed childcare expenses to be deducted from income tax as part of his campaign

I don't disagree with you: I think religions generally are pro-child welfare.

However, that doesn't change the fact that the States with the most restrictive abortion laws offer the least support to parents.

dixiedean · August 26

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.

Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?

rcs1000 · August 26

Fairliered said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

I wonder which PBer that is?

The one who is wrong? Or the one who is ... educating ... the unenlightened?

HYUFD · August 26

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

LostPassword said:

moonshine said:

Leon said:

Battlebus said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:
OK this is interesting. Farage admitting that the ECHR is embedded into the Good Friday Agreement and that the required renegotiation of that won't be "quick". Does that mean that we can't do any of this without it? Because unless we quit ECHR and the UN treaties none of this is legal.
No, Parliament is sovereign.

Just quit the ECHR and then renegotiate the GFA as per the new circumstances.

The GFA has been tweaked many times already. If it were Ireland wanting to quit they wouldn't let the tail wag the dog and neither should we.
When Lord Blumkett and others in Labour want to leave the ECHR then consensus appears to be broadening

Those who do not want Farage need to realise the status quo is only going to increase that likelihood
I advocate changing much of the status quo, so I don't care much for the "we can't do x" arguments. We can, the valid question is whether we should and if so, how?

The simple truth is that the populist right spin a picture that only Britain is under siege by "fighting age men". Incorrect. We get fewer than many of our neighbours. There is no need for us to abrogate agreements that many now look to amend, and any "just send them home" plan by definition needs a counterparty to agree to receive them. As Farage stated.

So the solution is international cooperation, not WE ARE BRITAIN WE MAKE THE RULES displays.
We are sovereign, we absolutely can make the rules.

If people want to cooperate, great.

If people don't, that's fine too.
It isn't fine too when you are trying to land RAF planes full of people into their sovereign territory.

They are sovereign and absolutely can make their own rules...

I have no doubt that deals will be done. Some deals. A load of people will have (a) no paperwork and (b) no country willing to take them as they are "fighting age males"

We have more chance of doing deals if we don't act like a limp-dicked beta male whining on about how we absolutely get to make the rules dictating to foreigners what happens in their country.
Some deals is enough.

For those countries willing to take people back (and that we are willing to send them to), send them there.

For those unwilling, or where we are unwilling to send them to, have a Plan B. Eg like Rwanda.

Rwanda didn't work under the Tories due to issues on our side, not theirs.

That is workable, whether you like it or not. Bilateral agreements requiring only our agreement and the other parties agreement.

What's not required is a multilateral treaty requiring unanimity and the lowest common denominator.
We're importing our food, our energy and even our monarchy in the past. We've just moved onto importing our people as we don't allow the young the financial base to plan and have a family. As another PB'er said, we are here by choice.
This is a misframing

Yes uk birthrates are falling - but they are falling almost everywhere outside Africa (and drifting down even there). They are falling in religious countries and secular countries, empty countries and crowded countries, countries with cheap houses and countries with expensive houses

No one is entirely sure why
I think the answers pretty obvious to be honest but you get told off for saying it out loud. The places with very high birth rates correlate with there being very little personal independence for women. As the opportunity cost to women of having children rises, they have fewer children. Ultimately to the level where fertility rates fall well below replacement rate.
I believe survey evidence shows that women in England have on average one child fewer than they want.

A key factor seems to be in not finding a suitable and willing man to act as the father before it's too late. The government should put money into a match-making website - all commercial dating apps have an interest in you failing to find someone, and to continue to use the app to keep looking.

I'm only half-joking.
I always find it ironic that those people who are most opposed to abortion, also seem to be most opposed to the government spending money on things that would support low income parents, like subsidised childcare.
I don't think that follows. Roman Catholics for example are more pro big government on average and big child benefit spending but also anti abortion.

It is right wing laissez fair libertarians most opposed to subsidised childcare and increased child benefit but they also tend to be pro choice on abortion up to a point
I know it's not true of you: but in the US, it certainly is true. The States with the most restrictive abortion laws - Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and South Dakota - all rank at the bottom of child well being and support indices.

Now, I don't think this is because religious people have some objection to helping others. I think it's that there is a natural suspicion of government spending, and this is government spending.
They also have plenty of libertarian low tax conservatives who hold their noses and vote GOP even despite its social conservatism.

The Vatican for instance is firmly pro big spending on children and anti abortion, Meloni is similar and even Farage opposes the 2 child benefit cap.

Trump also allowed childcare expenses to be deducted from income tax as part of his campaign
I don't disagree with you: I think religions generally are pro-child welfare.

However, that doesn't change the fact that the States with the most restrictive abortion laws offer the least support to parents.

Look at Ireland too, which was massively pro family in terms of state support when it banned abortion in the 20th century.

On state child funding you are not completely right either, Florida and West Virginia offer universal pre kindergarten programmes for instance and Florida also bans abortion after 6 weeks and West Virginia has a near total abortion ban

IanB2 · August 26

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

LostPassword said:

moonshine said:

Leon said:

Battlebus said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:
OK this is interesting. Farage admitting that the ECHR is embedded into the Good Friday Agreement and that the required renegotiation of that won't be "quick". Does that mean that we can't do any of this without it? Because unless we quit ECHR and the UN treaties none of this is legal.
No, Parliament is sovereign.

Just quit the ECHR and then renegotiate the GFA as per the new circumstances.

The GFA has been tweaked many times already. If it were Ireland wanting to quit they wouldn't let the tail wag the dog and neither should we.
When Lord Blumkett and others in Labour want to leave the ECHR then consensus appears to be broadening

Those who do not want Farage need to realise the status quo is only going to increase that likelihood
I advocate changing much of the status quo, so I don't care much for the "we can't do x" arguments. We can, the valid question is whether we should and if so, how?

The simple truth is that the populist right spin a picture that only Britain is under siege by "fighting age men". Incorrect. We get fewer than many of our neighbours. There is no need for us to abrogate agreements that many now look to amend, and any "just send them home" plan by definition needs a counterparty to agree to receive them. As Farage stated.

So the solution is international cooperation, not WE ARE BRITAIN WE MAKE THE RULES displays.
We are sovereign, we absolutely can make the rules.

If people want to cooperate, great.

If people don't, that's fine too.
It isn't fine too when you are trying to land RAF planes full of people into their sovereign territory.

They are sovereign and absolutely can make their own rules...

I have no doubt that deals will be done. Some deals. A load of people will have (a) no paperwork and (b) no country willing to take them as they are "fighting age males"

We have more chance of doing deals if we don't act like a limp-dicked beta male whining on about how we absolutely get to make the rules dictating to foreigners what happens in their country.
Some deals is enough.

For those countries willing to take people back (and that we are willing to send them to), send them there.

For those unwilling, or where we are unwilling to send them to, have a Plan B. Eg like Rwanda.

Rwanda didn't work under the Tories due to issues on our side, not theirs.

That is workable, whether you like it or not. Bilateral agreements requiring only our agreement and the other parties agreement.

What's not required is a multilateral treaty requiring unanimity and the lowest common denominator.
We're importing our food, our energy and even our monarchy in the past. We've just moved onto importing our people as we don't allow the young the financial base to plan and have a family. As another PB'er said, we are here by choice.
This is a misframing

Yes uk birthrates are falling - but they are falling almost everywhere outside Africa (and drifting down even there). They are falling in religious countries and secular countries, empty countries and crowded countries, countries with cheap houses and countries with expensive houses

No one is entirely sure why
I think the answers pretty obvious to be honest but you get told off for saying it out loud. The places with very high birth rates correlate with there being very little personal independence for women. As the opportunity cost to women of having children rises, they have fewer children. Ultimately to the level where fertility rates fall well below replacement rate.
I believe survey evidence shows that women in England have on average one child fewer than they want.

A key factor seems to be in not finding a suitable and willing man to act as the father before it's too late. The government should put money into a match-making website - all commercial dating apps have an interest in you failing to find someone, and to continue to use the app to keep looking.

I'm only half-joking.
I always find it ironic that those people who are most opposed to abortion, also seem to be most opposed to the government spending money on things that would support low income parents, like subsidised childcare.
I don't think that follows. Roman Catholics for example are more pro big government on average and big child benefit spending but also anti abortion.

It is right wing laissez fair libertarians most opposed to subsidised childcare and increased child benefit but they also tend to be pro choice on abortion up to a point
I know it's not true of you: but in the US, it certainly is true. The States with the most restrictive abortion laws - Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and South Dakota - all rank at the bottom of child well being and support indices.

Now, I don't think this is because religious people have some objection to helping others. I think it's that there is a natural suspicion of government spending, and this is government spending.

Ideology before welfare. A killer, sadly all too often literally, every time.

viewcode · August 26

If anybody on here is a fan of Lindsay Ellis, she has a new one out on YouTube. She's one of the Nebula exiles so this is notable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwpanShgOp4

CatMan · August 26

rcs1000 said:

viewcode said:

rcs1000 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

That's one of two xkcd tshirts I own
(insert obvious question here)
https://xkcd.com/149/

I'm going to regret this but...

I don't get it.

rcs1000 · August 26

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

The Vatican for instance is firmly pro big spending on children and anti abortion, Meloni is similar and even Farage opposes the 2 child benefit cap.
What's the Vatican's birth rate, please?

There were two officially registered Vatican births, in the last year that I saw; almost certainly from the wives of Swiss Guards.

Lennon · August 26

CatMan said:

rcs1000 said:

viewcode said:

rcs1000 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

That's one of two xkcd tshirts I own
(insert obvious question here)
https://xkcd.com/149/
I'm going to regret this but...

I don't get it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudo

rcs1000 · August 26

CatMan said:

rcs1000 said:

viewcode said:

rcs1000 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

That's one of two xkcd tshirts I own
(insert obvious question here)
https://xkcd.com/149/
I'm going to regret this but...

I don't get it.

You need to be a Linux user to get it.

Taz · August 26

ydoethur said:
FFS. Gloucestershire having absolutely dominated the group stage with six wins from six matches are about to come third in the table and have an away quarter final.

That is really, really typical of Gloucestershire.

Is this The Hundred ?

LostPassword · August 26

rcs1000 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

That's one of two xkcd tshirts I own

I displayed the "Ballmer Peak" xkcd comic at a previous employer. Not the sort of thing to show off as a consultant at a client site though.

rottenborough · August 26

Fairliered said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

I wonder which PBer that is?

The wall behind looks quite a light colour so not Leon.

Cookie · August 26

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?

I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.

Sunil_Prasannan · August 26

rcs1000 said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

The Vatican for instance is firmly pro big spending on children and anti abortion, Meloni is similar and even Farage opposes the 2 child benefit cap.
What's the Vatican's birth rate, please?
There were two officially registered Vatican births, in the last year that I saw; almost certainly from the wives of Swiss Guards.

Just two out of a population of a 1,000?

Luckyguy1983 · August 26

...

ydoethur · August 26

Taz said:

ydoethur said:
FFS. Gloucestershire having absolutely dominated the group stage with six wins from six matches are about to come third in the table and have an away quarter final.

That is really, really typical of Gloucestershire.
Is this The Hundred ?

No, this is cricket.

rcs1000 · August 26

Sunil_Prasannan said:

rcs1000 said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

The Vatican for instance is firmly pro big spending on children and anti abortion, Meloni is similar and even Farage opposes the 2 child benefit cap.
What's the Vatican's birth rate, please?
There were two officially registered Vatican births, in the last year that I saw; almost certainly from the wives of Swiss Guards.
Just two out of a population of a 1,000?

Well: the Swiss Guards are the only people who live in the Vatican are allowed to be married. (And they're only allowed to be married if they've already served some period as a guard already.) So, the population of eligible married women is pretty small.

rcs1000 · August 26

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.

When I had just turned 10, to go to school I would walk to my local train station (Strawberry Hill in South West London), and catch a train towards Waterloo. I would get off at Vauxhall, walk to a bus stop, and catch the 2b bus over Vauxhall Bridge. I would leave for school at 740am, catch the 750am train, and make it to school at about 840am.

I had no cell phone, and if I needed to reach my parents to tell them about problems with the travel, I had a 10 pence coin for a pay phone.

I would very much have like to have given my children the same responsibility and freedom, but my wife was very much opposed.

We tend to think the streets much more dangerous than they actually are.

SandyRentool · August 26

rcs1000 said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
When I had just turned 10, to go to school I would walk to my local train station (Strawberry Hill in South West London), and catch a train towards Waterloo. I would get off at Vauxhall, walk to a bus stop, and catch the 2b bus over Vauxhall Bridge. I would leave for school at 740am, catch the 750am train, and make it to school at about 840am.

I had no cell phone, and if I needed to reach my parents to tell them about problems with the travel, I had a 10 pence coin for a pay phone.

I would very much have like to have given my children the same responsibility and freedom, but my wife was very much opposed.

We tend to think the streets much more dangerous than they actually are.

Railway station.

Nigelb · August 26

Incidentally, it's a pretty ugly painting.

Old master painting looted by Nazis spotted in Argentinian property listing
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/26/old-master-painting-giuseppe-ghislandi-looted-by-nazis-argentina-property-listing

LostPassword · August 26

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.

This is one of the ways in which modern culture has made parenting harder work than it was in the past, of course.

But then, my Grandad, who had lots of independence, used that independence to shoot stones through church windows with his catapult, and trespass on the railways (he later became a much-respected headteacher).

Scott_xP · August 26

rcs1000 said:

Fairliered said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:
@Leon

Birthrates are falling in Africa. They're just starting at a much higher level than elsewhere. Tunisia has already dipped below replacement. Morocco and South Africa are only just above. Places like Kenya were at 4.5 not that long ago, and are now at a smidgen over 3.
Which is still well above replacement level
Yes.

But if we'd been having this conversation in 2010, you'd have said* "every country in Africa has birthrates well above replacement". Now, in 2025, it's "most countries in Africa has birth rates well above replacement".

The trend is not your friend here.

* And maybe did say
I think technology is a big reason for falling birthrates. People worldwide have things to do outside of the bedroom.

I wonder which PBer that is?
The one who is wrong? Or the one who is ... educating ... the unenlightened?

One of them likes Radiohead

Dopermean · August 26

ydoethur said:

Taz said:

ydoethur said:
FFS. Gloucestershire having absolutely dominated the group stage with six wins from six matches are about to come third in the table and have an away quarter final.

That is really, really typical of Gloucestershire.
Is this The Hundred ?
No, this is cricket.

Worse than that they're going to save Hampshire from Essex's late run on the outside

MattW · August 26

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.

That is one of my standard thought-provoker images to start conversations

.

Scott_xP · August 26

The Mad King is now hiding his hands under the table

JosiasJessop · August 26

LostPassword said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
This is one of the ways in which modern culture has made parenting harder work than it was in the past, of course.

But then, my Grandad, who had lots of independence, used that independence to shoot stones through church windows with his catapult, and trespass on the railways (he later became a much-respected headteacher).

Also, there's a certain amount of survivor bias. Life was cheaper, especially when there were more kids (see previous discussion). When you only have one or two kids, you want them to survive - and have the ability to keep an eye on them more easily than f you have six or seven. Note also kids' survival rates over the years.

A whole back I read Brenda Blethyn's autobiography. when she was a child, she and a friend was accosted on the street by a man who wanted them to 'help him' by stroking his appendage. They ran off; but the idea that it is a modern problem is naive. You just never got to hear about it back then.

JosiasJessop · August 26

rcs1000 said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
When I had just turned 10, to go to school I would walk to my local train station (Strawberry Hill in South West London), and catch a train towards Waterloo. I would get off at Vauxhall, walk to a bus stop, and catch the 2b bus over Vauxhall Bridge. I would leave for school at 740am, catch the 750am train, and make it to school at about 840am.

I had no cell phone, and if I needed to reach my parents to tell them about problems with the travel, I had a 10 pence coin for a pay phone.

I would very much have like to have given my children the same responsibility and freedom, but my wife was very much opposed.

We tend to think the streets much more dangerous than they actually are.

Yeah, but your parents did not care for you. Particularly your dad...

(runs for cover...)

turbotubbs · August 26

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Thoughts and prayers for me as I am Headingley forced to watch The Hundred.
Could be worse, you could be a Gloucestershire supporter at Bristol watching Hampshire massacre us.

It's great isn't it! Reigning champs and all that...

dixiedean · August 26

So many fewer cars too.

Mexicanpete · August 26

Scott_xP said:
The Mad King is now hiding his hands under the table

Let's hope the Führer doesn't sit on them later when Nigel makes his report on Lucy Connolly's free speech incarceration. Incoming invasion and UK regime change?

Leon · August 26

Just realised the England flag - following Musk’s intervention - is now likely to become the international symbol of alt.right populism and western nativism

Making it extremely problematic for left wingers and a shame for Gareth Southgate

Leon · August 26

Musk’s England flag tweet has now been seen by 26 MILLION people

Sunil_Prasannan · August 26

Leon said:
Just realised the England flag - following Musk’s intervention - is now likely to become the international symbol of alt.right populism and western nativism

Making it extremely problematic for left wingers and a shame for Gareth Southgate

Just ironed my England flag mankini earlier today.

A_View_From_Cumbria5 · August 26

rcs1000 said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
When I had just turned 10, to go to school I would walk to my local train station (Strawberry Hill in South West London), and catch a train towards Waterloo. I would get off at Vauxhall, walk to a bus stop, and catch the 2b bus over Vauxhall Bridge. I would leave for school at 740am, catch the 750am train, and make it to school at about 840am.

I had no cell phone, and if I needed to reach my parents to tell them about problems with the travel, I had a 10 pence coin for a pay phone.

I would very much have like to have given my children the same responsibility and freedom, but my wife was very much opposed.

We tend to think the streets much more dangerous than they actually are.

Luxury ! I had to leave home at 7.30 with the milk kits to pick up the school bus at 7.50, arrive at school 8.30 even though it didn't start till 8.50. On a night school out 4.00 pm, bus 4.10 or 4.15 back to home town 4.50 then walk back home to get there 5.25 pm. Then up to 3 hrs homework in 6th Form. But, I had it easy, some of my friends were expected to milk and do up either before school or after getting home, probably not both in the same day. To be fair, if they wanted me to work in the evening then they would pick me up from the bus stop.

As the best ever Andy Capp cartoon had the caption. Two kids who had obviously been much delayed by Andy in a drunken verbose mood, one kid to the other, "The older they get, the further they had to walk to school !"

Nigelb · August 26

rcs1000 said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
When I had just turned 10, to go to school I would walk to my local train station (Strawberry Hill in South West London), and catch a train towards Waterloo. I would get off at Vauxhall, walk to a bus stop, and catch the 2b bus over Vauxhall Bridge. I would leave for school at 740am, catch the 750am train, and make it to school at about 840am.

I had no cell phone, and if I needed to reach my parents to tell them about problems with the travel, I had a 10 pence coin for a pay phone.

I would very much have like to have given my children the same responsibility and freedom, but my wife was very much opposed.

We tend to think the streets much more dangerous than they actually are.

I got dropped off at school as it was on the way to my dad's workplace.
But we regularly got the bus into town aged 10 (I occasionally walked the five or so miles home when I forgot the bus fare), used to wander off for the whole afternoon (the M62 construction site at weekends was a favoured playground) etc.

Different times.

Eabhal · August 26

MattW said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
That is one of my standard thought-provoker images to start conversations .

You may be aware of an 11-year old child who got killed while cycling to school in Edinburgh. Bin lorry driver convicted, had spent most of his shift on his phone. 12 month driving ban.

There were hundreds of comments at the time and recently at the sentence that pinned the blame on the parents for allowing him to cycle to school. It's seen as negligence nowadays.

Dopermean · August 26

Dopermean said:

ydoethur said:

Taz said:

ydoethur said:
FFS. Gloucestershire having absolutely dominated the group stage with six wins from six matches are about to come third in the table and have an away quarter final.

That is really, really typical of Gloucestershire.
Is this The Hundred ?
No, this is cricket.
Worse than that they're going to save Hampshire from Essex's late run on the outside

Essex almost over the line against Derbyshire and a faint glimmer of a chance of a tight finish at Bristol. Though probably too few runs.

dixiedean · August 26

Did my first month's interrailing round Europe at 14 with a mate the same age.

Dopermean · August 26

Dopermean said:

Dopermean said:

ydoethur said:

Taz said:

ydoethur said:
FFS. Gloucestershire having absolutely dominated the group stage with six wins from six matches are about to come third in the table and have an away quarter final.

That is really, really typical of Gloucestershire.
Is this The Hundred ?
No, this is cricket.
Worse than that they're going to save Hampshire from Essex's late run on the outside
Essex almost over the line against Derbyshire and a faint glimmer of a chance of a tight finish at Bristol. Though probably too few runs.

LOL I hope Gloucestershire supporters haven't gone home depressed before the end!!

JosiasJessop · August 26

Leon said:
Musk’s England flag tweet has now been seen by 26 MILLION people

6 million people, and 20 million bots.

And that's leaving aside the point that he's the head of the company, who has previously complained about his own diarrhoetical output not getting enough attention. And who sacks people on a drug-induced whim.

Only insane low-IQ fools would take Twix usage statistics seriously - especially when it comes to its boss.

kle4 · August 26

All part of treating everything like a TV show of course, and plenty of room for falsities, but it is admittedly bold to make open that which was traditionally not.

In his first three cabinet meetings alone, Trump took nearly 100 questions, on a extremely wide range of domestic and foreign policy topics.

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has repeatedly pointed to this as evidence that this administration is the most "transparent" in US history.

Reporters in the room - which are drawn from the day's press pool - aren't in any way limited in terms of what they can ask.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckgd3dm41ppt

kle4 · August 26

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.

It's a very interesting topic, and thought provoking image.

I have no stats or research to back it up, but my gut just says even if we need not be as open as back then - there wasn't a choice - if we've gotten to a point where people are too anxious as teenagers to travel about at all that has to be a step too far, right?

Dopermean · August 26

Eabhal said:

MattW said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
That is one of my standard thought-provoker images to start conversations .
You may be aware of an 11-year old child who got killed while cycling to school in Edinburgh. Bin lorry driver convicted, had spent most of his shift on his phone. 12 month driving ban.

There were hundreds of comments at the time and recently at the sentence that pinned the blame on the parents for allowing him to cycle to school. It's seen as negligence nowadays.

Worse than that, the court attributed blame to the child.
According to the report, the cab footage showed that the driver only looked to his right while pulling out and colleagues had tried to get him to stop.

kle4 · August 26

Eabhal said:

MattW said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
That is one of my standard thought-provoker images to start conversations .
You may be aware of an 11-year old child who got killed while cycling to school in Edinburgh. Bin lorry driver convicted, had spent most of his shift on his phone. 12 month driving ban.

There were hundreds of comments at the time and recently at the sentence that pinned the blame on the parents for allowing him to cycle to school. It's seen as negligence nowadays.

I'd read that in one US state it was against the law for parents to leave a 10 year old on their own for a few hours. I don't know if that is true, but I am curious at what age it would be considered ok, regardless of what the law is. Teenager ok, but lower than that unacceptable?

dixiedean · August 26

kle4 said:
All part of treating everything like a TV show of course, and plenty of room for falsities, but it is admittedly bold to make open that which was traditionally not.

In his first three cabinet meetings alone, Trump took nearly 100 questions, on a extremely wide range of domestic and foreign policy topics.

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has repeatedly pointed to this as evidence that this administration is the most "transparent" in US history.

Reporters in the room - which are drawn from the day's press pool - aren't in any way limited in terms of what they can ask.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckgd3dm41ppt

However. There are Cabinet meetings and Press Conferences. They are not the same thing.

Leon · August 26

I can report that it is still definitely summer in Vienna

Das Scorchio

JosiasJessop · August 26

Leon said:
I can report that it is still definitely summer in Vienna

Das Scorchio

Pity the Viennese prostitutes.

Leon · August 26

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:
I can report that it is still definitely summer in Vienna

Das Scorchio
Pity the Viennese prostitutes.

They coped with egon schiele

JosiasJessop · August 26

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:
I can report that it is still definitely summer in Vienna

Das Scorchio
Pity the Viennese prostitutes.
They coped with egon schiele

Yeah, but you're definitely the Z-squad in comparison.

kinabalu · August 26

Leon said:
Just realised the England flag - following Musk’s intervention - is now likely to become the international symbol of alt.right populism and western nativism

Making it extremely problematic for left wingers and a shame for Gareth Southgate

I won't be able to fly my flag of St George anymore? That's a real blow.

JosiasJessop · August 26

kle4 said:

Eabhal said:

MattW said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
That is one of my standard thought-provoker images to start conversations .
You may be aware of an 11-year old child who got killed while cycling to school in Edinburgh. Bin lorry driver convicted, had spent most of his shift on his phone. 12 month driving ban.

There were hundreds of comments at the time and recently at the sentence that pinned the blame on the parents for allowing him to cycle to school. It's seen as negligence nowadays.
I'd read that in one US state it was against the law for parents to leave a 10 year old on their own for a few hours. I don't know if that is true, but I am curious at what age it would be considered ok, regardless of what the law is. Teenager ok, but lower than that unacceptable?

My son is eleven. From ten, we'd leave him alone for an hour in the house whilst we go out for a run. I wouldn't extend that much at the moment - not because I don't trust him, but about how he'd react to the unexpected. You get subtle cues he's ready: a parcel delivery guy came a while back, and I asked him to take it in. It wasn't for us, but he knew the neighbours, accepted the parcel, and locked the door afterwards.

Kids grow up at different rates. They are individuals. You can trust some to do some things at a certain age, but not others. But those kids might not be ready for other things. Some adults might not be...

And that's the problem with such laws. Some kids might be emotionally and physically ready to have sex at 16. Some people are not in such a state at 20, or older. But there has to be an age, and unlike driving, there is no test.

As a parent, you just have to look at your kid and ask "What are they ready for?"

rottenborough · August 26

JosiasJessop said:

kle4 said:

Eabhal said:

MattW said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
That is one of my standard thought-provoker images to start conversations .
You may be aware of an 11-year old child who got killed while cycling to school in Edinburgh. Bin lorry driver convicted, had spent most of his shift on his phone. 12 month driving ban.

There were hundreds of comments at the time and recently at the sentence that pinned the blame on the parents for allowing him to cycle to school. It's seen as negligence nowadays.
I'd read that in one US state it was against the law for parents to leave a 10 year old on their own for a few hours. I don't know if that is true, but I am curious at what age it would be considered ok, regardless of what the law is. Teenager ok, but lower than that unacceptable?
My son is eleven. From ten, we'd leave him alone for an hour in the house whilst we go out for a run. I wouldn't extend that much at the moment - not because I don't trust him, but about how he'd react to the unexpected. You get subtle cues he's ready: a parcel delivery guy came a while back, and I asked him to take it in. It wasn't for us, but he knew the neighbours, accepted the parcel, and locked the door afterwards.

Kids grow up at different rates. They are individuals. You can trust some to do some things at a certain age, but not others. But those kids might not be ready for other things. Some adults might not be...

And that's the problem with such laws. Some kids might be emotionally and physically ready to have sex at 16. Some people are not in such a state at 20, or older. But there has to be an age, and unlike driving, there is no test.

As a parent, you just have to look at your kid and ask "What are they ready for?"

Isn't the law 14?

Pretty sure it was the law when I was a kid.

rottenborough · August 26

kinabalu said:

Leon said:
Just realised the England flag - following Musk’s intervention - is now likely to become the international symbol of alt.right populism and western nativism

Making it extremely problematic for left wingers and a shame for Gareth Southgate
I won't be able to fly my flag of St George anymore? That's a real blow.

What we gonna do when alt-right populism fails utterly to deliver on its snake oil promises and falls into utter contempt?

kinabalu · August 26

rottenborough said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:
Just realised the England flag - following Musk’s intervention - is now likely to become the international symbol of alt.right populism and western nativism

Making it extremely problematic for left wingers and a shame for Gareth Southgate
I won't be able to fly my flag of St George anymore? That's a real blow.
What we gonna do when alt-right populism fails utterly to deliver on its snake oil promises and falls into utter contempt?

The LibDems?

JosiasJessop · August 26

rottenborough said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:
Just realised the England flag - following Musk’s intervention - is now likely to become the international symbol of alt.right populism and western nativism

Making it extremely problematic for left wingers and a shame for Gareth Southgate
I won't be able to fly my flag of St George anymore? That's a real blow.
What we gonna do when alt-right populism fails utterly to deliver on its snake oil promises and falls into utter contempt?

The 600,000 adults scheduled for deportation will become 6,000,000. And when that doesn't stop the rapes and crime (mostly committed by people like us...) it'll be anyone who are, or look, different.

rottenborough · August 26

kinabalu said:

rottenborough said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:
Just realised the England flag - following Musk’s intervention - is now likely to become the international symbol of alt.right populism and western nativism

Making it extremely problematic for left wingers and a shame for Gareth Southgate
I won't be able to fly my flag of St George anymore? That's a real blow.
What we gonna do when alt-right populism fails utterly to deliver on its snake oil promises and falls into utter contempt?
The LibDems?

Well, yes. It maybe centrist Dad all that, but they might be the only non-looney political force left in 2029.

But I meant with respect to the St George flag?

Stuartinromford · August 26

rottenborough said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:
Just realised the England flag - following Musk’s intervention - is now likely to become the international symbol of alt.right populism and western nativism

Making it extremely problematic for left wingers and a shame for Gareth Southgate
I won't be able to fly my flag of St George anymore? That's a real blow.
What we gonna do when alt-right populism fails utterly to deliver on its snake oil promises and falls into utter contempt?

Flip to the bonkers left, probably. The Living Marxism crew, only in reverse.

Stand by for drooling profiles of Zahra Sultana in The Spectator in about 2030.

TOPPING · August 26

kinabalu said:

Leon said:
Just realised the England flag - following Musk’s intervention - is now likely to become the international symbol of alt.right populism and western nativism

Making it extremely problematic for left wingers and a shame for Gareth Southgate
I won't be able to fly my flag of St George anymore? That's a real blow.

I bet they fly them a lot around where you grew up.

Hampstead I'm sure less so.

JosiasJessop · August 26

rottenborough said:

JosiasJessop said:

kle4 said:

Eabhal said:

MattW said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
That is one of my standard thought-provoker images to start conversations .
You may be aware of an 11-year old child who got killed while cycling to school in Edinburgh. Bin lorry driver convicted, had spent most of his shift on his phone. 12 month driving ban.

There were hundreds of comments at the time and recently at the sentence that pinned the blame on the parents for allowing him to cycle to school. It's seen as negligence nowadays.
I'd read that in one US state it was against the law for parents to leave a 10 year old on their own for a few hours. I don't know if that is true, but I am curious at what age it would be considered ok, regardless of what the law is. Teenager ok, but lower than that unacceptable?
My son is eleven. From ten, we'd leave him alone for an hour in the house whilst we go out for a run. I wouldn't extend that much at the moment - not because I don't trust him, but about how he'd react to the unexpected. You get subtle cues he's ready: a parcel delivery guy came a while back, and I asked him to take it in. It wasn't for us, but he knew the neighbours, accepted the parcel, and locked the door afterwards.

Kids grow up at different rates. They are individuals. You can trust some to do some things at a certain age, but not others. But those kids might not be ready for other things. Some adults might not be...

And that's the problem with such laws. Some kids might be emotionally and physically ready to have sex at 16. Some people are not in such a state at 20, or older. But there has to be an age, and unlike driving, there is no test.

As a parent, you just have to look at your kid and ask "What are they ready for?"
Isn't the law 14?

Pretty sure it was the law when I was a kid.

"children aged 12 or older should only be left alone for long periods of time when both the child feels safe and the parent feels they’re ready
children under 12 are rarely mature enough to be left alone for long periods of time
babies, toddlers and very young children should never be left alone"

https://www.gov.uk/law-on-leaving-your-child-home-alone

Which comes down to many factors, including the definition of "long periods of time".

I think that's about right for our son. Others may differ.

Taz · August 26

JosiasJessop said:

rottenborough said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:
Just realised the England flag - following Musk’s intervention - is now likely to become the international symbol of alt.right populism and western nativism

Making it extremely problematic for left wingers and a shame for Gareth Southgate
I won't be able to fly my flag of St George anymore? That's a real blow.
What we gonna do when alt-right populism fails utterly to deliver on its snake oil promises and falls into utter contempt?
The 600,000 adults scheduled for deportation will become 6,000,000.

🙄.

nova · August 26

rottenborough said:

JosiasJessop said:

kle4 said:

Eabhal said:

MattW said:

Cookie said:

dixiedean said:

Battlebus said:
I have come to the conclusion that we hate children as much as we hate immigrants. Was told about a local parish in Kent where the Parish Council leader (over 80) has had the chains of the swings cut (for health and safety issues!). They are also sitting on about £60k of grant which they could spend on replacing the equipment but the leader wants to send the money back to the County instead of improvements.

So high house prices, high rents, expensive school clothing and pay for your own tertiary education while inviting the tertiary educated from other countries. We've lost all reason - by choice - as we could have had family supportive policies.
Yep.
No ball games. No speed restrictions. I'm intimidated by them hanging out in groups.
And why oh why do they never play out?
I saw this today. It made me sad. It turns out to be a story which is 18 years old but I think it still has currency.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children-lost-right-roam-generations.html

It reflects my own experience - at 8, I had the whole of our estate* and the fields behind in which to roam, but we don't let our own kids roam that far or operate that independently. I'd like to have given them more independence, but the culture is just that it isn't done, and if you let your 8 year old get to and from school on their own you'd soon get some questions from the authorities.

That said, I'm happy to report that our kids still achieve independence, just slightly later: my 15 year old frequently goes into Manchester or other locations reachable by public transport, and has had a day out to York over the holidays with friends and without adult supervision, and is looking for other opportunities; and my 13 year old isn't far behind her.

*it was a housing estate. I'm not some duke.
That is one of my standard thought-provoker images to start conversations .
You may be aware of an 11-year old child who got killed while cycling to school in Edinburgh. Bin lorry driver convicted, had spent most of his shift on his phone. 12 month driving ban.

There were hundreds of comments at the time and recently at the sentence that pinned the blame on the parents for allowing him to cycle to school. It's seen as negligence nowadays.
I'd read that in one US state it was against the law for parents to leave a 10 year old on their own for a few hours. I don't know if that is true, but I am curious at what age it would be considered ok, regardless of what the law is. Teenager ok, but lower than that unacceptable?
My son is eleven. From ten, we'd leave him alone for an hour in the house whilst we go out for a run. I wouldn't extend that much at the moment - not because I don't trust him, but about how he'd react to the unexpected. You get subtle cues he's ready: a parcel delivery guy came a while back, and I asked him to take it in. It wasn't for us, but he knew the neighbours, accepted the parcel, and locked the door afterwards.

Kids grow up at different rates. They are individuals. You can trust some to do some things at a certain age, but not others. But those kids might not be ready for other things. Some adults might not be...

And that's the problem with such laws. Some kids might be emotionally and physically ready to have sex at 16. Some people are not in such a state at 20, or older. But there has to be an age, and unlike driving, there is no test.

As a parent, you just have to look at your kid and ask "What are they ready for?"
Isn't the law 14?

Pretty sure it was the law when I was a kid.

I don't think there is a set age. It's just about leaving them at "risk". The NSPCC recommend 12, but for short periods, it clearly depends on the child.

Given that most kids can go to and from school on their own at secondary, 12 seems odd to be the consensus for being at home. My son's primary allows final year students to go home on their own too.

Still, I was 9 when I went on a school trip to Bruges, and we were allowed out in the evening on our own in the city. The teachers just said, "stay in pairs, and be back by 9pm)".

nico67 · August 26

JosiasJessop said:

rottenborough said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:
Just realised the England flag - following Musk’s intervention - is now likely to become the international symbol of alt.right populism and western nativism

Making it extremely problematic for left wingers and a shame for Gareth Southgate
I won't be able to fly my flag of St George anymore? That's a real blow.
What we gonna do when alt-right populism fails utterly to deliver on its snake oil promises and falls into utter contempt?
The 600,000 adults scheduled for deportation will become 6,000,000. And when that doesn't stop the rapes and crime (mostly committed by people like us...) it'll be anyone who are, or look, different.

Yes once removing migrants doesn’t do the job of cheering up the public they’ll move onto the next scapegoats . The Trumpification of the UK will go into warp drive with Reform in power .

Last in, first out? – politicalbetting.com

Comments