A lawyer working for a bank/financial institution is usually the best of humanity….
A BlackRock solicitor has been fined for shouting abuse at other passengers on a train.
Rebecca Lindsay, who qualified in Scotland in 2020, was travelling from Edinburgh to Glasgow last December after a Christmas party (which was not thrown by BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager, it pointed out to ROF).
Having partaken in the refreshments available at the event, Lindsay took a tumble in the aisle and was helped up by another passenger.
Lindsay struck up a conversation with the man before becoming “aggressive” towards him, and when another passenger asked if he was alright, Lindsay yelled at them, “Is he your boyfriend? Have you got your d**k up his a**e, is he shagging him tonight - he is up his ass”.
Turning on a woman in the carriage, she shouted, “You are a f***ing mad f***ing dyke lesbian, you are the problem”.
Once Lindsay was sat down, she called a man who was passing in the aisle with a woman “ugly”.
Then she shouted at him, “Go away you f***ing orange ned, go away you f***ing psycho freak!” and kicked him twice for good measure.
Fiscal depute Ross Canning told the court, “The man with the woman tried to get Lindsay into her seat in an attempt to diffuse the situation. From the seated position, she kicked the man twice but there was no injury”.
The court heard how Lindsay, from Glasgow, shared her thoughts with her fellow passengers for the duration of the journey, telling one rubbernecker, “You getting a f***ing hard on for it, aye?”
Lindsay pled guilty to behaving in a threatening or abusive manner aggravated by prejudice related to sexual orientation, and to assault.
Her lawyer said she had consumed alcohol while on medication because “there was social pressure on her to drink” at the party, and that it “went to her head”.
He said his client had “no recollection” of going full ned and that “She cannot express more regret than she feels and is utterly ashamed by her conduct. She bitterly regrets her actions”.
In further mitigation, the court heard that the man she kicked had called her an “old skank”, which may explain why she was only fined £640.
I think it’s time for King Charles to get on a plane to meet Trump and intercede on behalf of Ukraine. It would appeal to Trump’s vanity and we know he listens to the last person he speaks to. I think if there is anyone in the world who could sway Trump’s tiny mind then the King has the best chance - Christ even take one for Ukraine by dangling an honorary knighthood should Trump get a peace deal that favours Ukraine.
Surely he shouldn't be getting involved in politics.
Yes and Trump won't give a peace deal that favours Ukraine, best he can be persuaded to do is get a ceasefire on current lines and that is for Starmer and Cooper and other Nato leaders to persuade him on not the King
I am finding it very hard to get het up by the Covid report. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Yes we know that shagger was the worst possible leader in a time of crisis. But good men, better men, competent men are also just as capable of inaction when faced with "that can't be right" data.
I am more interested in what we can change next time than calling for vengeance against people who have long since been booted out of office.
I think most of us could have predicted most of that report about five years ago.
Politicians all crap, civil servants all wonderful, no lessons to learn, now write the nine-figure cheque for the lawyers writing the report please.
Now, if they could produce a report from the perspective of something like a transport accident investigation, going into detail about what led to the decisions that were made, what might be done differently next time, and with comparison of approaches taken in other countries, that one might be worth reading.
Yep - lessons can be learnt, doesn't help when you don't say what bits looking backwards could be used to implement restrictions earlier.
without that information and without knowing what else works we could well end up implement restrictions for 45 of the next 0 pandemics.
What restrictions, though ?
Face masks, for example, greatly lower the transmission rate for any respiratory virus.
Compared with even the shortest lockdown, they are a minor imposition - and in some countries just ordinary practice.
Better ventilation has similar health benefits for relatively minor costs.
The other lesson which ought to be learned was the benefit of cheap rapid tests for infection, once developed.
We wasted tens of billions on PCR 'gold standard' testing which was almost completely ineffective in changing outcomes. Cheap self-administered tests, widely adopted, could completely avoid the need for any lockdown in the future (and could have been far better used earlier in this pandemic).
I haven't read the report, but if it hasn't adopted a cost/benefit analysis as its fundamental framework, then it is a waste of time. (Apart from the necessary conformation of what a crap PM was Boris - though we didn't need to spend £200m to know that.)
The big dog that has not barked in the night time, although it might by Sunday, is the defence of Boris ‘he got the big calls right’ Johnson or the Conservative government in general – or the devolved governments. One less king across the water for Kemi to worry about.
I mentioned the anti-A/C thing in planning yesterday.
The units I use - which chill/heat the air in the room, using a liquid loop to the outside air - have a HEPA filter in them.
iirc there was some discussion here during the pandemic of filtered air for schools.
The animus against A/C in the UK is an interesting cultural thing.
I actually had a planning guy ring me up - the architect included the A/C units in the diagrams of the work we were doing, even though they are located so as not to require planning consent.
He seem upset that he couldn't stop me adding the. "Why not natural ventilation"? - I pointed out that we were including an opening roof skylight at the top of the stairs to the loft conversion, as well.
"But it's wasteful" - I pointed out that was air source and driven by solar panels. "But.... "
I got the distinct impression that if he had had the power, he would have wanted to block it.
What a complete prat.
Take a look into heat exchange ventilation, though. It pays for itself in the winter, as you don't have to rely on natural ventilation (opening a window, for instance), and prevents damp problems. Not even that expensive for domestic units, and uses very little electricity (v low speed fan).
I've got a colleague currently sticking a heat pump on an old stone built cottage. Apparently the stone acts as a good store of heat as long as it's dry, and the ventilation system required wasn't a big issue. It will complement his wood burner and oil Aga.
I think the move to heat pumps will happen rapidly in the right conditions - the government needs to do less regulating and more nudging via subsidy, tax and cheap finance, and let the market work it out.
One thing I'm starting to notice in local by-elections compared to the MRPs: All the MRPs are showing the LD vote decreasing (sometimes significantly) in their areas of strength, but increasing slightly across the rest of the country. In practice in by-elections the reverse is happening, the LDs are strengthening where they are strong and if anything losing ground where they're out of the running. Last night's results show that exactly, up in both seats in Stratford (and very narrowly second in the seat Reform picked up from the Tories), nowhere and declining in the rest.
So I think all projections currently underestimate LD seats. TBF others have been saying this - on current polls there is a swing of several points from C to LD yet seat projections are going the other way. Of course given the shortage of potential targets from the Tories and the potential gains from Labour start and stop at Sheffield Hallam that doesn't mean they'll gain many either, but surely 80 rather than 60 would be about right on current polling.
That doesn't surprise me. The Lib Dems complete focus on working particular areas means that they will attract more support - including tactical voting support - in areas where they are strong, but their typical voters are also more likely to vote tactically for other parties in areas where they are weak.
An MRP, based on the demographic factors that correlate with each party's support, would therefore be expected to spread Lib Dem support more evenly. You might expect this to apply to a degree to all parties, but it would be more pronounced for the LibDems than, say, the Tories.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he will not betray Ukraine's national interest, as he mulls over the US peace plan.
But Ukraine's president warned the next week would be very difficult for the country, as it faces the choice of losing a major partner or its dignity.
In a video statement, he said he would not let Russia accuse Ukraine of derailing any peace process as his country faces one of the most difficult moments in its history.
Ukraine will work fast and constructively with the US, Zelenskyy said, as he urged his government and the country's parliament to work together.
Zelenskyy's comments come after reports from the Reuters news agency that the US wants a framework of its peace deal signed by Thanksgiving, which is next Thursday.
Do they publish how they get from the votes cast to the final result anywhere ? Because from that notice it could be complete bollocks.
Do you really intend to defame the elections officer?
D&G will publish it if they haven't; the councils always do. But this estimable chap will explain things in words shorter than eight letters and not necessarily beginning with b - just keep an eye on him:
Lots of guys with UJs in their profile not understanding the Scottish voting system - why haven’t Reform won!? Some poor saps even reduced to asking Grok.
I've seen quite a few posts in the last week from people asking 'how do I vote?' , the polling card maybe wasn't enough of a clue. There's probably around 25% who have never voted before!
We take for granted how much more we know about the electoral system than the general population. Hurry up council and publish each stage transfers!
A lawyer working for a bank/financial institution is usually the best of humanity….
A BlackRock solicitor has been fined for shouting abuse at other passengers on a train.
Rebecca Lindsay, who qualified in Scotland in 2020, was travelling from Edinburgh to Glasgow last December after a Christmas party (which was not thrown by BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager, it pointed out to ROF).
Having partaken in the refreshments available at the event, Lindsay took a tumble in the aisle and was helped up by another passenger.
Lindsay struck up a conversation with the man before becoming “aggressive” towards him, and when another passenger asked if he was alright, Lindsay yelled at them, “Is he your boyfriend? Have you got your d**k up his a**e, is he shagging him tonight - he is up his ass”.
Turning on a woman in the carriage, she shouted, “You are a f***ing mad f***ing dyke lesbian, you are the problem”.
Once Lindsay was sat down, she called a man who was passing in the aisle with a woman “ugly”.
Then she shouted at him, “Go away you f***ing orange ned, go away you f***ing psycho freak!” and kicked him twice for good measure.
Fiscal depute Ross Canning told the court, “The man with the woman tried to get Lindsay into her seat in an attempt to diffuse the situation. From the seated position, she kicked the man twice but there was no injury”.
The court heard how Lindsay, from Glasgow, shared her thoughts with her fellow passengers for the duration of the journey, telling one rubbernecker, “You getting a f***ing hard on for it, aye?”
Lindsay pled guilty to behaving in a threatening or abusive manner aggravated by prejudice related to sexual orientation, and to assault.
Her lawyer said she had consumed alcohol while on medication because “there was social pressure on her to drink” at the party, and that it “went to her head”.
He said his client had “no recollection” of going full ned and that “She cannot express more regret than she feels and is utterly ashamed by her conduct. She bitterly regrets her actions”.
In further mitigation, the court heard that the man she kicked had called her an “old skank”, which may explain why she was only fined £640.
Good to see that women are catching up with men in the Get-Fighting-Stupid-Drunk-In-Public-And-Abuse-People front.
It is not true that drunken women are the worst thing on trains: that is easily drunken/high men being aggressive (hint: whenever you encounter such, make sure the first word out of your mouth in any reply is "no"). But it is also true that a drunken hen night posse are not pleasant to sit next to.
Do they publish how they get from the votes cast to the final result anywhere ? Because from that notice it could be complete bollocks.
Should do, the Council are just slow. From an itv border report, suggests Tories won on transfers by around 42 votes, ironically it was SNP transfers which tipped them over the line
We can see the threats from the US now. Reuters reporting that the US will stop providing weapons and intelligence support of Ukraine doesn't sign by Thanksgiving (in six days).
The loss of intelligence would hurt, but far less than agreeing to surrender would.
The loss of weaponry is an empty threat. The US has stopped supplying weapons, and their arms manufacturers won't stop selling them.
Most US-weapons are supply-limited. Certainly for the next couple of years arms production could be diverted to rebuilding US stocks. I think the US could quite easily turn off weapons supplies to Ukraine if they wanted to.
They could. But I think European re-armament has now got to the point where a sufficiently determined Europe might be able pick up the slack (certainly in something like artillery). The biggest deficit is in intelligence (satellite capacity) and communications (Starlink, etc).
There is also a c.90% probability that Trump would fold if his bluff was called.
The key armament gaps would be in interceptor missiles for Patriots and ammunition for HIMARS. And then there's a whole bunch of things that have enough US components that the US could block their export/use, like Storm Shadows. In the worst-case scenario there seems to be spare capacity in Ukraine to increase drone production, if Europe provided the cash, though.
So I agree that Ukraine could survive with sufficient European support if the US withdrew there's, but also the US does have real leverage over Ukraine.
Con gain in Dumfries and Galloway on transfers. There was also a Lib Dem hold in Stratford and Avon.
Yes, Reform won most votes on first preferences in Dumfries but the Conservatives won the seat as it was elected by STV and most SNP, Labour and LD and Green preferences went Conservative over Reform. Clear evidence now FPTP disadvantages the Tories at the moment and boosts Reform https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1991875559710667073?s=20
More the Galloway part this time HYUFD, although the SNP candidate being from Dumfries (70 plus miles away) won't have helped their cause. This result will buoy the Tories for holding Galloway and West Dumfries in 2026, as its one of the less affluent parts of Galloway, so stronger for Reform. Stewartry is more well heeled
Not sure on breakdown on prefs, let's wait and see, we do know SNP transfers have broken more to the Tories than Reform
A lawyer working for a bank/financial institution is usually the best of humanity….
A BlackRock solicitor has been fined for shouting abuse at other passengers on a train.
Rebecca Lindsay, who qualified in Scotland in 2020, was travelling from Edinburgh to Glasgow last December after a Christmas party (which was not thrown by BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager, it pointed out to ROF).
Having partaken in the refreshments available at the event, Lindsay took a tumble in the aisle and was helped up by another passenger.
Lindsay struck up a conversation with the man before becoming “aggressive” towards him, and when another passenger asked if he was alright, Lindsay yelled at them, “Is he your boyfriend? Have you got your d**k up his a**e, is he shagging him tonight - he is up his ass”.
Turning on a woman in the carriage, she shouted, “You are a f***ing mad f***ing dyke lesbian, you are the problem”.
Once Lindsay was sat down, she called a man who was passing in the aisle with a woman “ugly”.
Then she shouted at him, “Go away you f***ing orange ned, go away you f***ing psycho freak!” and kicked him twice for good measure.
Fiscal depute Ross Canning told the court, “The man with the woman tried to get Lindsay into her seat in an attempt to diffuse the situation. From the seated position, she kicked the man twice but there was no injury”.
The court heard how Lindsay, from Glasgow, shared her thoughts with her fellow passengers for the duration of the journey, telling one rubbernecker, “You getting a f***ing hard on for it, aye?”
Lindsay pled guilty to behaving in a threatening or abusive manner aggravated by prejudice related to sexual orientation, and to assault.
Her lawyer said she had consumed alcohol while on medication because “there was social pressure on her to drink” at the party, and that it “went to her head”.
He said his client had “no recollection” of going full ned and that “She cannot express more regret than she feels and is utterly ashamed by her conduct. She bitterly regrets her actions”.
In further mitigation, the court heard that the man she kicked had called her an “old skank”, which may explain why she was only fined £640.
Ah wuz mad wi the bevvy an the pills is a defence in Scots law. (I jest, probably).
TSE (surprisingly) failed to spot the somewhat backhanded comment by the Sheriff:
'Sheriff David Hall told her, “You are 35 years old with no previous convictions or outstanding matters” and that “I accept the submission that you are unlikely to be seen in court again”.'
I am finding it very hard to get het up by the Covid report. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Yes we know that shagger was the worst possible leader in a time of crisis. But good men, better men, competent men are also just as capable of inaction when faced with "that can't be right" data.
I am more interested in what we can change next time than calling for vengeance against people who have long since been booted out of office.
I think most of us could have predicted most of that report about five years ago.
Politicians all crap, civil servants all wonderful, no lessons to learn, now write the nine-figure cheque for the lawyers writing the report please.
Now, if they could produce a report from the perspective of something like a transport accident investigation, going into detail about what led to the decisions that were made, what might be done differently next time, and with comparison of approaches taken in other countries, that one might be worth reading.
Yep - lessons can be learnt, doesn't help when you don't say what bits looking backwards could be used to implement restrictions earlier.
without that information and without knowing what else works we could well end up implement restrictions for 45 of the next 0 pandemics.
What restrictions, though ?
Face masks, for example, greatly lower the transmission rate for any respiratory virus.
Compared with even the shortest lockdown, they are a minor imposition - and in some countries just ordinary practice.
Better ventilation has similar health benefits for relatively minor costs.
The other lesson which ought to be learned was the benefit of cheap rapid tests for infection, once developed.
We wasted tens of billions on PCR 'gold standard' testing which was almost completely ineffective in changing outcomes. Cheap self-administered tests, widely adopted, could completely avoid the need for any lockdown in the future (and could have been far better used earlier in this pandemic).
I haven't read the report, but if it hasn't adopted a cost/benefit analysis as its fundamental framework, then it is a waste of time. (Apart from the necessary conformation of what a crap PM was Boris - though we didn't need to spend £200m to know that.)
The big dog that has not barked in the night time, although it might by Sunday, is the defence of Boris ‘he got the big calls right’ Johnson or the Conservative government in general – or the devolved governments. One less king across the water for Kemi to worry about.
I mentioned the anti-A/C thing in planning yesterday.
The units I use - which chill/heat the air in the room, using a liquid loop to the outside air - have a HEPA filter in them.
iirc there was some discussion here during the pandemic of filtered air for schools.
The animus against A/C in the UK is an interesting cultural thing.
I actually had a planning guy ring me up - the architect included the A/C units in the diagrams of the work we were doing, even though they are located so as not to require planning consent.
He seem upset that he couldn't stop me adding the. "Why not natural ventilation"? - I pointed out that we were including an opening roof skylight at the top of the stairs to the loft conversion, as well.
"But it's wasteful" - I pointed out that was air source and driven by solar panels. "But.... "
I got the distinct impression that if he had had the power, he would have wanted to block it.
I'm not surprised. Planners tried to stop someone in a parish near me in Yorkshire Dales having a window in a barn conversion (which they couldn't refuse) ground floor room that couldn't be seen from any lawful public views. They should put slits in no more than 6 in wide. So this was bullshit mixed with anachronism. They wanted early 17thC slits from a thatched corn barn in a slated 19th C hay barn. As members we were appalled but we got them. The slits would have meant they would have had to have had the lights on all the time even the middle of summer. So we spouted green energy bullshit in return and gave then a window twice the size they asked for but with a condition they didn't use incandescent bulbs when there was sufficient natural light.
Come the revolution some of these planners are going to have one hell of a wakeup call ...
My late uncle spent 2 years battling the Lake District NPA trying to replace some rotten single glazed windows with more or less identical double glazing. This was in a cottage outside of any village and not in a heritage location.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
I could have sworn you were the person who used to like posting that amusing link ... "immigration is ruining my neighbourhood says man who can't explain why".
Bit disappointed to see you succumbing to the Reformy populist line now. It's worrying too. I'd have thought you'd be amongst the last.
Lots of guys with UJs in their profile not understanding the Scottish voting system - why haven’t Reform won!? Some poor saps even reduced to asking Grok.
Do they publish how they get from the votes cast to the final result anywhere ? Because from that notice it could be complete bollocks.
Do you really intend to defame the elections officer?
D&G will publish it if they haven't; the councils always do. But this estimable chap will explain things in words shorter than eight letters and not necessarily beginning with b - just keep an eye on him:
No, I wasn't meaning to defame anybody. What did and does surprise me is that the declaration of the result does not give the mathematical justification of the declared result by giving the stages. I guessed that would follow but am surprised it isn't published at exactly the same time as the declaration, and as part of the declaration. I really think they ought to.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
I'd like him to go as well, but you are not exactly providing us ( so far) with names outside those to whom you could apply the Mandy Rice-Davies assertion.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
I could have sworn you were the person who used to like posting that amusing link ... "immigration is ruining my neighbourhood says man who can't explain why".
Bit disappointed to see you succumbing to the Reformy populist line now. It's worrying too. I'd have thought you'd be amongst the last.
I did and do post it and I stand by it but look where we are now. Reform are top of the polls. Perhaps I was too insulated and believing (recall my magnificent "surely Reform aren't going to do well in the locals" prediction) in my own sense of what is right.
We are in a backlash phase. Which started from one T Blair's approach to EU migration, proceeded through the Boriswave and has now led to Nigel's ascendency (whatever happens at the GE - I will not be so gung ho about his lack of prospects).
One of the reasons I so welcome @Isam's return to PB is that he is able to articulate precisely this concern, and on PB of all places, and his voice has been one on which, amongst all the noise of Reform-adjacent opinions which I dismiss in a heartbeat, I place a great deal of weight. He has consistently noted how this influx of people is not something that a large number (majority? Look at the Reform polling, who knows) has agreed with and have not had the opportunity to vote against. They did with Brexit, which I believe was as much general dissatisfaction with their (economic) lives, and may well be about to do the same again with Reform where the focus has been and will continue to be immigration.
I don't agree with it but I don't think I have ever dismissed it (thanks again @Isam) as a concern.
Do they publish how they get from the votes cast to the final result anywhere ? Because from that notice it could be complete bollocks.
Do you really intend to defame the elections officer?
D&G will publish it if they haven't; the councils always do. But this estimable chap will explain things in words shorter than eight letters and not necessarily beginning with b - just keep an eye on him:
No, I wasn't meaning to defame anybody. What did and does surprise me is that the declaration of the result does not give the mathematical justification of the declared result by giving the stages. I guessed that would follow but am surprised it isn't published at exactly the same time as the declaration, and as part of the declaration. I really think they ought to.
Ballot Box Scotland now has the stage results ... Reform led at every stage until the SNP transfers were added at the end. It does look like every eliminated party were slightly more transfer friendly to the Tories than Reform, bar the Heritage party candidate.
That took a Reform lead of around 38 and turned into a Tory gain by 42 votes. It's a complex system but the decision is to use STV in Council by elections as well as when the whole council is up for election. So you can end up with wards which have 3 or 4 members and all (or almost all) are from one party.
In Stranraer & Rhins, 2 sitting Tory councillors defected to form their own party in June, the election was due to the retiral of an independent
I think it’s time for King Charles to get on a plane to meet Trump and intercede on behalf of Ukraine. It would appeal to Trump’s vanity and we know he listens to the last person he speaks to. I think if there is anyone in the world who could sway Trump’s tiny mind then the King has the best chance - Christ even take one for Ukraine by dangling an honorary knighthood should Trump get a peace deal that favours Ukraine.
Surely he shouldn't be getting involved in politics.
Do they publish how they get from the votes cast to the final result anywhere ? Because from that notice it could be complete bollocks.
Do you really intend to defame the elections officer?
D&G will publish it if they haven't; the councils always do. But this estimable chap will explain things in words shorter than eight letters and not necessarily beginning with b - just keep an eye on him:
No, I wasn't meaning to defame anybody. What did and does surprise me is that the declaration of the result does not give the mathematical justification of the declared result by giving the stages. I guessed that would follow but am surprised it isn't published at exactly the same time as the declaration, and as part of the declaration. I really think they ought to.
Fair enough on the first!
It can be very complex and I expect they want to check carefully - IIRC there are potentially almost as many stages as there are candidates and if the likes of the Orange Order, Lord Binface, Independents, Scottish Family Party, etc.) join in ...
I've been looking on social media to see if anyone on the left of politics has described Gill's sentence as a bit harsh.
No luck so far.
Might that be because it is scrupulously fair. Lord HawHaw was hanged back in the day.
The only man to be hanged for lying on a passport application; a penalty that many in Reform would no doubt welcome.
Do we hang people for passport fraud? Because I can think of one culprit...
It was high treason, of course. But, as an American citizen with Irish parents, Haw-Haw/Joyce only had a British passport as a result of a fraudulant application, and could not have been convicted had he not lied on the application form (he may have been guilty of other offences but you can't betray a country to which you do not, in fact, owe allegiance).
It may help with accuracy on the forms if the Passport Office pointed out that, if anything is incorrect, you just might be executed based on this precedent.
Lots of guys with UJs in their profile not understanding the Scottish voting system - why haven’t Reform won!? Some poor saps even reduced to asking Grok.
Having looked at the available detail on the Trump surrender plan, one thing that strikes me is that, if Trump were a straightforward Russian asset he would be content to receive his payoff in private. But the plan includes two provisions which are very Trumpian. The US is to be paid for providing Ukraine security guarantees. And the US is to receive 50% of the profits from a Ukraine Reconstruction Fund that is capitalised 50:50 by frozen Russian assets and the Europeans.
Trump really likes receiving his payoff in public so that he can brag about it.
Do they publish how they get from the votes cast to the final result anywhere ? Because from that notice it could be complete bollocks.
Do you really intend to defame the elections officer?
D&G will publish it if they haven't; the councils always do. But this estimable chap will explain things in words shorter than eight letters and not necessarily beginning with b - just keep an eye on him:
No, I wasn't meaning to defame anybody. What did and does surprise me is that the declaration of the result does not give the mathematical justification of the declared result by giving the stages. I guessed that would follow but am surprised it isn't published at exactly the same time as the declaration, and as part of the declaration. I really think they ought to.
Fair enough on the first!
It can be very complex and I expect they want to check carefully - IIRC there are potentially almost as many stages as there are candidates and if the likes of the Orange Order, Lord Binface, Independents, Scottish Family Party, etc.) join in ...
It was also close enough to need several rounds of transfers to get an overall winner.
Do they publish how they get from the votes cast to the final result anywhere ? Because from that notice it could be complete bollocks.
Do you really intend to defame the elections officer?
D&G will publish it if they haven't; the councils always do. But this estimable chap will explain things in words shorter than eight letters and not necessarily beginning with b - just keep an eye on him:
No, I wasn't meaning to defame anybody. What did and does surprise me is that the declaration of the result does not give the mathematical justification of the declared result by giving the stages. I guessed that would follow but am surprised it isn't published at exactly the same time as the declaration, and as part of the declaration. I really think they ought to.
Ballot Box Scotland now has the stage results ... Reform led at every stage until the SNP transfers were added at the end. It does look like every eliminated party were slightly more transfer friendly to the Tories than Reform, bar the Heritage party candidate.
That took a Reform lead of around 38 and turned into a Tory gain by 42 votes. It's a complex system but the decision is to use STV in Council by elections as well as when the whole council is up for election. So you can end up with wards which have 3 or 4 members and all (or almost all) are from one party.
In Stranraer & Rhins, 2 sitting Tory councillors defected to form their own party in June, the election was due to the retiral of an independent
So SNP voters won it for the Tory candidate, the rise of Reform is now making some extremely unexpected alliances, even SNP and Tory it seems on occasion!
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
Do they publish how they get from the votes cast to the final result anywhere ? Because from that notice it could be complete bollocks.
Do you really intend to defame the elections officer?
D&G will publish it if they haven't; the councils always do. But this estimable chap will explain things in words shorter than eight letters and not necessarily beginning with b - just keep an eye on him:
No, I wasn't meaning to defame anybody. What did and does surprise me is that the declaration of the result does not give the mathematical justification of the declared result by giving the stages. I guessed that would follow but am surprised it isn't published at exactly the same time as the declaration, and as part of the declaration. I really think they ought to.
Ballot Box Scotland now has the stage results ... Reform led at every stage until the SNP transfers were added at the end. It does look like every eliminated party were slightly more transfer friendly to the Tories than Reform, bar the Heritage party candidate.
That took a Reform lead of around 38 and turned into a Tory gain by 42 votes. It's a complex system but the decision is to use STV in Council by elections as well as when the whole council is up for election. So you can end up with wards which have 3 or 4 members and all (or almost all) are from one party.
In Stranraer & Rhins, 2 sitting Tory councillors defected to form their own party in June, the election was due to the retiral of an independent
So SNP voters won it for the Tory candidate, the rise of Reform is now making some extremely unexpected alliances, even SNP and Tory it seems on occasion!
Mm, pretty narrow margin too. Though you don't actually have to use all your votes. No need to vote for Reform at all, even if it is your last vote. I wonder how many people made that mistake? Edit: seriously.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
A few years ago, friends of ours from New Zealand brought their kids to Europe for a holiday. They had lived in London in the late 90s/early 2000s. They went back to Maida Vale where they'd lived and they thought that area felt quite different.
Having looked at the available detail on the Trump surrender plan, one thing that strikes me is that, if Trump were a straightforward Russian asset he would be content to receive his payoff in private. But the plan includes two provisions which are very Trumpian. The US is to be paid for providing Ukraine security guarantees. And the US is to receive 50% of the profits from a Ukraine Reconstruction Fund that is capitalised 50:50 by frozen Russian assets and the Europeans.
Trump really likes receiving his payoff in public so that he can brag about it.
I’d like to think Trump’s need to brag about his great dubious deals might be the downfall of the fat, crooked fkker, but so far, so not so good.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he will not betray Ukraine's national interest, as he mulls over the US peace plan.
But Ukraine's president warned the next week would be very difficult for the country, as it faces the choice of losing a major partner or its dignity.
In a video statement, he said he would not let Russia accuse Ukraine of derailing any peace process as his country faces one of the most difficult moments in its history.
Ukraine will work fast and constructively with the US, Zelenskyy said, as he urged his government and the country's parliament to work together.
Zelenskyy's comments come after reports from the Reuters news agency that the US wants a framework of its peace deal signed by Thanksgiving, which is next Thursday.
And the wankers are still trying to gaslight us on the shameful details.
Reporter: You said this is a good plan. So according to our sources, this proposal demands major concessions of Ukraine and doesn't demand much from Russia.
Do they publish how they get from the votes cast to the final result anywhere ? Because from that notice it could be complete bollocks.
Do you really intend to defame the elections officer?
D&G will publish it if they haven't; the councils always do. But this estimable chap will explain things in words shorter than eight letters and not necessarily beginning with b - just keep an eye on him:
No, I wasn't meaning to defame anybody. What did and does surprise me is that the declaration of the result does not give the mathematical justification of the declared result by giving the stages. I guessed that would follow but am surprised it isn't published at exactly the same time as the declaration, and as part of the declaration. I really think they ought to.
Ballot Box Scotland now has the stage results ... Reform led at every stage until the SNP transfers were added at the end. It does look like every eliminated party were slightly more transfer friendly to the Tories than Reform, bar the Heritage party candidate.
That took a Reform lead of around 38 and turned into a Tory gain by 42 votes. It's a complex system but the decision is to use STV in Council by elections as well as when the whole council is up for election. So you can end up with wards which have 3 or 4 members and all (or almost all) are from one party.
In Stranraer & Rhins, 2 sitting Tory councillors defected to form their own party in June, the election was due to the retiral of an independent
So SNP voters won it for the Tory candidate, the rise of Reform is now making some extremely unexpected alliances, even SNP and Tory it seems on occasion!
It's happened to the Tories several times in Scottish council by elections, now it seems like Reform are the least transfer friendly party
I'm sure Russell Findlay will thank John Swinney at FMQs next week for the favour to get his new councillor elected!
We can see the threats from the US now. Reuters reporting that the US will stop providing weapons and intelligence support of Ukraine doesn't sign by Thanksgiving (in six days).
The loss of intelligence would hurt, but far less than agreeing to surrender would.
The loss of weaponry is an empty threat. The US has stopped supplying weapons, and their arms manufacturers won't stop selling them.
Most US-weapons are supply-limited. Certainly for the next couple of years arms production could be diverted to rebuilding US stocks. I think the US could quite easily turn off weapons supplies to Ukraine if they wanted to.
They could. But I think European re-armament has now got to the point where a sufficiently determined Europe might be able pick up the slack (certainly in something like artillery). The biggest deficit is in intelligence (satellite capacity) and communications (Starlink, etc).
There is also a c.90% probability that Trump would fold if his bluff was called.
The key armament gaps would be in interceptor missiles for Patriots and ammunition for HIMARS. And then there's a whole bunch of things that have enough US components that the US could block their export/use, like Storm Shadows. In the worst-case scenario there seems to be spare capacity in Ukraine to increase drone production, if Europe provided the cash, though.
So I agree that Ukraine could survive with sufficient European support if the US withdrew there's, but also the US does have real leverage over Ukraine.
Of course it does. But how much leverage depends on Europe.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
I could have sworn you were the person who used to like posting that amusing link ... "immigration is ruining my neighbourhood says man who can't explain why".
Bit disappointed to see you succumbing to the Reformy populist line now. It's worrying too. I'd have thought you'd be amongst the last.
I did and do post it and I stand by it but look where we are now. Reform are top of the polls. Perhaps I was too insulated and believing (recall my magnificent "surely Reform aren't going to do well in the locals" prediction) in my own sense of what is right.
We are in a backlash phase. Which started from one T Blair's approach to EU migration, proceeded through the Boriswave and has now led to Nigel's ascendency (whatever happens at the GE - I will not be so gung ho about his lack of prospects).
One of the reasons I so welcome @Isam's return to PB is that he is able to articulate precisely this concern, and on PB of all places, and his voice has been one on which, amongst all the noise of Reform-adjacent opinions which I dismiss in a heartbeat, I place a great deal of weight. He has consistently noted how this influx of people is not something that a large number (majority? Look at the Reform polling, who knows) has agreed with and have not had the opportunity to vote against. They did with Brexit, which I believe was as much general dissatisfaction with their (economic) lives, and may well be about to do the same again with Reform where the focus has been and will continue to be immigration.
I don't agree with it but I don't think I have ever dismissed it (thanks again @Isam) as a concern.
Fair enough. It most certainly is driving our politics atm. No argument there. But it's rather convenient how you can exempt yourself from being 'dismissive' despite posting lots of comments mocking anti-immigrant sentiment whereas similar from me is granted no such largesse. Fwiw I don't assume everybody voicing opposition to immigration is doing so for grubby reasons or out of ignorance. I take things case by case. Try my best to anyway.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
None that I frequent. That's probably the point.
Fair enough.
I find that when people talk about legitimate concerns, they often can't actually point to specific neighbourhoods and changes, which leads me to conclude that maybe they don't have legitimate concerns. London is very different to how it was when I was born, for all sorts of different reasons. I'd point to technological changes as being a big factor. In terms specifically of "feeling dislocated", it's house prices that are a problem, meaning it's difficult for younger people to buy in the neighbourhood where they grew up (and there's less social housing available). But when people talk about "changing character", that often doesn't actually seem to connect with any real change... although I do recall one friend commenting on the changing character of Clapton because a lot of Poles had moved in to the area, and how they'd made it much nicer.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he will not betray Ukraine's national interest, as he mulls over the US peace plan.
But Ukraine's president warned the next week would be very difficult for the country, as it faces the choice of losing a major partner or its dignity.
In a video statement, he said he would not let Russia accuse Ukraine of derailing any peace process as his country faces one of the most difficult moments in its history.
Ukraine will work fast and constructively with the US, Zelenskyy said, as he urged his government and the country's parliament to work together.
Zelenskyy's comments come after reports from the Reuters news agency that the US wants a framework of its peace deal signed by Thanksgiving, which is next Thursday.
And the wankers are still trying to gaslight us on the shameful details.
Reporter: You said this is a good plan. So according to our sources, this proposal demands major concessions of Ukraine and doesn't demand much from Russia.
Why the hell should Ukraine give up Land to Russia that Russia has not been able to take in 4 years, let along give up Other land. I don’t get it. You’re rewarding aggression and what’s next ?
Mind you the corruption scandal isn’t helping Zelenskyy even though he seems an innocent party
A lawyer working for a bank/financial institution is usually the best of humanity….
A BlackRock solicitor has been fined for shouting abuse at other passengers on a train.
Rebecca Lindsay, who qualified in Scotland in 2020, was travelling from Edinburgh to Glasgow last December after a Christmas party (which was not thrown by BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager, it pointed out to ROF).
Having partaken in the refreshments available at the event, Lindsay took a tumble in the aisle and was helped up by another passenger.
Lindsay struck up a conversation with the man before becoming “aggressive” towards him, and when another passenger asked if he was alright, Lindsay yelled at them, “Is he your boyfriend? Have you got your d**k up his a**e, is he shagging him tonight - he is up his ass”.
Turning on a woman in the carriage, she shouted, “You are a f***ing mad f***ing dyke lesbian, you are the problem”.
Once Lindsay was sat down, she called a man who was passing in the aisle with a woman “ugly”.
Then she shouted at him, “Go away you f***ing orange ned, go away you f***ing psycho freak!” and kicked him twice for good measure.
Fiscal depute Ross Canning told the court, “The man with the woman tried to get Lindsay into her seat in an attempt to diffuse the situation. From the seated position, she kicked the man twice but there was no injury”.
The court heard how Lindsay, from Glasgow, shared her thoughts with her fellow passengers for the duration of the journey, telling one rubbernecker, “You getting a f***ing hard on for it, aye?”
Lindsay pled guilty to behaving in a threatening or abusive manner aggravated by prejudice related to sexual orientation, and to assault.
Her lawyer said she had consumed alcohol while on medication because “there was social pressure on her to drink” at the party, and that it “went to her head”.
He said his client had “no recollection” of going full ned and that “She cannot express more regret than she feels and is utterly ashamed by her conduct. She bitterly regrets her actions”.
In further mitigation, the court heard that the man she kicked had called her an “old skank”, which may explain why she was only fined £640.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he will not betray Ukraine's national interest, as he mulls over the US peace plan.
But Ukraine's president warned the next week would be very difficult for the country, as it faces the choice of losing a major partner or its dignity.
In a video statement, he said he would not let Russia accuse Ukraine of derailing any peace process as his country faces one of the most difficult moments in its history.
Ukraine will work fast and constructively with the US, Zelenskyy said, as he urged his government and the country's parliament to work together.
Zelenskyy's comments come after reports from the Reuters news agency that the US wants a framework of its peace deal signed by Thanksgiving, which is next Thursday.
And the wankers are still trying to gaslight us on the shameful details.
Reporter: You said this is a good plan. So according to our sources, this proposal demands major concessions of Ukraine and doesn't demand much from Russia.
Why the hell should Ukraine give up Land to Russia that Russia has not been able to take in 4 years, let along give up Other land. I don’t get it. You’re rewarding aggression and what’s next ?
Mind you the corruption scandal isn’t helping Zelenskyy even though he seems an innocent party
Ukraine is at war, surely the solution for the corruption scandal is to line those guilty of corruption against a wall and shoot those responsible
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
Loads of areas have changed significantly. Kings Cross from red light district with petty crime to tourist and commercial, Shoreditch from forgotten to hipster and many more. But there has always been change in London, the idea that it ever stayed the same from grand parents to grand childrens generations is the myth here.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
I could have sworn you were the person who used to like posting that amusing link ... "immigration is ruining my neighbourhood says man who can't explain why".
Bit disappointed to see you succumbing to the Reformy populist line now. It's worrying too. I'd have thought you'd be amongst the last.
I did and do post it and I stand by it but look where we are now. Reform are top of the polls. Perhaps I was too insulated and believing (recall my magnificent "surely Reform aren't going to do well in the locals" prediction) in my own sense of what is right.
We are in a backlash phase. Which started from one T Blair's approach to EU migration, proceeded through the Boriswave and has now led to Nigel's ascendency (whatever happens at the GE - I will not be so gung ho about his lack of prospects).
One of the reasons I so welcome @Isam's return to PB is that he is able to articulate precisely this concern, and on PB of all places, and his voice has been one on which, amongst all the noise of Reform-adjacent opinions which I dismiss in a heartbeat, I place a great deal of weight. He has consistently noted how this influx of people is not something that a large number (majority? Look at the Reform polling, who knows) has agreed with and have not had the opportunity to vote against. They did with Brexit, which I believe was as much general dissatisfaction with their (economic) lives, and may well be about to do the same again with Reform where the focus has been and will continue to be immigration.
I don't agree with it but I don't think I have ever dismissed it (thanks again @Isam) as a concern.
Fair enough. It most certainly is driving our politics atm. No argument there. But it's rather convenient how you can exempt yourself from being 'dismissive' despite posting lots of comments mocking anti-immigrant sentiment whereas similar from me is granted no such largesse. Fwiw I don't assume everybody voicing opposition to immigration is doing so for grubby reasons or out of ignorance. I take things case by case. Try my best to anyway.
There are two issues/audiences here. There is PB and there is the real world.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
I lived and worked for a while just off the Kings Road and it was fun. Later I lived and worked in Soho which was also fun though quite different. If I had seen three girls peeing together in Sloane Square as I did on Dean St it would have been an unpleasant surprise but in Soho that was what made it what it was and why people came from far and wide to enjoy the local colour!
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
Loads of areas have changed significantly. Kings Cross from red light district with petty crime to tourist and commercial, Shoreditch from forgotten to hipster and many more. But there has always been change in London, the idea that it ever stayed the same from grand parents to grand childrens generations is the myth here.
We used to have a correspondent who could have reported from Camden on how it had ceased to be squats.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
None that I frequent. That's probably the point.
Like that link you used to post! It wasn't you, was it.
The Gill conviction should be good for the Tories.
Why ?
Does anyone outside of politics obsessives care ?
It's quite big, senior British politician in the pay of Putin's Russia. I'd hope it would have some cut through.
No-one cared when the PM had all sorts of connections to Putin's Russia, including dropping his security team to "party" with them off the record. So pretty safe to say no-one will care now either.
I'd like him to go as well, but you are not exactly providing us ( so far) with names outside those to whom you could apply the Mandy Rice-Davies assertion.
Like with Reeves, who replaces him and will they improve things. Starmer is utterly useless. Liz Truss levels. But who is any better in Labour ? I cannot see anyone and the other parties are even worse.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
Loads of areas have changed significantly. Kings Cross from red light district with petty crime to tourist and commercial, Shoreditch from forgotten to hipster and many more. But there has always been change in London, the idea that it ever stayed the same from grand parents to grand childrens generations is the myth here.
Indeed, but is TOPPING, or whoever, complaining about those particular examples of changed character?
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
Loads of areas have changed significantly. Kings Cross from red light district with petty crime to tourist and commercial, Shoreditch from forgotten to hipster and many more. But there has always been change in London, the idea that it ever stayed the same from grand parents to grand childrens generations is the myth here.
Londons a world city. My area has gentrified a fair bit though remains a little tatty, has got older (partly as a result of that gentrification), has seen huge construction of high rise residential blocks (of variable quality but better than the wasteland they replaced), has changed ethnically from largely white British and black British/Caribbean with a smattering of South Asian and HK Chinese, to a veritable United Nations with large groups of French, Vietnamese, Chinese, West Africans (Anglophone and Francophone), Somalis, Americans, Poles, Turkish Cypriots, you name it. Is it better or worse than before? It’s certainly better maintained, but it’s very much recognisably the same Lewisham it was when I first came here in 1998. Some things haven’t changed at all, like New Cross Gate Sainsburys.
Having looked at the available detail on the Trump surrender plan, one thing that strikes me is that, if Trump were a straightforward Russian asset he would be content to receive his payoff in private. But the plan includes two provisions which are very Trumpian. The US is to be paid for providing Ukraine security guarantees. And the US is to receive 50% of the profits from a Ukraine Reconstruction Fund that is capitalised 50:50 by frozen Russian assets and the Europeans.
Trump really likes receiving his payoff in public so that he can brag about it.
Yes. I don't place much credence in the idea that Trump is a Russian 'asset' in that sense. It's fanciful. He is however the next best thing from their pov. Onboard with their worldview and easy to manipulate.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
Loads of areas have changed significantly. Kings Cross from red light district with petty crime to tourist and commercial, Shoreditch from forgotten to hipster and many more. But there has always been change in London, the idea that it ever stayed the same from grand parents to grand childrens generations is the myth here.
Indeed, but is TOPPING, or whoever, complaining about those particular examples of changed character?
It will be mostly be Islamification in Mile End, Romford etc. That is also true and causes problems for some. But immigrants arriving in London and moving outwards over generations is again nothing new.
BREAKING: President Zelenskyy addressed Ukrainians from outside his presidencial office in Kyiv and told them the county is facing “one of the most difficult moments in our history” as its biggest ally presses it into a deal with the nation that has fought to destroy it for 11 years.
“Now the pressure on Ukraine is one of the most difficult. Now Ukraine may find itself facing a very difficult choice - either the loss of dignity, or the risk of losing a key partner. Either [the Trump administration] 28 points, or an extremely difficult winter, the most difficult and further risks. Life without freedom, without dignity, without justice and for us to believe the one who has attacked twice already. They will expect an answer from us.”
BREAKING: President Zelenskyy addressed Ukrainians from outside his presidencial office in Kyiv and told them the county is facing “one of the most difficult moments in our history” as its biggest ally presses it into a deal with the nation that has fought to destroy it for 11 years.
“Now the pressure on Ukraine is one of the most difficult. Now Ukraine may find itself facing a very difficult choice - either the loss of dignity, or the risk of losing a key partner. Either [the Trump administration] 28 points, or an extremely difficult winter, the most difficult and further risks. Life without freedom, without dignity, without justice and for us to believe the one who has attacked twice already. They will expect an answer from us.”
BREAKING: President Zelenskyy addressed Ukrainians from outside his presidencial office in Kyiv and told them the county is facing “one of the most difficult moments in our history” as its biggest ally presses it into a deal with the nation that has fought to destroy it for 11 years.
“Now the pressure on Ukraine is one of the most difficult. Now Ukraine may find itself facing a very difficult choice - either the loss of dignity, or the risk of losing a key partner. Either [the Trump administration] 28 points, or an extremely difficult winter, the most difficult and further risks. Life without freedom, without dignity, without justice and for us to believe the one who has attacked twice already. They will expect an answer from us.”
Ukraine has really had a shitty time of it. One of the most dumped-on nations in history.
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet vote sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as an incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
As someone who was born in London and lived most of my life here, may I ask what specific bit of London do you feel has significantly changed character in recent years, and in what way?
Loads of areas have changed significantly. Kings Cross from red light district with petty crime to tourist and commercial, Shoreditch from forgotten to hipster and many more. But there has always been change in London, the idea that it ever stayed the same from grand parents to grand childrens generations is the myth here.
Indeed, but is TOPPING, or whoever, complaining about those particular examples of changed character?
It will be mostly be Islamification in Mile End, Romford etc. That is also true and causes problems for some. But immigrants arriving in London and moving outwards over generations is again nothing new.
It's essentially a rerun of 'rivers of blood' but this time it's about Muslims rather than non-white people from the Commonwealth.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
And all those tall buildings. Scary.
Did the packs of rabid urban foxes, and Hitchcockian bird flu-infested parakeets and ornamental geese, get a look in?
Lol, I imagine so.
The 'London is terrible' meme has been around for as long as can remember. Three drivers, I'd say:
1. Backdoor envy. It means 'wish I could live there'. 2. Parochial xenophobia. It means 'multicultural equals shithole'. 3. Ageing. It means 'I'm too old for all that'.
Number 2 is what I think is behind it when it's coming from the Populist Right.
There is a legitimate concern in some part of London of neighbourhoods' character changing. "White flight" as I believe it is called. Now, don't get me wrong. Walking down the Costa del Sol there's nothing I like better than a row of Spoons, Harry Ramsden's chippies, and sports bars showing Coventry vs Stoke on its five TV screens, but some say that it is an okay thing to want to preserve the character (ofc people vary on their choice of T= 0).
From my perspective, I don't mind if leafy suburbs, previously the preserve of the intelligentsia and literary types, are opened up to loadsamoney oiks who've made it in the City but you have to understand how some people think.
Can't fault you for effort on that one.
Nor I for your whole "fitting in to NW3" effort.
You seem to be bristling at something. Cmon spit it out.
I am bristling at the fact that imposters such as you - and I mention this only because I appreciate that, as incomers yourself, you feel exposed - don't allow yourseves to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns over the changing character of some neighbourhoods.
Now, you won't find a greater fan of London than me but as mentioned earlier, that is probably because I am insulated from some of the issues that others face (although I did see in spitting distance not so long ago, a phone being snatched out of the hand of some rugger bugger on Sloane Square if you can imagine it). I don't need to worry about the changing face of my neighbourhood or of feeling dislocated from somewhere that might previously have been homogenous in its character, or more homogenous.
We are in this pickle rn with Reform riding high precisely because of people like you who have chosen to dismiss any concern as invalid. Had there been more of an understanding of those concerns we would all be getting on with worrying about the tax status of a Jaffa Cake rather than immigration dominating the political discourse (crystalised most clearly to many in London).
Is why I'm bristling. Because it's your fault.
I could have sworn you were the person who used to like posting that amusing link ... "immigration is ruining my neighbourhood says man who can't explain why".
Bit disappointed to see you succumbing to the Reformy populist line now. It's worrying too. I'd have thought you'd be amongst the last.
I did and do post it and I stand by it but look where we are now. Reform are top of the polls. Perhaps I was too insulated and believing (recall my magnificent "surely Reform aren't going to do well in the locals" prediction) in my own sense of what is right.
We are in a backlash phase. Which started from one T Blair's approach to EU migration, proceeded through the Boriswave and has now led to Nigel's ascendency (whatever happens at the GE - I will not be so gung ho about his lack of prospects).
One of the reasons I so welcome @Isam's return to PB is that he is able to articulate precisely this concern, and on PB of all places, and his voice has been one on which, amongst all the noise of Reform-adjacent opinions which I dismiss in a heartbeat, I place a great deal of weight. He has consistently noted how this influx of people is not something that a large number (majority? Look at the Reform polling, who knows) has agreed with and have not had the opportunity to vote against. They did with Brexit, which I believe was as much general dissatisfaction with their (economic) lives, and may well be about to do the same again with Reform where the focus has been and will continue to be immigration.
I don't agree with it but I don't think I have ever dismissed it (thanks again @Isam) as a concern.
Fair enough. It most certainly is driving our politics atm. No argument there. But it's rather convenient how you can exempt yourself from being 'dismissive' despite posting lots of comments mocking anti-immigrant sentiment whereas similar from me is granted no such largesse. Fwiw I don't assume everybody voicing opposition to immigration is doing so for grubby reasons or out of ignorance. I take things case by case. Try my best to anyway.
There are two issues/audiences here. There is PB and there is the real world.
The Gill conviction should be good for the Tories.
Why ?
Does anyone outside of politics obsessives care ?
It's quite big, senior British politician in the pay of Putin's Russia. I'd hope it would have some cut through.
No-one cared when the PM had all sorts of connections to Putin's Russia, including dropping his security team to "party" with them off the record. So pretty safe to say no-one will care now either.
Bit more direct this though. Easy to grasp. Court conviction. Long sentence.
Comments
I think the move to heat pumps will happen rapidly in the right conditions - the government needs to do less regulating and more nudging via subsidy, tax and cheap finance, and let the market work it out.
An MRP, based on the demographic factors that correlate with each party's support, would therefore be expected to spread Lib Dem support more evenly. You might expect this to apply to a degree to all parties, but it would be more pronounced for the LibDems than, say, the Tories.
But Ukraine's president warned the next week would be very difficult for the country, as it faces the choice of losing a major partner or its dignity.
In a video statement, he said he would not let Russia accuse Ukraine of derailing any peace process as his country faces one of the most difficult moments in its history.
Ukraine will work fast and constructively with the US, Zelenskyy said, as he urged his government and the country's parliament to work together.
Zelenskyy's comments come after reports from the Reuters news agency that the US wants a framework of its peace deal signed by Thanksgiving, which is next Thursday.
https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-war-latest-trumps-peace-plan-revealed-in-full-but-zelenskyy-says-his-team-must-check-its-genuine-12541713
D&G will publish it if they haven't; the councils always do. But this estimable chap will explain things in words shorter than eight letters and not necessarily beginning with b - just keep an eye on him:
https://bsky.app/profile/ballotbox.scot
https://ballotbox.scot/
We take for granted how much more we know about the electoral system than the general population. Hurry up council and publish each stage transfers!
So I agree that Ukraine could survive with sufficient European support if the US withdrew there's, but also the US does have real leverage over Ukraine.
Not sure on breakdown on prefs, let's wait and see, we do know SNP transfers have broken more to the Tories than Reform
'Sheriff David Hall told her, “You are 35 years old with no previous convictions or outstanding matters” and that “I accept the submission that you are unlikely to be seen in court again”.'
The tenants must have had a fun heating bill.
Bit disappointed to see you succumbing to the Reformy populist line now. It's worrying too. I'd have thought you'd be amongst the last.
We are in a backlash phase. Which started from one T Blair's approach to EU migration, proceeded through the Boriswave and has now led to Nigel's ascendency (whatever happens at the GE - I will not be so gung ho about his lack of prospects).
One of the reasons I so welcome @Isam's return to PB is that he is able to articulate precisely this concern, and on PB of all places, and his voice has been one on which, amongst all the noise of Reform-adjacent opinions which I dismiss in a heartbeat, I place a great deal of weight. He has consistently noted how this influx of people is not something that a large number (majority? Look at the Reform polling, who knows) has agreed with and have not had the opportunity to vote against. They did with Brexit, which I believe was as much general dissatisfaction with their (economic) lives, and may well be about to do the same again with Reform where the focus has been and will continue to be immigration.
I don't agree with it but I don't think I have ever dismissed it (thanks again @Isam) as a concern.
That took a Reform lead of around 38 and turned into a Tory gain by 42 votes. It's a complex system but the decision is to use STV in Council by elections as well as when the whole council is up for election. So you can end up with wards which have 3 or 4 members and all (or almost all) are from one party.
In Stranraer & Rhins, 2 sitting Tory councillors defected to form their own party in June, the election was due to the retiral of an independent
It can be very complex and I expect they want to check carefully - IIRC there are potentially almost as many stages as there are candidates and if the likes of the Orange Order, Lord Binface, Independents, Scottish Family Party, etc.) join in ...
It may help with accuracy on the forms if the Passport Office pointed out that, if anything is incorrect, you just might be executed based on this precedent.
Trump really likes receiving his payoff in public so that he can brag about it.
Reporter: You said this is a good plan. So according to our sources, this proposal demands major concessions of Ukraine and doesn't demand much from Russia.
Leavitt: Your understanding is wrong. Have you read the full plan?
https://x.com/PolymarketIntel/status/1991738544973574300
I'm sure Russell Findlay will thank John Swinney at FMQs next week for the favour to get his new councillor elected!
https://www.stratford.gov.uk/
I knew this because SonA kettles came from S(tratford) on A(von).
But how much leverage depends on Europe.
I find that when people talk about legitimate concerns, they often can't actually point to specific neighbourhoods and changes, which leads me to conclude that maybe they don't have legitimate concerns. London is very different to how it was when I was born, for all sorts of different reasons. I'd point to technological changes as being a big factor. In terms specifically of "feeling dislocated", it's house prices that are a problem, meaning it's difficult for younger people to buy in the neighbourhood where they grew up (and there's less social housing available). But when people talk about "changing character", that often doesn't actually seem to connect with any real change... although I do recall one friend commenting on the changing character of Clapton because a lot of Poles had moved in to the area, and how they'd made it much nicer.
Land to Russia that Russia has not been able to take in 4 years, let along give up
Other land. I don’t get it. You’re rewarding aggression and what’s next ?
Mind you the corruption scandal isn’t helping Zelenskyy even though he seems an innocent party
Does anyone outside of politics obsessives care ?
https://stratford-tc.gov.uk
BREAKING: President Zelenskyy addressed Ukrainians from outside his presidencial office in Kyiv and told them the county is facing “one of the most difficult moments in our history” as its biggest ally presses it into a deal with the nation that has fought to destroy it for 11 years.
“Now the pressure on Ukraine is one of the most difficult. Now Ukraine may find itself facing a very difficult choice - either the loss of dignity, or the risk of losing a key partner. Either [the Trump administration] 28 points, or an extremely difficult winter, the most difficult and further risks. Life without freedom, without dignity, without justice and for us to believe the one who has attacked twice already. They will expect an answer from us.”
https://x.com/ChristopherJM/status/1991887141090054644?s=20
Breaking: Independent Alliance MP Iqbal Mohamed has quit Your Party. That's two of the five Independent Alliance MPs who have now left the project.
https://x.com/meganekenyon/status/1991887998494163305?s=20
NEW THREAD
Decimated by deliberate famine under Stalin, one of the biggest sources of war dead in WW2, under the Soviet yoke for decades culminating in bearing the brunt of the Chernobyl tragedy, run like a Mafia state post independence by a series of the most corrupt governments anywhere in the post Soviet vote sphere, then ground down by Russian aggression for a decade, subject to a bloody and ruinous invasion, and now sold down the river for money by the USA.
https://youtu.be/IOi7um5PtMY?si=JaOGUmPcZrb_8f81