A bit of a vote

[RedRooster]

As they say it's not the falling that hurts it's the landing. 

I'm in two minds about your election, just voting in Labour because they are not the Tories seems to me to be leaving yourself wide open. Just saying.. 

RR

[Nick Jones]

56 minutes ago, RedRooster said:

I'm in two minds about your election, just voting in Labour because they are not the Tories seems to me to be leaving yourself wide open. Just saying..

Yes mate….. however…… the options are severely limited.

And in fact “Not Tory” has a strong attraction. As said earlier, to the question Tory or donkey? “Yep, donkey please”.

[RogerH]

On 5/25/2024 at 9:37 AM, RogerH said:

 

The Greens should be boiled slowly and  severed     served  Al Dente 

 

Roger

aaaarrrgghhhh!!   why is it that you can re-read a line and be positive there are no spelling mistakes.  When you hit GO they appear from the woodwork.

Thank you for mentally editing it for me when reading.

 

Roger

[mossmonaco]

I see from the BBC that the cons are proposing to re-introduce conscription with one of the optional forms of service being to work in cyber-security.

The logic seems to be...

1. The youth of today is feckless, workshy, criminaly inclined, undiciplined, drug-addled, and whats more, most of them don't vote tory.

2. China and Russia are a cyber and military threat

3. the military is understaffed

4. the miltary have vast reserves of personnel who  are all  highly trained experts in counciling, moitivating, educating, re-habilitating and educating

5. if we take group 4 and get them to devote their efforts to group 1 (instead of messing about defending the realm) then

 

a. group 1 will enthusiasticly embrace their new opertunities to be shot at

b. group 4 will enthusiasticly embrace their new opertunities to spend their days looking for bits of coal that they can give the conscripts to paint

c. when group 2 notice that our trained military is busy with other things then they wont take advantage

d. when group 2 notice that our cyber-security is staffed by people with a level of skill and motivation that even PC world would reject they wont take advantage.

 

[Escadrille Ecosse]

Interestingly, Sweden has re-introduced what they now call 'civil conscription' on a limited basis and it has proved generally popular with the young 'uns. I am assuming that there is a similar attitude to their civil conscription as they is to paying taxes and engagement in civil society.

Compare and contrast with prevailing attitudes in the UK. Which is one of the main reasons that the UK Armed Forces are generally against conscription.

Two of the main barriers to voluntary recruitment into our Forces are the legacy of the compulsory redundancy of trained and experienced service people a few years back meaning there are insufficient instructors and the shambles of the recruitment process itself after the local recruiting offices manned by serving Armed Foces members were closed and replaced by outsourcing to clueless numpties. Both of these policies being introduced during the tenure of the current bunch of w#####s.

PS. Hope the shoulder recovers as quickly as possible. Some friends had a bit of a 'coming together' at the top of the banking at the velodrome in Glasgow yesterday. The 8 metre slide to the ground resulted in much bruising for the three of them and a broken scapula for one of the lads. Shoulders hurt and take a while to mend.

Edited May 26 by Escadrille Ecosse

[mossmonaco]

Apparently the ball at the top of my humerous is in three pieces, none of which are connected to the rest of my humerous. I had pla\nned on cycling down to cornwall (320 miles) the day after the ground got in the way to fix my mums garage door for her. With quality planning like that I should be advising Rishi

[Escadrille Ecosse]

Ouch. A smashed up humerus is not in the least bit humerous.

Have they said they will need to pin it back together?

5 minutes ago, mossmonaco said:

With quality planning like that I should be advising Rishi

Not sure he'd listen...

[mossmonaco]

at the moment they are sayning that there is little to choose between doing nothing (sling for 8 weeks, then start physio, hopefully 60-70% recovery in 6 monthe) or nailing it (risk of drilling through a nerve, 60-70% recovery in 6 months, so they want to xray once a week and as long as nothing moves leave it alone.

Ive been reading up and (I am not a doctor or a surgeon) am comming to the opinion that a repair with threaded wire would be a better option for me (they have not mentioned this option but i have been reading up ) This option requires greater surgical skill bul may give 85% functioal recovery. I have an appointment on friday where I will be asking about it.

It seens that I need to hammer the point that I am fitter and more active than the average 63 year old: that a sub-optimal outcome will have a relatively greater effect on me.The faster I can get to a stage where physio can start the less atrophication to overcome

[mossmonaco]

ps. you say that you dont think Rishi would listen......how sure are you, coz there are a few things I|m tempted to say to him but Ive been holding back through fear of legal action.

[Nick Jones]

1 minute ago, mossmonaco said:

coz there are a few things I|m tempted to say to him but Ive been holding back through fear of legal action.

Heh….. plenty out there with “things” to say to him….. Not just him.

Just maybe my local incumbent will be unwise enough to visit my doorstep begging for votes. I have a few choice words for him…. 
This is a highly unlikely scenario as he’s not noted for his energy locally, and if he ever read my emails he’ll already know how much I like him (not!). Though I’ve absolutely no reason to believe he’s ever read my mails….. certainly he doesn’t answer them. Even those on actual serious parish matters he could reasonably have helped with.

Ball of humerus in 3 bits separate from the rest sounds distinctly sub-optimal. Definitely do your research (as you clearly are), question and do your best to influence the treatment path. It can work!

[PaulAA]

1 hour ago, mossmonaco said:

at the moment they are sayning that there is little to choose between doing nothing (sling for 8 weeks, then start physio, hopefully 60-70% recovery in 6 monthe) or nailing it (risk of drilling through a nerve, 60-70% recovery in 6 months, so they want to xray once a week and as long as nothing moves leave it alone.

Ive been reading up and (I am not a doctor or a surgeon) am comming to the opinion that a repair with threaded wire would be a better option for me (they have not mentioned this option but i have been reading up ) This option requires greater surgical skill bul may give 85% functioal recovery. I have an appointment on friday where I will be asking about it.

It seens that I need to hammer the point that I am fitter and more active than the average 63 year old: that a sub-optimal outcome will have a relatively greater effect on me.The faster I can get to a stage where physio can start the less atrophication to overcome

Is a hemiarthroplasty not a viable option? Recovery would be considerably quicker.

[Escadrille Ecosse]

2 hours ago, mossmonaco said:

It seens that I need to hammer the point that I am fitter and more active than the average 63 year old: that a sub-optimal outcome will have a relatively greater effect on me.The faster I can get to a stage where physio can start the less atrophication to overcome

Very much this.

[zetecspit]

That shoulder/bone stuff sounds nasty. Hoping for a fast recovery with good outcome for you.

 

Back to the election, the Tories have scored a blinding something or t'other. Return of National Service (even if it is one weekend a month) is not going to engage the yoof , or indeed andbody with half a brain. It is clearly rubbish.

And Labour, taking about spending plans being fully funded. And they have grasped £7.6bn from "closing tax loopholes and fixing tax evasion"  I would love to see how they came up with that figure, and how they reckon they can actually nail the tax evaders down. They are the slipperiest of all fish. The non-Doms are likely to have a clever wheeze too. And are better funded than the govt. 

So it looks like we are in for 6 weeks of both sides trying to reel in voters with their clever, but naive ideas. At least the labour statement looks more promising on the surface (so far)

[JohnD]

Son and I were discussing this  at lunch today.   While agreeing that this was 'dog-whistle' stuff,   I expressed a limited agreement with the concept, quoting Dr.Johnstone (forget the Boris of that ilk) who said that "Every man thinks less of himself for not serving His Majesty".   Son replied by pointing out that while he, at 43, might have the opportunity to have his head shot off, I at 76, never would.   I hadvto agree.

He then clinched it by showing me this: http://bit.ly/BBCComedyGreats (Sir Humphrey demonstrates how easily both sides are argued)

John

[Escadrille Ecosse]

2 hours ago, JohnD said:

Son replied by pointing out that while he, at 43, might have the opportunity to have his head shot off, I at 76, never would

Hopefully. But I suspect there were quite a few in Georgia, Crimea, Zaporizhia, etc who thought the same. Until they had to think about their mothers, daughters and sisters. And we are back to the men who volunteered for the Home Guard.

[RedRooster]

I do like Georgia,

[PaulAA]

7 hours ago, zetecspit said:

And Labour, taking about spending plans being fully funded. And they have grasped £7.6bn from "closing tax loopholes and fixing tax evasion"  I would love to see how they came up with that figure, and how they reckon they can actually nail the tax evaders down. They are the slipperiest of all fish. The non-Doms are likely to have a clever wheeze too. And are better funded than the govt.

I was mildly amused to see that quintessential Tory, Nick Candy, bellyaching about the service charge on his £150m penthouse on Park Lane. Oh dear. But then I stumbled across an interview with his Australian floozy, who was "straight talking" (as I believe the Populists like to call it) about her admiration for Trump.

Which made me realise that a punitive tax on the excessively rich isn't just an issue of the revenue it would generate, but would be a positive benefit to the whole of society by the deflating of some very misguided egos.

[RogerH]

My Local MP is John McDonnell.  I do not and never have liked his politics. 

However back in 20xx   he popped into my garage when I was working  on some high level  engineering issue . 

 Indeed he was looking for votes and asked the usual question - Can I rely on.......Will you be...... etc etc.

My replies were quite simple  - when will you........ why don't you..... etc etc.

One concern I had a couple of  years earlier was that the Greater London Authority  wanted to close the whole length of road between Uxbridge and Shepards Bush to allow buses and Newt catchers more freedom.    I asked 'why don't they install a high level two lane monorail down the centre of the road.

This would get the buses out of the way of 'normal' people and the Newt catchers could all be lined up and shot.

The reply was interesting, no words but you could see the cogs inside going around.  Eventually nothing actually h.appened either way.

Nice man to chat with but otherwise a waste of space.

 

Roger

[zetecspit]

10 hours ago, PaulAA said:

I was mildly amused to see that quintessential Tory, Nick Candy, bellyaching about the service charge on his £150m penthouse on Park Lane. Oh dear. But then I stumbled across an interview with his Australian floozy, who was "straight talking" (as I believe the Populists like to call it) about her admiration for Trump.

Which made me realise that a punitive tax on the excessively rich isn't just an issue of the revenue it would generate, but would be a positive benefit to the whole of society by the deflating of some very misguided egos.

Trump is interesting, just like studying a pathogen and how it works. 

From what I can make out he has been "clever" (is a weaselish way) and undermimed Americas whole system. So if you don't like the legal system, just say so and people believe you. You don't like an election result? say it is fake. Simple solutions to a problem. Which deserves respect for how low he has stooped. What is horrifying is the following he has.

But onto taxation. As I mentioned the wealthiest are the slipperiest and have deep pockets when it comes to tax avoidance. And trying to write legislation must be an absolute nightmare to make it watertight (which it never is). And I am pretty sure it would be a bad thing to drive the wealthiest out of the country as they (mainly) still pay a massive amount of tax, just not as much as they should. 

And reading about the Tory "National Service" idea, it seems they are suggesting a years "apprenticeship" for a number of presuably brighter individuals, which will cost a fortune to set up and run, but could, just could, be a good idea if done well (which it wouldn't) As to the weekend volunteers, I can hear the groans from all the lucky groups who will be getting the "volunteers" dumped on them.

So far Labout are sounding better, but still unconvincing. They should probably say as little as possible, so the tories can't pick holes. And the tories have a much much harder job ahead. They have a poor track record. Which is worse than not having one at all (labour). I just hope the tories close the gap, get their house in order and become a strong opposition. In reality I doubt the parties are that far apart in terms of policy. What I would really like to do is to try Labour and Tories out in simulated "political gaming" but that would be a bit complex. 

[mossmonaco]

Suppose it's too much to ask to try them out in Hunger Gaming.

A political fight-to-the-death in which a thousand political candidates are  armed only with weapons. They fight it out on live TV (wembly might be a good venue) until only one is left alive. |That one is then arrested on murder charges and locked up.

|Ticket sales would bolster tax revenues and while it should be free-to view the advertising potential would be enormous....Companies could sponsor individual candidates to bludgeon rival candidates using their products....By the time you count the possible TV syndication revenue I think this could be a real winner.

National service? well we are clearly going to need a lot of stewards

[Nick Jones]

National service thing is just a distraction. Profile raiser to get talked about.

Grave error of judgment for the Toxic party IMO as it’s too obviously moronic and attracting the wrong comment. Feels almost like Sunak is out to inflict maximum damage on his party…

Especially daft idea given that under Toxic control the training parts of the MOD which would obviously be highly necessary to such an idea, have been systematically dismantled and “outsourced” to “save money”.

11 hours ago, PaulAA said:

Which made me realise that a punitive tax on the excessively rich isn't just an issue of the revenue it would generate, but would be a positive benefit to the whole of society by the deflating of some very misguided egos.

Yes. But many of these are armour plated egos….  Personally I find the idea that any individual thinks that they “need” more than a couple of million quid (say) and have a god-given right to grab and hold on to whatever they can, and t goo hell with everything else, fairly repulsive.  The cult of self is well out of hand…..

[thebrookster]

1 hour ago, zetecspit said:

But onto taxation. As I mentioned the wealthiest are the slipperiest and have deep pockets when it comes to tax avoidance. And trying to write legislation must be an absolute nightmare to make it watertight (which it never is). And I am pretty sure it would be a bad thing to drive the wealthiest out of the country as they (mainly) still pay a massive amount of tax, just not as much as they should. 

I'm yet to be convinced that this is the major problem, rather more of a "side show".

I would much rather see caps placed on bonuses and the like, and companies made to re-invest, whether that is back into the company or to the workers. The prime example is the ex post office CEO, who happily took £3M in bonuses whilst the PO is struggling. And that is but one example.

If we (as a country) can rein back on the corporate greed, I suspect we might solve quite a few problems.

[JohnD]

I fear that the bonusses (Sp?) are a side show in lack of investment - it's the dividends paid out to shareholders that amount to many times more.  Vide, the water Cos, whose lack of investment while distributing BILLIONS to the punters who 'own' them is rebounding on them.   Thames Water anyone?

My paper this morning reports that Trump has been wooing the US "Libertarians", the even loopier section of that great country's population who attract as much as 3% of the vote in most elections, but who he wants on his side.   He spoke at their National Convention, but was booed and heckled, by Libertarians, some of whom held up signs saying "MAGA = SOCIALISM".    I suppose it is possible to go so far right wing as to end up on the left.

John

 

 

[zetecspit]

Reinvestment is the key. But I worry about capping stuff. History teaches us interferring like that typically has a poor outcome. With either loopholes or top talent clearing off where they are not capped. 

The PO is a typical story we hear, but would anybody suggest she was paid to do her job of getting the PO ready to sell? 

Johns point is bang on. I don't have any issues with shareholders getting paid. However, whne they are making ayments by borrowing money, that is wrong. Profits only should be dished out. 

I see Labour are now wittering about lots of projects that will be financed by the private sector. Again, there is a history lesson there, with many public bodies being shafted by PFI stuff. No doubt we will be told they won't make the same mistake again, but I would happily pop my pension funds into somebody providing PFI contracts because they are bound to produce an excellent return. And no doubt they will largely go to friends of the labour party. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" 

[thebrookster]

58 minutes ago, zetecspit said:

Reinvestment is the key. But I worry about capping stuff. History teaches us interferring like that typically has a poor outcome. With either loopholes or top talent clearing off where they are not capped. 

Hmmmm, however exactly how many folks would we really lose?

It seems to be the oft repeated reply, we will lose the talent. But if we are in a position where losing a few top execs can scupper everything, then arguably something else is wrong.