Mailwatch(ed) Forum

The fall in oil prices will also hamper the Russian economy so that's another bonus. The rest of this guy's predictions sound a bit fanciful.

Donald Trump’s tariffs – why the fuss? As an ordinary UK citizen I see only upsides. First, it’s the Americans paying the tariffs, not us. The resulting fall in the price of oil and the value of the dollar should reduce the cost of my petrol. As Americans switch to bourbon and Californian wine, the price of my scotch whisky and French wine should come down. If other countries send more of their goods to the UK to avoid the tariffs, this will force UK producers to become more competitive to the benefit of ordinary people like me.

Following on from comments re: Guardian BTL being a fucking binfire, spotted today:

So would I have instant access to say, a thousand quid to fix my car in this socialist utopia? Or fifteen thousand quid to fix my roof?

Fucking dreamer.

Meanwhile, on a forum upon which I am banned from certain sections thereof, I learned today that certain individuals are praising Trump to the rafters because they've made a killing on the stock market and sneering at others along the lines of "well, if you're too stupid to play the markets like we do then you'll just have to enjoy your poverty."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... 1bsymDOHrA

Marina Hyde on fine form, dissecting Katy Perry (and others) taking a giant leap into the void.

How did she find the trip? “I don’t really have the words for this, like … ?” OK but can you at least try? “I can’t put it into words but I looked out the window and we got to see the moon”.

Back at the viewing platform in the West Texas desert, commentary was provided by, among others, Kris Jenner and a bottom-tier Kardashian (Khloé). Khloé glossed the moment of landing with the words: “it’s literally so hard to explain right now”. Other insights? “There’s one woman whose grandfather is back there and he is 92 and they didn’t even have transportation back then.”

Imagine going to actual space and talking instead about therapy-speak “space”. When Buzz Aldrin beheld the surface of the moon, he described it as “magnificent desolation”. Honestly, if he wanted to feel desolation he could have just tuned into this corner of West Texas on Monday afternoon. When a Stem advocate came for her post-flight interview, we got to see the apparently lobotomised reporter shriek: “How do you look perfect after just going to space?!”

“Space is going to finally be glam,” agreed Perry. “Let me tell you something. If I could take glam up with me, I would do that. We are going to put the ‘ass’ in astronaut.”

I always thought space travel was futuristic, but this was the first time it came off as travelling back in time, in this case using their little capsule to take us back to the most ludicrous inanities of 2010s girlboss feminism.

Lauren eventually announced that she’d learned: “We’re all in this together. We’re so connected.” Agreed. In which spirit, please please please could Amazon pay full and fair tax in all the territories in which it, one of the world’s three biggest companies, operates?

Excellent stuff.

Excellent. Thanks, Marina.

An excellent example of morons reaching the starting point of [insert concept here] and it being received as newsworthy because they're famous.

'There are no borders from space'

Jee wizz golly.

See also: 'speaking as a mother' for people who've now realised having kids means the world isn't just about them - but haven't got any further than that. [why is there not a parallel cliche of 'speaking as a father'? Men are just as capable of this self-interested angle, after all...]

Boiler wrote: ↑Sat Apr 12, 2025 5:19 pm Following on from comments re: Guardian BTL being a fucking binfire

Aren't they just? I gave up on posting, it being about 90% "Socialist Sunday" or "Rejoin now". I've actually bookmarked everybody who stops short of this stuff, and that's better for my sanity than posting myself.

As Twlldun said, this stuff is overdone. It's not like there's only one university left. And the amounts of money needed in Higher Education seem to be very large- I've noted before how lots of expert criticism of the government is "give my sector a lot of money now", as if they're the only sector with problems. But Higher Ed do have a point on overseas students, in particular. And Bridget Philipson surely could have got more money out of the Treasury, just like she did for schools. There have been some not very encouraging leaks about future policy, but there's clearly an argument in government about them. Let's hope that's resolved the right way. But it looks there'll be lots of mergers needed, and some executives in the sector won't be missed.

RedSparrows wrote: ↑Tue Apr 15, 2025 12:27 pm
See also: 'speaking as a mother' for people who've now realised having kids means the world isn't just about them - but haven't got any further than that. [why is there not a parallel cliche of 'speaking as a father'? Men are just as capable of this self-interested angle, after all...]

As Marina hints at in the article, ingrained sexist assumptions still abound. Women feel, men think. Women are, men do.

I've mentioned before studies of news clips of families of deceased soldiers. Fathers and brothers would venture opinions, and ask questions. Mothers, wives and daughters would flick through oversized and old fashioned photo albums or issue "I just want him to be home!" platitudes.

It’s obviously tin-eared to compare this reluctance to step in with the way parliament was recalled to save Scunthorpe steelworkers: though both industries are strategically important to the nation in different ways, nobody’s currently trying to shut down the last university in Britain to the strategic advantage of their Chinese rivals. Rescuing British Steel really was a race against time, given blast furnaces can’t simply be switched back on again if they’re allowed to go cold. But to those on the sharp end, it certainly feels like a stark illustration of where priorities lie.

Yes Gabby it is tin-eared.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Apr 15, 2025 12:31 pm

Boiler wrote: ↑Sat Apr 12, 2025 5:19 pm Following on from comments re: Guardian BTL being a fucking binfire

Aren't they just? I gave up on posting, it being about 90% "Socialist Sunday" or "Rejoin now". I've actually bookmarked everybody who stops short of this stuff, and that's better for my sanity than posting myself.

Don't forget the Cybernats. Not seen any of this "Socialist Sunday" stuff but the tiresome "Rejoin Now!" brigade evidently think we hold all the cards - now, where have I heard that before...?

Yeah, the Rejoin Now people are mirror image British exceptionalism. Socialist Sunday is what the people on Bluesky call themselves rather than on the Guardian, but basically Jez fans who think "Yeah Starmer, nationalizing Scunthorpe shows Jeremy was right". The Cybernats probably cap both though- there's one in particular who every day hits seems to have unearthed some new misstep that Labour have made in Scotland.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Apr 15, 2025 5:38 pm The Cybernats probably cap both though- there's one in particular who every day hits seems to have unearthed some new misstep that Labour have made in Scotland.

Doesn't by any chance always preface "BBC" with "controversial"?

No subsidies to keep plants in Scotland and Wales is the CyberNat line and it's a strong point. Labour needs to watch itself with middle England as well if they're going to spend large amounts of their tax on 'muppets up norf'* when there's still potholes down their street.

* Yes I know Scunthorpe is East Midlands.

Boiler wrote: ↑Tue Apr 15, 2025 6:35 pm
Doesn't by any chance always preface "BBC" with "controversial"?

Don't think it's the same guy.

I wonder whether he's coming up with this stuff himself or whether there's some Wings Over Scotland type he's getting them from.

George Monbiot having a normal one.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ir-starmer

Those of us who try to defend wildlife are horribly familiar with bad laws. But we’ve never seen anything like this. The government’s planning and infrastructure bill is the worst assault on England’s ecosystems in living memory. It erases decades of environmental protections, including legislation we inherited from the EU, which even the Tories promised to uphold.

The rules defending wildlife and habitats from unscrupulous developers are weak enough already, which is partly why, as Labour reminded us in its manifesto, Britain is “one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world”. But this bill will make it much, much worse.

At present, builders are supposed to follow a “mitigation hierarchy”: avoid, minimise, mitigate, offset. Ideally, they should avoid building in places of high wildlife value, especially irreplaceable habitats. If that isn’t possible, they should minimise the harm inflicted. Then they should mitigate that harm, by restoring the habitats they’ve damaged. Only if all these options are exhausted should they seek to offset the damage by creating habitat elsewhere. This final gambit is generally the most expensive and least successful.

I find that last bit hard to believe. The bat tunnel cost £100m. What good could you do with that money elsewhere?

Monbiot argues that the bat tunnel was the fault of not listening to environmental groups from the start, who would have told them to avoid the woodland. Colour me sceptical on that.

The environmental groups wouldn't have wanted the railway built at all.

You'd have thought that Bruce Wayne was rich enough to build his own fucking tunnel.

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Fri Apr 25, 2025 10:50 am You'd have thought that Bruce Wayne was rich enough to build his own fucking tunnel.

I'm reminded of Colin Furze at this point: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-l ... e-61851694