blandy

Posts removed. This is not a thread for individual player merits or who you'd like to see in the Euros squad etc. Please start a thread, or use a relevant existing thread for those discussions. Thanks.

The EU would and did take nations to court if they broke the regulations and EU laws on water pollution. After we joined the EU we had to clean up seas and rivers. The UK current government (via the regulator, OFWAT and the Environmental agency, which have been weakened by the same government) basically doesn't take polluters to court, and free from EU law, there's no comeback for their laxity/blind eye turning.

It’s brilliant, isn’t it. It’s going to lead to all kinds of implosion. They’re even doing it to their in-house newspaper, the Torygraph.

Wordle 1,012 6/6*

It makes everything better. Nothing fishy about it at all!

Make sure you cancel the direct debit or whatever method, now. You’ll forget, or they’ll take the money anyway and then…

Some of those seem unlikely- I mean 5:1 for Boris Johnson? ditto 10:1 and 20:1 for May and Truss. They’ve had their goes. The angry ham defected to Reform, Thatchers brain in a horse is standing down at the next election and so it’s gotta be the Parrot, or the bag of snakes. Suella or Kemi, then.

Back on the horse Wordle 1,011 3/6*

If you've got a 12" er you only need to go at 33 rpm

Open Office (and Libre Office which is another alternative, and arguably better IMO) work with excel and word files etc. fine - you can convert them to open format, but you don't have to. You don't have to keep the Microsoft programme(s). You can uninstall them via "add or remove programmes" in the control panel - hit the windows key and type "remove" and the drop down will show that option and then you can click it and pick what you want to bin off.

200 day streak over Wordle 1,010 X/6*

It is, yes. I agree. I guess the problem is that if the state runs it all, then the department for water might well get its budget cut, because austerity, or because the NHS or education or whatever is deemed more politically necessary. I mean there were nationwide hose pipe bans and stuff in the 1970s and a big kerfuffle about water pipes leaking and so on. Whichever model of ownership there is, the problem is ineffective control and regulation.

Planted out some broad bean seeds today, put other bean and chilli and tomato seeds into windowsill pots, cut back some shrubs and bushes and the front garden looks kind of threadbare compared to its previous jungle self. Hopefully the bushes recover, but if not the veg can go where they are/were. No idea if any of the seeds will grow, they’re just saved ones from eating stuff. Not got any spuds, though. Bit of an oversight.

In the future, water will be the cause of wars. Scaling that conflict back, Wales, say, might decide it needs to stop sending water to neighbouring places, because needs the water there for locals. Or take any region and similar circs. So leaving planning and responsibility to local companies or authorities isn’t an answer, though they surely need to be involved?

Ta. Presumably to housing developers. Presumably housing shortages are something of a long standing problem? I’m not defending it, by the way. Just wondering if the interlinked complexity of different issues isn’t more complex than a headline or a tweet. It seems like by being laisse faire government has allowed long term planning and so on to just be neglected and not even understood or considered. The network, and it is a network isn’t just a “local” thing. Dryer places get water from wetter ones and stuff. So as you’ve posted before, Wales sells water to Merseyside or wherever. The South east gets water from the midlands or East Anglia or wherever. So while the network is joined up, at least to a degree, it looks like the national uk thinking isn’t.

Genuine question. Is it down to water companies to determine future growth in water needs, assess sites for reservoir suitability and apply for permission to build them? I’ve no quibble with them being profiteering, polluting scumbags, but didn’t know it was their job to plan for this stuff.

Swapped my starter, seeing as yesterday’s word was so close to it. Didn’t help much. Wordle 1,009 5/6*

I doubt he’ll get a pardon.

And some pensioners have paid in way more than they’re ever taking out. The state pension is, compared to other countries in the EU etc. pretty woeful. I agree the political will to make changes isn’t there and it’s possible that one day the changes necessary may eventually be made, or partially made, but I’d wager that at the point they do it, if they do, the accumulated “stock” for younger individuals will not be taken from them, but a new level of annual increase will be set without the triple lock. They won’t lose what they have already gained to that point. Taking the example of more recent changes, they been around increasing the age you get it. For women it went to 65 from 60, then for people my age it went from 65 to 67 and I think it’s gone up another year since then. But the level of weekly payments accumulates each year and the young benefit the most from that (though they obviously don’t see that until many years time). Further, younger people are paying less, typically, because they generally earn less at the start of their lives (and nothing if they’re kids). And then again they also benefit the most over time, assuming the Tory NI rate cut endures for any length of time. Its a rare example of something that counter-intuitively actually benefits the young the most, while also being of genuine help to all the pensioners with little or no other pension provision, many in poverty.

The people who will benefit the most from the triple lock are those furthest from taking their pension. This assumes that the state pension isn’t cancelled, but it’s compounding of increases, like with interest on a multi year savings account.

Strewth Wordle 1,008 3/6*

Too weak to know otherwise.

Blatant PFK, there. Well done. I’m not giving you one, though.

That was for DRM reasons by the record companies, not Apple reasons. I agree broadly with the rest of your post though. Apple take advantage of their strength for purely commercial reasons (as do others, like google, Amazon etc.). They each do it in different ways and with different “justifications”, only a few of which seem to have any degree of validity to me.

You're welcome. Your comment on the ASA is fair and a good one. Is an ad fair honest and decent? kind of thing - I'd have no problem if the PL (or the Gov't) appointed someone(s) to adjudicated similarly on club ownership. It wouldn't need to be a permanent role - just someone appointed to address a specific case as it arose. The criteria would need to be set by the PL or if it's a gov't role, by the Gov't. My fundamental concern over a Gov't regulator is that when the remit is wide, and unclear - and in this case it's a sort of "something must be done and a regulator is a "something", therefore that's a solution". Well, no, it's not a solution. It's an idea. Proposals were released by the Gov't to cover what this regulator would potentially have powers to do. When it comes to the myriad of wider issues, most of them I don't think are or ought to be in the purview of the government. I accept that "Football" (the current authorities and clubs) are not doing a good job of managing all these issues in many cases. It's one of those things where (IMO) mood music is saying "we need a regulator", but my suspicion is that Politics will interfere with any "independent" regulator - appointees will be political favourites, prone to do the bidding of a Tory or Labour leader or Government, and paid a fat fee for being there.