Rishi Sunak announces 4 July general election
Same situ. Never actually made a bet
It did surprise me they had the same odds on hung par.iment as tory win.
1/9 for a labour win.
So please campaign they seem pretty confident in labour majority.
Your not alone. Even tory backbenchers were expecting autumn time.
Seems they think, the recent inflation news is the best chance they have. Especially given how desperate he is to claim the usual labour bad on econ. Dispite 14 years of failing to get it right.
If that's true. Current odds are at 11/2. So may be worth you risking a few quid. Good luck
Fair points.
In power from 22 oct 22 till today.
And this is the first announcement he has made, that he actually has public support for.
Giving it the opposite issue,
Thanks for updating me BTW.
But that then make it impossible to proove in any case where the commiter is not vocal..
IE if Israel says its self defence. Absolutly no one can proove their motive.
Allowing crap like the claims all folks objecting are just antisemitic. Cos lets face it. There history was one of the few cases where the nazis were open about plans.
Feeding anyone shrimp you have kept in you pants. Def needs adding to the genocide definition.
Under imposing measures intended to prevent birth. As you and anyone accepting them I Will def be single.
Note the language: “ANY of the following acts”.
Meaning a) would indicate any nation at war with a nation with a defined identity (most ).
Is technically guilty.
I am not questioning if Israel is. There actions are over the top whatever.
But that definition is extreamly broard in a world that dosenot ban defensive wars. Few would argue a single response on a nation that attacked yours is invalid.
Yet by that definition. Hamas committed genocide on Oct 7 and Israel repeated it with their first response.
Absolutely no violent attack on one nation from another. Dose not involve killing members of a nation ethnic or religious group. As that describes every one.
So seems like a law very open to being considered wrong and reinterpretation as the nation considers it.
Followed by the totally unrelated article.
Converting you garden shelter into an XL bully kennel.
DWP still fucks us though. Refusing to provide help with claims unless you insist. Takes ages to get things sorted with them keep saying. We are not allowed to fill the forms for you.
If you are not someone strong enough to stand up to them. They will fuck you over in the name of process. Saying you need to find someone to help you. PS do not do that. Make sure they get someone qualified.
As a legally blind person also my brother.
DWP really is crappy. You ask for help filling thing in. They out right say they can't.
You are literally forced to insist. My brother literally sat at the desk with his guide dog. And said I am not leaving untill I get help.
This was when moving him from DLA to PIP. When it first happened.
Disable people should not be forced to fight for their rights. By the same government responsible for enforcing the laws.
You are entirly correct many lack the energy and strength.
You can. Most things have gui options.
But you quickly learn for somethings. The terminal is just easier.
If you ignore odd stuff. Most everyday stuff to maintain the system is available in a controlled panal like program. It varies based on distribution and windows manager. But the basic setup is there for most things.
Its when you want to do something creative it gets more complex. While most commands have gui apps. Most online guidance will just find the terminal an easy way to guide you.
To be clear. What he actually claims is.
Cut immigration by forcing disabled people. Who we can assume have already been found unfit for work. Or they would be forced to work under UC. To be reevaluated and forced to find jobs.
The things forgotten.
One
The current UC WCA is far from lenient. To be found limited capacity for work. Takes a pretty strong requirement.
And has nothing to do with PIP. So many on PIP are already working. Universal credit is for non working people. Disabled or not.
Two
I doubt they forgot this. They just hope we will.
But the figures the show prooving an increase in claims.
Compare a period where DWP was rejecting PIP claiments by at least 60% falsely. And was continually challenged and lost in court. To a period years later when the previously rejected cases are being added to the totals.
Sorta think after 2. The wife may have been encouraged to speak some basic points.
Like "Little Billy may need a raincoat." Type comments starting a deeper conversation.
Sorry to lump more work on females. Please blame the blind guys education system not me.
with people on lower incomes and those without a car disproportionately affected.
Not to mention disabled. Many disabilities both physical and mental. Make driving impossible. Not just visual impairment as I have.
But the reduction in bus services especially to smaller towns and villages. Where its often moved to 0 buses or one bus every 2 days like services.
The reduction over the last 15 years or so has become very noticeable. Forcing a huge increase in cost. As taxis that have increased hugly in price since the pandemic. Are the only option people like me have.
I am old enough to remember pre privatisation as a child. Where you could get Sunday level services everywhere, even on Xmas day. When there really were few places apart from very extream areas. Where commuting via public transport was not an option.
What ever way you look at it. The tory privatisation of buses has failed miserably.
Can't disagree with the tittle. Although its not just the US that needs to thinkbabout keeping capacity.
But the idea that China is not playing by the rules. Is rather hypocritical. When you consider the subsidies the US has used for past priorities. Lets face it whose rule is China breaking. And why the hell should China be expected to follow them when the US and other nations have made zero effort to prevent there own corperations outsourcing to China. More to the point. Getting China to take over production has been an intentional move from the west. As a way to reduce the hold on communism. Western governments have openly tried to encourage a growth in capitalist ideas and a buying Chinese population to sell to.
Yhe US can and should do what they like terrif wise. Doing so is basically just subsidy in reverse. IE charging other providers rather then funding reduced cost production of your own manufacturing. Its just less efficient because you can only effect limited other nations when you have treaties with some. Where as subsidies allow you to ensure your nation can still produce its own requirements. No matter what other nations do. Why nations should be very careful about agreeing to subsidy banning treaties.
But the US has used subsidy with oil farming and many other industries through history. When it suited them to ensure their industries could compete. As has europe and much of the world.
But if you don't like the fact that another nation dose not follow rules you have invented with out their agreement. Don't pretend its chinas fault. China dose plenty we can critisize them for.
But the moving of production from the west is a open choice by Western companies. And one many many people have warned will leave the west without their own facilities. Since at least the 80s. The fact that western governments and western voters of those govs etc, did nothing to stop the actions. Is hardly a reason to blame China.
But let's face it the day and politician anywhere says. OK we are doing this to fix our own lack of gas ( give a shit ) over the last 50 years.
Is the day we see a huge change in modern democracy. Or at least the attempt at one.
As bad as the post office behaived. And it is finguck disgracefully.
What seems the most effective way of preventing this behaviour. Is some way to ban parliment from passing its duty to manage the judiciary on to 3rd party organisations.
Seriously our courts police and CPS is supposed to be how laws are kept equal without giving agency to people with conflicting interests when examining evidence. And government ministers are supposed to oversea these organisations under the scrutiny of a parlimentry majority. IE democratically ( ignoring how crap fptp is).
Yet the post office was handed CPS's job and police investigational powers. For crimes it perceives from its staff. Not entirly unique RSPCA has been given policing investigational powers with animal care crimes. Local authority CPS and police powers with council tax payment cases.
But in all of these crap systems. The whole point of judiciary having no conflicting interests in the gathering and or evaluation of evidence. Is totally ignored. Just to allow our government to invest less in ensuring non biased investigation and prosecution of laws. While claiming its for efficency.
Any situation where UK citizens can have their freedom removed based on evidence gather evaluated and or presented by people with conflicting interests in the results of that evaluation. Is clearly prown to curruption. And our government should simply have no right to pass those guys to organisations with other priorities and motivations then justice.
Of course banning a future parliment from anything is impossible in our current constitutional monarcy. So it would require a pretty historic constitutional change to allow some form of limits on all parliments. But it is time for something significant i personally think.
How?
Well no country is forced to obay sanctions. Such things are (like all international law) built on treaty agreements between nations.
So only nations with agreements to support sanctions against other nations are required to enforce them within there own laws.
And in russias case Those agreeing nations are mostly NATO members. Where as china was a warsaw pack member during the cold war.
Ill say one thing. As some one with disabilities. While i have no desire myself. Heck my life will be short anyway.
I do feel it is a right people should have.
It just really requires a sound mind at the time of choice. And huge effort to ensure it is not a choice the paiteint is neing forced or guilted into making.
As I cant really come up with an effective and garenteed way to enforce those restrictions.
Im currently happy my natiin will not allow anyform of assisted suicide. It must be entirly at partients own control. And technocally even then its a crime. But one that xamt be punished. Where as an assistant will be jailed.
But I can hope/wish for a world where people could choose to have suffering ended without so much risk of others pushing them into it for thier ow. Reasons.
As I say its not a choice I would make. But my own health means it could be one I mY want amd need help to make in the future.
Not to different here.
Its not so much about trust. Its more a case of if I have to suffer a dick in my arse. I d like some variety, And a rapest who at least still thinks he should try to convince me I asked for it.