"Paid time off work" =/= time off work at your normal pay. There is a very significant drop in income for most people, down to £70 per day, which is £10 an hour if you work 9-5 with a 1 hour lunch or £7 an hour if you normally work 10 hour days. That last one is less than the under 18 minimum wage.
For me, the bigger problem with how Lemmy is federated is the way comments and posts have unique IDs for every instance. You can't easily find a comment or post from one instance on any other instance. With users, you just have /user/username@instance, what we need is /post/###@instance or /comment/###@instance. Instead, we just have /post/### and the ### is different everywhere (I think it's just sequential for every post/comment the instance federates).
Maybe there's some reason they did it this way, but it feels like the better solution is to have the original host instance decide the number, then every other instance just use their number and their @instance.
To be fair, lemm.ee didn't really act as host to any major communities to begin with. So communities aren't really the loss here, and it could be that having at least a few big active communities on an instance is a key part of maintaining its long term viability.
Also, all the text posts and comments from lemm.ee will still remain on other instances. I'm sure the instance could also back up content, if the specific admin so desired to re-host.
The lemm.ee admin is a shit hot developer though, his instance was generally more robust than all the others, and he helped other instances when they had various problems. It's a shame he wasn't the lead lemmy developer, although I'm sure he doesn't have the time for such a big undertaking.
Rail contracts and train companies aren't the problem. The problem is rail stock leasing, which has obsene prices and pushes the public-facing train companies to both be expensive but also run a paper thin margin. Nationalising the train companies won't do anything about rail stock leasing, the government needs to focus on the root problem, not buy out the under-performing public facing business at a high price.
The thing is there are multiple companies/sectors involved here, and this isn't addressing the worst of them (yet, if ever).
First you have the railway lines themselves. These are run by Network Rail, which is already a part of the Department for Transport. This part covers a significant expense, but it's needed and run fairly lean.
Then you have the train companies. These are the ones running the trains, they are typically private businesses. They lease rail stock (trains and carriages) and sell tickets, while paying Network Rail for the use of the lines. These are the customer facing businesses, and South Western Rail is one of them and the one nationalised in this story. In spite of having high ticket prices and revenue, they have low profits due to high costs.
Lastly you have the rail stock companies. These are the real villains, frankly, much moreso than train companies. They set leasing prices for trains, and in turn cause the train companies to run at paper thin margins. They aren't customer facing, so the public eye isn't upon them and they get away with a lot. They have established long term contracts, so simply nationalising a train company won't end this deal.
However, nationalising train companies does mean that the government (either the DfT or the new Great British Railways) will be negotiating with rail stock companies. In theory, the government are a bigger entity, so have a better negotiating position, and also they should be more motivated to bring the costs down. Private rail companies make more money overall with paper thin margins on high prices, not only because a small percentage of a bigger number can be bigger, but because having a small margin puts them in a better negotiating position with local government ("You have to give us a good deal, we can't afford to operate otherwise, and you need us").
So nationalising train companies might lead to lower prices in future, through fairer leasing rates on rail stock. However this won't start to happen until these contracts are renewed.
Really, a much heavier hand is needed from the government, one that focuses specifically on the rail stock leasing sector.
Not that odd, if anything I thought it was strange that someone would give their name and their family's image to a paper, particularly on a subject as contentious as this.
"Al Moy" may also be a pseudonym. I wonder if "Al Moy" even exists.
“It seems as though families like us are paying more and more, and being squeezed on everything from our salaries to our outgoings. I know each party has its flaws, but I think the Conservatives are at least a bit more transparent,” he says.
More like the Conservatives didn't target those with lots of money, those who can make reasonable adjustments, instead focusing on those who already have very little.
The issue here is people are trying to apply scientific reasoning in a legal setting. The two are not the same. There is a legal process for bringing in scientific reasoning - you can't just hash it out in court like you would in an academic paper.
I say the case needed a statistician. Incredibly, the prosecution deliberately decided to avoid using one to assess questions like “How unusual is this shift pattern for a random nurse?” or “How likely was it that said nurse was personally drawn to caring for the sickest infants? How were shifts assigned?”
Yes, it might have been better for Lucy if there was a statistician. However, it's not the prosecution's job to prove her innocence, it's her's and her solicitor's. If there needed to be a statistical analysis and sworn statement from an expert, it would be on the defendant to arrange that.
No mention of how he was always a massive Russophile, and how Dominic Cummings started out on the UK politics scene as his advisor after living in Russia.
This cunt was a key part in getting the UK out of Europe at the behest of Russia.
The USA detained her at the border because a) there was no direct way for her to go back home from the US/Canada land border; b) she had been refused entry by Canada, who have similar entry requirements, meaning the US should be refusing her entry also; and c) she had already been in the country for 3 weeks and they needed to investigate what she had been doing. That's an awful lot more than just "vibes".
But yes, as I said in my comment above, the length of detention is the real fucked up part. That's longer than needed to sort the logistics or perform any necessary investigations, and proves that this is just about filling private prisons at the expense of taxpayers.
Canada was not in the same position as the US, so the two responses aren't directly comparable. However, you're right that the US is not a safe country - I'd even caution US citizens against crossing the border right now.
That one was at the Mexican border, and I think the woman was German.
You might be right, I remember the tattoo one being a girl who was turned away at another border before being detained by the US on her way back. If that happened in Mexico as well it's easy to see why the two could get confused.
Like I say though the fucked up part is the lengthy detention. That doesn't benefit anyone except the private prisons, at the expense of American taxpayers.
"Paid time off work" =/= time off work at your normal pay. There is a very significant drop in income for most people, down to £70 per day, which is £10 an hour if you work 9-5 with a 1 hour lunch or £7 an hour if you normally work 10 hour days. That last one is less than the under 18 minimum wage.