Recent posts

#11

Off the Record / Re: Quo Vadis, Democrats?

Last post by Valmy - Today at 07:38:28 PM

He's got a point.  The belief that a country inhabited primarily by Jews is horrible is not a left-right issue.

What makes that country horrible is the same thing that makes our country horrible. They keep re-electing a disgusting criminal as their leader that then goes on to do evil things. I presume not every country with Jews in it does that.

#12

Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...

Last post by Valmy - Today at 07:36:09 PM

This love of tariffs baffles even a left-winger like me.

It makes perfect sense. Trump, and his supporters, are extremely xenophobic and think all foreigners are inferior and suspect...and probably dangerous criminals or conspiring to screw the United States.

So Trump wants to build a giant wall to insulate us form foreigners.

American Conservatives seem to hate and fear the entire world outside of the 1-2% that are them.

#13

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Valmy - Today at 07:31:06 PM

There's definitely been some similar issues in the US. I remember reading a story in the NYT about a town in Michigan which elected a majority Muslim council and Muslim mayor with the support of progressive activists, who then felt very betrayed when the council voted to ban flying the Pride flag on council buildings.

Well there is always that one town that is the exception.

But as Sav pointed out...the town was over 50%+ immigrants largely from Muslim countries. That is a very specific scenario.

And it doesn't seem like that particular alliance between progressive activists and Islamic conservatives lasted longer than one local election.

But on a national and systematic level all dangerous religions of all sorts are dangerously empowered by conservative policies.

#14

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Sheilbh - Today at 07:09:57 PM

Brilliant Pythonesque - what has the ECHR ever done for us



https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOAmhDbCMQV/?igsh=NHh1MHI5Ymw0Y2Vx

Well the ECHR became part of British domestic law in 1998 and I'm not sure it was quite such a seismic moment of Britain from the darkness into the light through the ECHR (I also couldn't help but notice that democracy didn't come up in the lift). There are, astonishingly, even places that have developed those rights without the the ECHR

I think there are real problems with it. A lot, I actually think is down to how British courts have interpreted some of those rights - particularly privacy. But also the way they balance, which is part of the ECHR - in my view they vastly underweight the public interest. Although I think there are also some really serious problems with the ECHR more broadly - there are some cases recently that I really profoundly object to and think are overstepping into what should be the place of democratic politics.

I think with the FT and former Labour Home Secretaries saying the ECHR needs "reform" (very, very difficult/borderline impossible) or to de-couple from the ECHR we are sort of entering the point when "respectable"/"sensible" opinion is starting to acknowledge there's an issue which is a start.

This is where we're missing the next step, of stopping people from going to Libya et al in the first place.
Where are the campaigns telling Sub Saharan Africans how bad life actually is in the UK? - I've mentioned before the chat I had with some Rwandan teachers where they were genuinely shocked to hear how expensive things were in Europe and how little teachers were paid, and that they were actually financially considerably better off at home.
Why aren't we doing more to spread the word of how bad the crossing is?

I know this is hard to believe but life in the UK is better for most people in most of the world.

Maybe not one to be expected right this instant, and rather more one for Europe than the UK, but also how about encouraging development in African countries?- link standards of democracy and human rights to favourable trade deals.

This is lovely in theory - and I think what Europeans have described as their aid efforts. I would note that receiving aid from the EU is conditional on accepting deportations of migrants and taking steps to prevent migration to Europe.

But I think there are two fundamental problems with it now - which I slightly bang on about.

In the West we do not have a development model. We cannot point to a country and say this is how we can help you develop. The best we've got is possibly South Korea or Taiwan and sadly "be a strategically essential Asian country while America fights in Vietnam" is not a replicable model. By contrast China can point to their experience and say, accurately, that they have lifted more people out of poverty in a shorter space of time than any other country in history. They have also developed and strengthened their position as a country.

In part I think that is linked to the second issue which is that I don't think Africans need Europeans lecturing them any more. We've been doing it for a long time and it's time to listen. I don't think it's even about a development offer, I think it's about "voice" and I don't think there's anywhere in the world as solipsistic as Europe. There is no reason the rest of the world should care about European issues, we're not in a position to dictate and we need to develop real partnerships as equals - which means treating the rest of the world as equals (again I'd flag very recent comments by Lula and Widodo on Europe's "neo-colonial" attitudes in negotiations). We're not the metropole any more. Related to that and our theory of development - I think we have majored on "rule of law" and "governance" plus some other slightly fluctuating priorities and we have not had a great development success. China's focus is on physical infrastructure which seems to be getting better results.

I've mentioned before but I have a friend who worked in a very aid-dependent, sub-Saharan African state with civil conflict for several years. And his recurring theme was that speaking to government and speaking to local leaders - Chinese authorities ask what they need (e.g. a road, an airport, a port) and offer to build that plus the thing China want. Western authorities and aid agencies talk about wanting partnership but it tends to be actually they set out what their policy goals are - these fluctuate depending on the political focus back home. He has supported on trying to get funding for refugees and displaced people in that country and explains that a lot of that job is basically re-purposing a project. So how do you make "pay for a refugee camp" tie into sustainability and energy transition goals for DfID this year, and then make the same project ("pay for a refugee camp") into a project with clear violence against women and girls goals the next year.

It's not to say those policy goals are bad but they change regularly and are being dictated by us. I also think there probably needs to be a conversation about international development aid (the UK was genuinely a world leader on this - sadly no more). Is it there to help develop countries, is it there to advance our interests or is it there to aid the most needy? As I think those all look quite different.

If we're continuing to boost up asylum and turn it into this overly important issue then that is fighting on ground of Reform's choosing. Its a mistake to go too deep into this. Damage can be limited but Labour will never win.
The focus should be on delivering what people want in areas where Reform doesn't have a hope in hell of competing.

I don't think it's a choice. But I don't think you can do politics by content moderation or just not talking about things. I think you always have to make your case and in government show you're able to do it. As I say I don't think it's about immigration I think it's about control and the sense that things are not in control/the state can't control things. I think it's similar to the low-level crime and anti-social behaviour and I think it's really corrosive. (But again - state capacity is my explanation for everything )

I think the US is instructive on this as I think it's where we're going if the mainstream parties don't grip it. I think we're reaching a point where there's little to no tolerance for illegal border crossings.

edit- just read a fact today. Immigration is down by half in the past year.... but politics has moved the other way.

Yeah I've flagged and it's largely changes from Sunak - but it's moved from the highest ever year, to the second highest ever year.

Though I'd also raise the point that this is just the tip of the ice berg. A tiny fraction of a fraction of stuff on twitter faces any consequence. I'd wager odds are good the amount of twitter-hate that gets prosecuted is nothing next to the more conventional crimes people moan about.

I can't see centralised stats on this. But as a comparison shoplifting is increasing rapidly - it's at record levels now and the British Retail Consortium say the stats of reports of shoplifting is significantly undercounting (because people don't believe the police will do anything).

This is not a good comparison as only one police force. But best I can do. In the five years to 2023 there were in total 15,000 arrests by the Met for shoplifting.

Another example is bicycle theft (focused in London but not London-specific) - the Lib Dems did some research and found that in 2023 there were about 80,000 reports and around 1,000 arrests.

#15

Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 07:08:44 PM

The Department of defence is now the department of war.

Trump missed a golden opportunity. He should've named it the department of peace.

#16

Off the Record / Re: Facebook Follies of Friend...

Last post by Razgovory - Today at 05:47:04 PM

Everyone should comply with police orders.

I've always found it helpful.  I really think they should teach kids in school how to conduct themselves during a traffic stop.  I think it would cut down on the number of shootings.  Hell, make PSA about it.  Vince and Larry taught me to buckle up, and I always do.

#17

Off the Record / Re: STAR TREK

Last post by HVC - Today at 05:40:26 PM

A simple (well known) premise, but great execution. Loved the visuals and animatronics, though the final reveal was a bit unnecessary IMO.

Yeah, episode would have been a lot better without Sparkles. Weirdly shoehorned in.

#18

Off the Record / Re: STAR TREK

Last post by HVC - Today at 05:39:32 PM

I didn't exactly get Doug in that they played him for laughs but she was also genuinely attracted.

Maybe he's packing?

#19

Gaming HQ / Re: Victoria 3

Last post by The Minsky Moment - Today at 05:25:00 PM

So having finally reached a stable late game, it's clear the economy still needs a bit of work.

GDPs are just way too high. I looked at four major nations that are roughly proceeding in my game similarly as they did historically in terms of territory, ranking etc: Russia, France, Spain, Japan.  In real life from 1836 to 1905 the GDP of those countries increased from 2 to 3 times.   But in the game it increased much faster, from a low of 5x (Russia) to a high of 15X (Japan).  (Russia is partially lagging behind because it didn't conquer the central asian states).

Looking at demographics, only Russia has peasants left in 1905.  Spain in 1905 has virtually no peasants and farmers make up less than 10% of total pop.  That's WAY WAY off historically.  Japan is the same.  Only Russia has a lot of peasants still but much less than historically.

Growth rates are too fast.  The game loop usually involves pumping construction sectors (growth rate) up to the fiscal limit.  Construction sectors are extremely fast and cheap to build. If you upgrade your construction PM you can literally double growth rate in an instant if you can accommodate it fiscally (and in Vic 3 you can change tax rates immediately by fiat).  Increasing construction needs to have longer lag time and harsher penalties if you overbuild.

Late game is plagued with labor shortages.  The labor saving PMs are too weak. Efficiency techs are separate from the labor saving PMs and they usually either result in no labor change or even require more workers.  Efficiency techs should drop workers as well.  Industrializing 19th century economies were plagued by unemployment problems (reserve labor army etc).  It was a race between growth in output and adoption of technologies that substituted capital for labor.  There is a missing "class" of urban proletarians doing odd jobs and services and every efficiency tech that increases productivity should dump workers back into that class. Severe and chronic labor shortages were just not features of 19th century Victorian and Edwardian economies, even advanced ones.

Qualifications are too easy, not a constraint. You are going to build unis for innovation and ample qualifications are a byproduct.  IRL it takes years to educate a proper engineer.

The basic model is sound.  The early and mid gameplay is good.  Late game breaks down because growth is too fast and high tech production absorbs too many workers per unit of production.  Growth needs to be slowed down.

#20

Off the Record / Re: TV/Movies Megathread

Last post by mongers - Today at 05:22:09 PM

A film new to me:

'The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp' - sterling work by all concerned. 

Such a great film. My favourite of the Powell & Pressburger films, though Red Shoes runs it quite close.

Yes I think I'll have a bit of a Powell and Pressburger binge over the next few weeks.

As Shelf said, it's a contender, but I can't comment as I've not watched nearly enough British films.

Though I love the recent 'Mr. Burton' 'biopic'.