Bye bye Starmer

User avatar
ZedLeg
Posts: 6913
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by ZedLeg »

Heaven forbid we all have to pay back the wealth we (as western countries) stole.
An absolute unit
User avatar
dinny_g
Posts: 5797
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:31 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by dinny_g »

Well when Norwegians and Swedes pay us back for the Celtic conquest, the French, and Flemish pay us back for the Normal Conquest, we can put that in the kitty to pay...

And should we give it straight to India or should we just cut out the middleman and pay it to Tibetans on their behalf on account of the Pala Tibetan War etc. ;)

Also, do we combine with Portugal (on account of them occupying India first ) and pay the one bill or do we both pay individually ??
JLv3.0 wrote: Thu Jun 21, 2018 4:26 pm I say this rarely Dave, but listen to Dinny because he's right.
Rich B wrote: Thu Jun 02, 2022 1:57 pm but Dinny was right…
User avatar
ZedLeg
Posts: 6913
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by ZedLeg »

I think that any country that can evidentially show that colonialism held back development should be able to claim with the country that colonised them.
An absolute unit
User avatar
dinny_g
Posts: 5797
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:31 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by dinny_g »

But India is the 5th largest economy in the world by GDP. Canada, 10th, Australia 13th, Ireland 25th

It's not like former British Colonies are floundering say like Central African Republic (Belgium - 163), Laos (France - 137), Peru (Spain - 49) etc
JLv3.0 wrote: Thu Jun 21, 2018 4:26 pm I say this rarely Dave, but listen to Dinny because he's right.
Rich B wrote: Thu Jun 02, 2022 1:57 pm but Dinny was right…
User avatar
ZedLeg
Posts: 6913
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by ZedLeg »

India has a high gdp because it has a massive productive population. It’s gdp per capita is very low.

I wonder if the aboriginial people or Inuits agree with your assessment of Australia and Canada.
An absolute unit
User avatar
Rich B
Posts: 10391
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:22 pm
Currently Driving: M2 Competition

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by Rich B »

£45 trillion - we might need to ditch the nhs entirely… for the next 248 years.
User avatar
Gavster
Posts: 2984
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2021 11:31 am
Currently Driving: ya mum

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by Gavster »

The Government have finally confirmed a total ban of online junk food advertising, and a post-9pm watershed for adverts on TV, which is brilliant news. Advertising is shown to have a big impact on food choices, especially for kids and it's a largely subconscious impact too, most people aren't very self-aware and believe they're impervious to advertising, but the data says otherwise.

And credit to Labour for actually doing it, because this policy was originally announced by BoJo in 2020, then confirmed by the Gov in 2021, then kicked down the road in 2022, then kicked down the road again by Rishi in 2023. Tories are always such fucking pussies when it comes to anything that might ruffle the feathers of industry. They hilariously said that postponing the advertising ban in 2022 would help with the cost of living... how?!?! They delayed the ban on BOGOF offers, which makes sense, but allowing businesses to spend millions of £££ on advertising campaigns doesn't save money for anyone. Make it make sense.
User avatar
Mito Man
Posts: 10682
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:27 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by Mito Man »

I briefly glossed through the list of "junk food" - seemed like it's encouraging more artificial sweeteners which I'm not sure is healthy.
There's some weird stuff banned - granola, muesli, porridge oats. What if they're the sugar free variants?
Tinned fruit, cream and syrups are exempt but fruit juice, frozen yogurt and sorbet banned.
I don't think there's anything explicitly banning a KFC advert, as long as it's just fried chicken and not a burger.
How about not having a sig at all?
User avatar
duncs500
Posts: 4954
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 8:59 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by duncs500 »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx247wkq137o

One source told the BBC: “It was suggested that she might want to go for a few thousand pounds less than the prime minister to avoid this very story. She declined.”

Whatever your political persuasion you have to say she appears to be quite formidable... :lol:
User avatar
Gavster
Posts: 2984
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2021 11:31 am
Currently Driving: ya mum

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by Gavster »

Mito Man wrote: Wed Sep 18, 2024 1:28 pm I briefly glossed through the list of "junk food" - seemed like it's encouraging more artificial sweeteners which I'm not sure is healthy.
There's some weird stuff banned - granola, muesli, porridge oats. What if they're the sugar free variants?
Tinned fruit, cream and syrups are exempt but fruit juice, frozen yogurt and sorbet banned.
I don't think there's anything explicitly banning a KFC advert, as long as it's just fried chicken and not a burger.
People get a bit scared of artificial sweeteners but the evidence suggests they're better than excessive sugar intake and help people to lose weight.

As for the classification, it's a combination of the food falling into a certain score on the gov's nutrient profile model AND being on that list. E.g. a sugar-free granola probably won't score high enough on the NPM to be banned. The things that get caught on the boundary are products that are high in nuts they're often high fat, despite nuts being 'healthy'.

And of course it's not perfect, there's an unlimited variety of ingredient combinations to make a recipe so there's always going to be foods that fall, perhaps unfairly, on the wrong side of the line. That's basically impossible to avoid.
V8Granite
Posts: 4511
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2018 11:57 am

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by V8Granite »

Fat isn’t unhealthy, it never has been, I don’t believe consumption of tallow, lard or butter negatively impacts people. When we started to eat processed things, the recommended cereals for breakfast, switching butter for margarines, breads with lots of extra ingredients, pastas etc then suddenly the U.K. started getting ill.

Low cholestorol is linked to All Cause Mortality. I think focusing on fat is a very bad idea. I think we should focus on processes which mix un-natural crap in our food.

You can’t even get a burger patty that isn’t about 30% other ingredients.

It’s not on trend though so highly unlikely to happen.

Dave!

(I’m backing out of this before I get distracted from my actual work and get into a rant 😂 )
User avatar
dinny_g
Posts: 5797
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:31 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by dinny_g »

V8Granite wrote: Wed Sep 18, 2024 2:18 pm tallow
I get my tallow from an Irish Butcher in Luton - it's lively stuff.

Back to advertising, if the government can now move onto gambling advertising in sports media, that would be great. We all know it's right to try to get kids interested in sport but everywhere, from TalkSport the radio to Sky Sports and TNT on the TV, EVERY SINGLE SPORTING EVENT has multiple adverts for gambling web sites in EVER SINGLE ADD BREAK. It's absolutely shocking and we're storing up a massive crisis for 10 years down the line
JLv3.0 wrote: Thu Jun 21, 2018 4:26 pm I say this rarely Dave, but listen to Dinny because he's right.
Rich B wrote: Thu Jun 02, 2022 1:57 pm but Dinny was right…
User avatar
Broccers
Posts: 5757
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 8:37 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by Broccers »

V8Granite wrote: Wed Sep 18, 2024 2:18 pm
Low cholestorol is linked to All Cause Mortality. I think focusing on fat is a very bad idea. I think we should focus on processes which mix un-natural crap in our food.
Yet they hand out statins like smarties
V8Granite
Posts: 4511
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2018 11:57 am

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by V8Granite »

We went to a James Concert at Chelsea (the old greenhouse, if I’ve got it right) and at the time they were advertising water in a can. A white can with black symbol of some sort.

The advertising was young kids the morning after, drinking cans of water and acting like it was alcohol but it was ok as it’s just water.

Yeah, that’s sensible 😂

Dave!
Last edited by V8Granite on Wed Sep 18, 2024 3:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mito Man
Posts: 10682
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:27 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by Mito Man »

Liquid Death - absofucklutely stupid.
How about not having a sig at all?
User avatar
Broccers
Posts: 5757
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 8:37 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by Broccers »

Best one I've read recently is 'Free Gear Keir' :lol:

You know things are really bad for you when even Owen Jones is having a dig.

https://x.com/owenjonesjourno/status/18 ... 2645169462
User avatar
MikeHunt
Posts: 825
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2018 11:34 am

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by MikeHunt »

Taylor Swift and Coldplay, bring back Truss.
User avatar
Mito Man
Posts: 10682
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:27 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by Mito Man »

Hates the rich, poor, middle class and pensioners but loves to receive gifts.
How about not having a sig at all?
User avatar
Swervin_Mervin
Posts: 5052
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 8:58 pm

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by Swervin_Mervin »

Mito Man wrote: Wed Sep 18, 2024 5:24 pm Hates the rich, poor, middle class and pensioners but loves to receive gifts.
Got to ride that gravy train while you can! If he can get cosy enough with Brussels he can change trains to the bigger one for life :lol:
User avatar
Rich B
Posts: 10391
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:22 pm
Currently Driving: M2 Competition

Re: Bye bye Starmer

Post by Rich B »

meh, i bet life in the public eye is probably not cheap. £170k really isn’t that much these days, and stuff like clothes for all the occasions you’re expected to attend won’t be cheap. the papers would have a field day if Mrs Starmer wore a primark dress to a event with world leaders or even the same dress 3 times.
Post Reply