placeholder

It's the right wing panacea. When an economy is strong, cut taxes. When it's weak cut taxes. This is obviously lunacy. Tax cuts will help those most who need them least. And where is the money going to come from to put the NHS on a firm footing that she claims she's going to do. And her promises on energy are vague. But her appointment of Rees-Mogg is ominous. One of the few bright spots in the UK's energy situation is renewable energy chiefly from wind power. The price of that is capped. Without that cap, electricity prices in the UK would be even higher.

Are you claiming that White Anglo Saxon people in the UK have a higher unemployment rate than other ethnic groups? That they are discriminated against? This would mean that non-whites should have a higher rate of employment than whites? Is that the case? About 14% of the UK's population is non-white. Unfortunately I can only find a breakdown at the level of white, not Anglo-Saxon government workers. What you claim here sounds like self-pitying nonsense, although obviously I don't have a clue as to your actual ethnicity. there were around 445,480 UK civil servants working in the UK and overseas at the end of March 2019 87.3% of civil servants were from the White ethnic group (compared with 85.6% of the working age population in the 2011 Census) 6.6% of civil servants were Asian, 3.4% were Black, 1.8% had Mixed ethnicity, 0.6% were from the Other ethnic group, and 0.3% were from the Chinese ethnic group What you claim here sounds like self-pitying nonsense, although obviously I don't have a clue as to your actual ethnicity.

Sanders is a self-confessed socialist. The Republicans would have been all over him for that. He wouldn't have stood a chance. The issue of Bernie is repeatedly raised by some who claim that they would have voted for or supported Sanders instead of Trump had Sanders won the nomination. Such fake Sanders supporters are practicing what is called concern trolling. It's a way of pretending that the concern troll is on the side of those whose political opinions they actually loathe. Oddly enough, some of them actually celebrated Trump's appointed of extreme right wing justices who are anathema to everything that Sanders stands for.

What don't you understand about the fact that this all began as an attempt by NARA to get back the unvetted documents that Trump took from the White House. All Trump had to do was was return the documents for NARA to be vetted. Instead, he refused to accede to a grand jury subpoena. His own lawyers had returned some classified documents in January. We know that they recognized them as classified documents because they claimed Trump had no further classified documents in his possession. In a june meeting at Mar a Lago convened only because of another subpoena, Trump's lawyers refused to let government reps open the remaining boxes kept in storage. They subsequently send a letter to the Justice Dept claiming that all classified documents had been returned. We now know this was false. It was out of desperation that NARA called in the FBI.

What you think is a revelation is actually old news. The acting head of NARA asked Biden for permission to disallow claims of executive privilege by Trump. He agreed to that. Other than that no evidence he was involved in the subsequent decisions.

So it's only left us who don't like Johnson? Lots of Tories don't seem to have much use for him either. Stop with the baiting already.

Just to add to that. A federal judge openly castigated Barr for his misrepresentation of the Mueller report.

This was the most minor infraction possible by a line lawyer. A line lawyer is someone at the very bottom of the hierarchical heap. They do not set policy. nor do they lead investigations. The infraction was uncovered by the Inspector General of the Justice Dept who sent all his findings along to John Durham for prosecution. To date, it is the only successful prosecution by Durham.

I misread your original post. Probably because the point iit raised was ridiculous. Why mention Sanders in particular? Was the situation any different for Ted Cruz. Marco Rubio, Tulsi Gabbard, etc.? And there are no laws stopping any of them from running as Independents. What exactly was the point of your observation?

Do you understand how a presidential system works? Is there any country in the world where more than one presidential candidate from a political party runs in a national election? That's what primaries are for.

More woe for the Fed Dow rises in volatile post-Labor Day trading as investors assess strong data, surging rates The moves came after August ISM data Tuesday morning was stronger than expected, coming in at 56.9 versus expectations of 55.5. The report follows Friday’s jobs release, which also beat Wall Street’s expectations, showing a more solid U.S. economy than anticipated https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/05/stock-futures-rise-after-major-averages-post-third-week-of-losses.html

"The Constitution does not expressly confer upon the Executive Branch any such privilege, but it has been claimed that the privilege derives from the constitutional provision of separation of powers and from a necessary and proper concept respecting the carrying out of the duties of the presidency imposed by the Constitution." What is there in this text that contradicts what I wrote?

But baiting people do.

That may be true in France but in the UK a religious marriage is not in the remit of the government. Only the civil aspect of the marriage is.

Well, it also includes religious divorce. But basically, their decisions don't have the force of law. In fact, Hasidic Jews have similar courts. Both courts can make life miserable for women seeking divorce. But actually, in theory at least, Hasidic courts are worse. In Islamic court, the husband doesn't have to be present for the woman to get a divorce. Whereas in Hasidic courts he does.

Funny joke but it is bad news for Ukraine.

Anyway, I've switched from being convinced to being agnostic on the issue.

Thanks for the possible correction. The first link offers no independent support for that 60% claim. The second report is based on a survey of Chinese people living in first tier cities. I don't know what percentage of Chinese tourists come from first tier cities. So, it may well be true. I'm sure that as time goes by the percentage of independent Chinese travelers will increase sharply. Still, I do recall that the Thai govt attempted a crackdown on Zero Dollar Tours from China.

That article has offers on evidence that Sweden fared well without resorting to strict measures. And it's indicative of the quality of the article you linked to that it cited a paper by 3 right wing economists. It's been substantially trashed by epidemiologists. Among other flaws, it changed the definition of lockdown to a very lax one to get the desired result. Fact check: Working paper isn't proof COVID-19 restrictions don't work, experts say https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/02/18/fact-check-working-paper-isnt-proof-lockdown-dont-work-experts-say/6749032001/

Actually, i was thinking of locating a virologist to be my investment counselor.

Well, actually neither do the Chinese. At least those who come on tours. Which is most of them.

Just for a change, why not try addressing the facts raised rather than resorting to an all-purpose rant.

I wasn't aware that potential candidates from either party weren't allowed to compete. Did I overlook some clause in the Constitution? Has everyone been overlooking that clause for the last 200+years?

I think a more accurate evaluation of seajae's contribution would be "well, ranted."

Actually, what they save on heating their homes when they are away might go a long ways towards financing their vacation. The yearly price cap for January 2023 is predicted to go to almost £5000. Given that a disproportionate amount of that will be consumed in the winter months, that would well ease the net cost of a thai vacation.