LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
I'm amazed they didn't test for it before moving people in or, if they did, that they didn't await the results before having people live onboard. There was quite a big issue with it after the lockdown with people not having been using hotels or offices. A friend from my running club does the testing and treating for a living and was ridiculously busy.TheBigBean said:
We periodically get notices about it. It is common especially when nothing is used for ages. In theory, I'm supposed to run every tap for at least 5 mins every week to avoid it building up.rjsterry said:
Shouldn't be. For legionella to be in the water system they are not storing at the correct temperature.TheBigBean said:Isn't it pretty normal? I'd imagine many of the hotels in use have it as well.
0 -
They took the samples on 25th July, got the results on 7th August. First people moved on board on 7th August. Results of new tests still being waited for.Pross said:
I'm amazed they didn't test for it before moving people in or, if they did, that they didn't await the results before having people live onboard. There was quite a big issue with it after the lockdown with people not having been using hotels or offices. A friend from my running club does the testing and treating for a living and was ridiculously busy.TheBigBean said:
We periodically get notices about it. It is common especially when nothing is used for ages. In theory, I'm supposed to run every tap for at least 5 mins every week to avoid it building up.rjsterry said:
Shouldn't be. For legionella to be in the water system they are not storing at the correct temperature.TheBigBean said:Isn't it pretty normal? I'd imagine many of the hotels in use have it as well.
0 -
That’s an interesting bit of analysis.kingstongraham said:
The underlying disparity is clear but just taking the capital out isn’t particularly helpful. The US is huge and has multiple centres of wealth creation. Removing just one obviously has less impact than removing one in the UK.
I agree UK economy is far too London centric. But the UK is small. We’re never going to have major wealth centres all over the place. Especially when all anybody cares about is FS.
San Fran = IT
NY = Finance
Houston = Oil etc.
London = FS
It’s more that our economy is narrowly focused.0 -
Germany then?morstar said:
That’s an interesting bit of analysis.kingstongraham said:
The underlying disparity is clear but just taking the capital out isn’t particularly helpful. The US is huge and has multiple centres of wealth creation. Removing just one obviously has less impact than removing one in the UK.
I agree UK economy is far too London centric. But the UK is small. We’re never going to have major wealth centres all over the place. Especially when all anybody cares about is FS.
San Fran = IT
NY = Finance
Houston = Oil etc.
London = FS
It’s more that our economy is narrowly focused.
We're in a better state than France by this metric. FWIW.
0 -
True, WFH has messed things up in big office buildings for the reasons you state. Given that it's a fairly well understood problem that people know how to control it's still surprising that someone didn't think to flush the water supply system through before bringing in the occupants.TheBigBean said:
We periodically get notices about it. It is common especially when nothing is used for ages. In theory, I'm supposed to run every tap for at least 5 mins every week to avoid it building up.rjsterry said:
Shouldn't be. For legionella to be in the water system they are not storing at the correct temperature.TheBigBean said:Isn't it pretty normal? I'd imagine many of the hotels in use have it as well.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I was going to say after the GDP figures that I saw another article this week saying that London and the SE have had a significantly better outlook in the last year than the rest of the UK. So that 0.2% probably comprises of growth in the SE just offsetting recession elsewhere. So it's certainly not "we've done better than the forecasts yet again - everything's great".
With respect to multiple Wealth Centres across the country - I don't think we're too small at all. We're a country of 70+ million, and centres like Greater Manchester, Scotland Central Belt, Birmingham/West Midlands are actually pretty substantial in relation to those areas mentioned elsewhere.0 -
Yes, we are falling behind, simple as that.
More informative than GDP is the figure adjusted for spending power though. I bet on that front we are even worse off.0 -
Wooosh! As my previous comment clearly went straight over your head, I'll explain again...rick_chasey said:
Yeah a margin of around 0.2% either way.wallace_and_gromit said:
Deary me, Rick. This is pretty feeble. Have you actually read the discussion or have you just gone straight into "rant mode" having read something non-negative in one of the early posts on the subject? Most of the discussion has been about the quality of forecasting and reporting.rick_chasey said:Pleased you lot can cheer along effectively stagnant growth.
Delighted it’s not recession but forgive me if I don’t cheer stagnation on.
You have the rare gift of being able to start an argument with people who are pretty much in agreement with you!
So another quarter of no growth.
Well done everyone.
No-one on here was cheering stagnation, as you implied.
The debate on the subject here earlier today had focused mainly on poor forecasting and poor reporting.
You appeared not to have actually read the debate and instead had a hissy fit right at the beginning and piled in, countering a position that no-one had made, thus starting an argument with people who actually agree with you.
Next up, you'll be starting arguments in empty rooms or in phone boxes, if you haven't already done so.2 -
First.Aspect said:
Yes, we are falling behind, simple as that.
More informative than GDP is the figure adjusted for spending power though. I bet on that front we are even worse off.
0 -
I look forward to the bleak assessment.kingstongraham said:First.Aspect said:Yes, we are falling behind, simple as that.
More informative than GDP is the figure adjusted for spending power though. I bet on that front we are even worse off.
0 -
If you’re economy is going to focus primarily on FS, why spread the wealth centres in a small country.super_davo said:I was going to say after the GDP figures that I saw another article this week saying that London and the SE have had a significantly better outlook in the last year than the rest of the UK. So that 0.2% probably comprises of growth in the SE just offsetting recession elsewhere. So it's certainly not "we've done better than the forecasts yet again - everything's great".
With respect to multiple Wealth Centres across the country - I don't think we're too small at all. We're a country of 70+ million, and centres like Greater Manchester, Scotland Central Belt, Birmingham/West Midlands are actually pretty substantial in relation to those areas mentioned elsewhere.
The issue isn’t the success of London and FS. It’s lack of strength/diversity in a nationwide economy.
The other regions need bringing up.0 -
Is it that the “focus” is on FS, or is it that FS has happened to be so extraordinarily successful?
0 -
Leveling up I think is the term.morstar said:
If you’re economy is going to focus primarily on FS, why spread the wealth centres in a small country.super_davo said:I was going to say after the GDP figures that I saw another article this week saying that London and the SE have had a significantly better outlook in the last year than the rest of the UK. So that 0.2% probably comprises of growth in the SE just offsetting recession elsewhere. So it's certainly not "we've done better than the forecasts yet again - everything's great".
With respect to multiple Wealth Centres across the country - I don't think we're too small at all. We're a country of 70+ million, and centres like Greater Manchester, Scotland Central Belt, Birmingham/West Midlands are actually pretty substantial in relation to those areas mentioned elsewhere.
The issue isn’t the success of London and FS. It’s lack of strength/diversity in a nationwide economy.
The other regions need bringing up.
This can be achieved by building more infrastructure to bring people in and out of London from further away.
#votetory0 -
Eventually.First.Aspect said:
Leveling up I think is the term.morstar said:
If you’re economy is going to focus primarily on FS, why spread the wealth centres in a small country.super_davo said:I was going to say after the GDP figures that I saw another article this week saying that London and the SE have had a significantly better outlook in the last year than the rest of the UK. So that 0.2% probably comprises of growth in the SE just offsetting recession elsewhere. So it's certainly not "we've done better than the forecasts yet again - everything's great".
With respect to multiple Wealth Centres across the country - I don't think we're too small at all. We're a country of 70+ million, and centres like Greater Manchester, Scotland Central Belt, Birmingham/West Midlands are actually pretty substantial in relation to those areas mentioned elsewhere.
The issue isn’t the success of London and FS. It’s lack of strength/diversity in a nationwide economy.
The other regions need bringing up.
This can be achieved by building more infrastructure to bring people in and out of London from further away.
#votetory
#votetory0 -
They'll just widen some more roads and lengthen some station platforms in the meantime.kingstongraham said:
Eventually.First.Aspect said:
Leveling up I think is the term.morstar said:
If you’re economy is going to focus primarily on FS, why spread the wealth centres in a small country.super_davo said:I was going to say after the GDP figures that I saw another article this week saying that London and the SE have had a significantly better outlook in the last year than the rest of the UK. So that 0.2% probably comprises of growth in the SE just offsetting recession elsewhere. So it's certainly not "we've done better than the forecasts yet again - everything's great".
With respect to multiple Wealth Centres across the country - I don't think we're too small at all. We're a country of 70+ million, and centres like Greater Manchester, Scotland Central Belt, Birmingham/West Midlands are actually pretty substantial in relation to those areas mentioned elsewhere.
The issue isn’t the success of London and FS. It’s lack of strength/diversity in a nationwide economy.
The other regions need bringing up.
This can be achieved by building more infrastructure to bring people in and out of London from further away.
#votetory
#votetory
Anyone wanting to cross the Pennines can drive, and there's already an overtaking lane on one stretch.
What more do you want?0 -
morstar said:
If you’re economy is going to focus primarily on FS, why spread the wealth centres in a small country.super_davo said:I was going to say after the GDP figures that I saw another article this week saying that London and the SE have had a significantly better outlook in the last year than the rest of the UK. So that 0.2% probably comprises of growth in the SE just offsetting recession elsewhere. So it's certainly not "we've done better than the forecasts yet again - everything's great".
With respect to multiple Wealth Centres across the country - I don't think we're too small at all. We're a country of 70+ million, and centres like Greater Manchester, Scotland Central Belt, Birmingham/West Midlands are actually pretty substantial in relation to those areas mentioned elsewhere.
The issue isn’t the success of London and FS. It’s lack of strength/diversity in a nationwide economy.
The other regions need bringing up.
I think there was a slogan for this.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Both. Neither happens by accident.rick_chasey said:Is it that the “focus” is on FS, or is it that FS has happened to be so extraordinarily successful?
0 -
I am aware. I’m still awaiting the sunlit uplands.rjsterry said:morstar said:
If you’re economy is going to focus primarily on FS, why spread the wealth centres in a small country.super_davo said:I was going to say after the GDP figures that I saw another article this week saying that London and the SE have had a significantly better outlook in the last year than the rest of the UK. So that 0.2% probably comprises of growth in the SE just offsetting recession elsewhere. So it's certainly not "we've done better than the forecasts yet again - everything's great".
With respect to multiple Wealth Centres across the country - I don't think we're too small at all. We're a country of 70+ million, and centres like Greater Manchester, Scotland Central Belt, Birmingham/West Midlands are actually pretty substantial in relation to those areas mentioned elsewhere.
The issue isn’t the success of London and FS. It’s lack of strength/diversity in a nationwide economy.
The other regions need bringing up.
I think there was a slogan for this.0 -
Your suggestion is that somehow the FS success has been at the expense of other industries; how has that actually happened?morstar said:
Both. Neither happens by accident.rick_chasey said:Is it that the “focus” is on FS, or is it that FS has happened to be so extraordinarily successful?
I'm not convinced about the zero sum aspect of this analysis.0 -
I appreciate it's dangerous to discuss the outcomes that derive from the data rather than complaining about how the data is obtained, as that is always the cake stop preoccupation.wallace_and_gromit said:
Wooosh! As my previous comment clearly went straight over your head, I'll explain again...rick_chasey said:
Yeah a margin of around 0.2% either way.wallace_and_gromit said:
Deary me, Rick. This is pretty feeble. Have you actually read the discussion or have you just gone straight into "rant mode" having read something non-negative in one of the early posts on the subject? Most of the discussion has been about the quality of forecasting and reporting.rick_chasey said:Pleased you lot can cheer along effectively stagnant growth.
Delighted it’s not recession but forgive me if I don’t cheer stagnation on.
You have the rare gift of being able to start an argument with people who are pretty much in agreement with you!
So another quarter of no growth.
Well done everyone.
No-one on here was cheering stagnation, as you implied.
The debate on the subject here earlier today had focused mainly on poor forecasting and poor reporting.
You appeared not to have actually read the debate and instead had a hissy fit right at the beginning and piled in, countering a position that no-one had made, thus starting an argument with people who actually agree with you.
Next up, you'll be starting arguments in empty rooms or in phone boxes, if you haven't already done so.
There is plenty of cheering going on in the press about some very poor numbers.
e.g. https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1801316/Remainer-GDP-Brexit-UK-economyRemainer predictions suffer another humiliating blow as UK GDP outpaces expectations
or https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/11/remainer-myths-are-crumbling-gdp-better-than-expected/Remainer myths are crumbling as GDP beats expectations
though, in fairness, both those papers show an even greater proclivity to talk about Brexit unnecessarily than @Stevo_666 ;-)0 -
kingstongraham said:
Those US numbers are unreal. Just crazy how far US has gone ahead since the GFC.0 -
It is a simple return on investment. London gets the greater share of investment.rick_chasey said:
Your suggestion is that somehow the FS success has been at the expense of other industries; how has that actually happened?morstar said:
Both. Neither happens by accident.rick_chasey said:Is it that the “focus” is on FS, or is it that FS has happened to be so extraordinarily successful?
...
What is the primary industry in London?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
So you think its time to let the long dead whining thread rest in peace?rick_chasey said:
I appreciate it's dangerous to discuss the outcomes that derive from the data rather than complaining about how the data is obtained, as that is always the cake stop preoccupation.wallace_and_gromit said:
Wooosh! As my previous comment clearly went straight over your head, I'll explain again...rick_chasey said:
Yeah a margin of around 0.2% either way.wallace_and_gromit said:
Deary me, Rick. This is pretty feeble. Have you actually read the discussion or have you just gone straight into "rant mode" having read something non-negative in one of the early posts on the subject? Most of the discussion has been about the quality of forecasting and reporting.rick_chasey said:Pleased you lot can cheer along effectively stagnant growth.
Delighted it’s not recession but forgive me if I don’t cheer stagnation on.
You have the rare gift of being able to start an argument with people who are pretty much in agreement with you!
So another quarter of no growth.
Well done everyone.
No-one on here was cheering stagnation, as you implied.
The debate on the subject here earlier today had focused mainly on poor forecasting and poor reporting.
You appeared not to have actually read the debate and instead had a hissy fit right at the beginning and piled in, countering a position that no-one had made, thus starting an argument with people who actually agree with you.
Next up, you'll be starting arguments in empty rooms or in phone boxes, if you haven't already done so.
There is plenty of cheering going on in the press about some very poor numbers.
e.g. https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1801316/Remainer-GDP-Brexit-UK-economyRemainer predictions suffer another humiliating blow as UK GDP outpaces expectations
or https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/11/remainer-myths-are-crumbling-gdp-better-than-expected/Remainer myths are crumbling as GDP beats expectations
though, in fairness, both those papers show an even greater proclivity to talk about Brexit unnecessarily than @Stevo_666 ;-)"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Might have been a good idea to reference those article in your original rant!rick_chasey said:
I appreciate it's dangerous to discuss the outcomes that derive from the data rather than complaining about how the data is obtained, as that is always the cake stop preoccupation.wallace_and_gromit said:
Wooosh! As my previous comment clearly went straight over your head, I'll explain again...rick_chasey said:
Yeah a margin of around 0.2% either way.wallace_and_gromit said:
Deary me, Rick. This is pretty feeble. Have you actually read the discussion or have you just gone straight into "rant mode" having read something non-negative in one of the early posts on the subject? Most of the discussion has been about the quality of forecasting and reporting.rick_chasey said:Pleased you lot can cheer along effectively stagnant growth.
Delighted it’s not recession but forgive me if I don’t cheer stagnation on.
You have the rare gift of being able to start an argument with people who are pretty much in agreement with you!
So another quarter of no growth.
Well done everyone.
No-one on here was cheering stagnation, as you implied.
The debate on the subject here earlier today had focused mainly on poor forecasting and poor reporting.
You appeared not to have actually read the debate and instead had a hissy fit right at the beginning and piled in, countering a position that no-one had made, thus starting an argument with people who actually agree with you.
Next up, you'll be starting arguments in empty rooms or in phone boxes, if you haven't already done so.
There is plenty of cheering going on in the press about some very poor numbers.
e.g. https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1801316/Remainer-GDP-Brexit-UK-economyRemainer predictions suffer another humiliating blow as UK GDP outpaces expectations
or https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/11/remainer-myths-are-crumbling-gdp-better-than-expected/Remainer myths are crumbling as GDP beats expectations
though, in fairness, both those papers show an even greater proclivity to talk about Brexit unnecessarily than @Stevo_666 ;-)
Thought he Torygraph article you reference now is timed at 1240pm today, which post-dates your original post on the subject today, so you definitely were t complaining about that at the time.
0 -
Back to the
mainonly tory policy, someone who sums it up better than I can, as usual.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CohnFb1tOUU The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.1 -
0
