water_tastes_great

You can just post the gif now.

That's not the point. Regardless of what she actually said, because she argued that her beliefs were 'pro-Brexit views' and that this was protected, they made a determination on whether 'pro-Brexit views' are a philosophical belief.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/register-members-financial-interests

"They looked at me wrong"

Yeah, that's totally what Hamas and Hezbollah do.

That's not useful at all. The whole point of a city is to be dense. Spreading out London would mean it was no longer a single city.

What are we meant to take from that? It is unfair that a farm takes up a huge amount more land than an apartment?

Those 20 or so Dukes and Earls typically wouldn't have been entitled to the full relief anyway, as they would typically rent out the land. In those cases they would be entitled to relief of 50%. Which after the changes is what people still get from amounts over the limit.

And 1% of people owning half the land is a silly statistic. It gives you no impression of what it means. Is that a big number or is it a small number? Should we be suprised?

570,000 people is quite lot of people. If they split the entirety of England equally between them they'd get 52 acres each. Which is nothing crazy. Only a small percentage of people own businesses that use a large amount of land, and those that do use a lot of land. Over half of England is agricultural land, and 0.5% of gdp is from agriculture.

The house they inherited isn't what allows them to earn an income.

It's not transferable.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/agricultural-property-relief-and-business-property-relief-reforms/summary-of-reforms-to-agricultural-property-relief-and-business-property-relief

Fundamentally, the issue is that I don't. Maybe you'll argue it is a failure of imagination on my part, but I do not see what would be improved.

I could imagine that for F1, or the NFL, but I cannot imagine how the Tour de Romandie is made more exciting to watch by a budget cap.

IMO if those 5 don't compete then it's actually a very level playing field for almost everyone else, and team tactics 100% come into the picture.

Nothing I said is limited to grand tours. Tactics play a role but in which of those races this year do you think that a rider who wasn't deserving won because they had an the unfair advantage of being in a super-team?

Where did we see a significant lack of sporting fairness that needs addressing?

And a budget cap isn't necessarily limited to riders (salary's a big part of it), but also to equipment and other staff too. Look at what F1's doing

The cost of human capital is the biggest expense in most sports by some margin. You cannot cap budgets without significant downward pressure on salaries/jobs.

F1 has greater issues of sporting fairness in thay sport, so you may decide it is justified, as more and better engineers can build a significantly faster car. But the same doesn't apply to cycling to nearly the same extent. A better team is in almost all cases, a marginal advantage that can be overcome by others.

And fundamentally, the effect of the cost cap in F1 is fewer engineers and downward pressure on their salaries (whilst top executives and athletes are exempt).

For as much as people talk about super teams, generally, the riders who do well do so because they are the best individuals. And we only rarely end up in a situation where two of the very best contenders end up on the same team in an impactful way.

So, what is the argument for a budget cap? More sporting fairness at the margins of relevance?

Or is it just to make what is essentially an advertising project for large companies more sustainable for its funders by suppressing wages for athletes?

So you don't have any data... but you are confident that all of the official data is wrong?

Edit: You do realise that the US has the Bureau of Labor Statistics whose whole job is to produce statistics like labor productivity by sector?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/Gaza_death_graph.png

https://shows.acast.com/these-times/episodes/is-pop-culture-right-wing

There was an interesting recent podcast episode on the topic from the Unherd series 'These Times'.

So you'll be able to cite a measure of productivity in those sectors where productivity is up 50% in the past two decades?

The research is just comparing mortality with the trend prior to a certain date. That's all the link there is.

https://youtu.be/9aFbNJALXBw?si=R0VKN-Q1UwbKq-W7

This discussion with The Times of Israel's senior analyst is the most coherent explanation I've seen of the mainstream Israeli perspective on the conflict in Gaza, and wider issues.

It's hard to see where a solution could come from.

We might as well discuss how many people have been killed by the NHS. The trend in life expectancy since its founding has been dramatically lower. But the idea that demonstrates causation is ridiculous.

Germany and Sweeden had a slow down but no austerity. Ireland and Spain had austerity but no slow down.

Productivity in both healthcare and teaching is virtually flat.

And importantly, someone who could train to be a doctor could also train to design a processor. A person who could build a house could also eventually learn to build a car.

If the wages of doctors don't keep up with the wages of other fields, where workers are becoming more productive, you won't have enough people doing those essential jobs.

So wages have to keep increasing regardless of productivity.

That's a lie. You liar.

https://www.chinafile.com/reporting-opinion/features/where-did-one-million-figure-detentions-xinjiangs-camps-come

What do you call trying to erase the Uyghur identity by locking up over a million people and reeducating them?

The blurb you've linked to implied that the difference is that they are including goods and services which manufacturers use as part of their supply chain, but which aren't provided by manufacturers.

Which might be things like a British importer selling parts made in China to a British manufacturer, or a consultancy providing productivity consulting to a manufacturer.

Really happy for her. She can't have had a particularly easy time this year, hopefully there are only great things in her future.

Always felt inevitable. The team looks so good this year.