tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15475128009738433092024-03-06T01:43:24.945+00:00Independent RamblingsAV: the gateway drug to real reformUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger466125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-87947359220326165552013-05-10T13:15:00.002+01:002013-05-10T13:15:38.659+01:00CAMRA get it wrong... againFrom the <a href="http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/10407240.Homes_and_nursery_plans_for_four_Swindon_pubs/?ref=nt">Swindon Advertiser</a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
PLANS are in motion to convert four closed pubs for other uses – further proof of the harsh conditions facing the licensed trade in Swindon.</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Planning applications have been submitted to Swindon Council for change of use for The Black Horse, in Hinton Road, <a href="http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/search/?search=Wanborough&topic_id=1285">Wanborough</a>, and The Sandgate, in Oxford Road, <a href="http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/search/?search=Stratton&topic_id=1283">Stratton</a>, as well as 12 Bar and The Falcon Inn, both in Westcott Place.</blockquote>
<br />
<br />
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 18px;">
Well, hardly surprising, really. All low-food, local, community pubs with no area outside to create a shelter. Places that rely on smokers.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
New figures released this week by the Campaign for Real Ale indicate 26 pubs across the UK are closing every week. Campaigners say this is largely as a result of the recession, tax on beer and cheap supermarket alcohol.</blockquote>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 18px;">
Well, the tax on beer is the same, whether we're talking pub or supermarket. Supermarket booze has always been cheaper. A mate of mine at university used to buy vodka and put it in a hip flask. Recession? Thing is, Swindon isn't actually feeling the effects of recession very much. </div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 18px;">
I don't know if CAMRA are being deliberately stupid, or are just ignorant.</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-24871769604205580412013-05-07T06:46:00.004+01:002013-05-07T06:47:24.938+01:00Taking the Biscuit<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22401876">3rd May 2013</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"For the Conservatives I understand why some people who have supported us before didn't support us again. They want us to do even more to work for hard-working people to sort out the issues they care about," he said.<br />
"More to help with the cost of living, more to turn the economy round, more to get immigration down, to sort out the welfare system. They will be our focus, they are our focus, but we have got to do more."</blockquote>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
7th May 2013</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
But the proposals, which include reducing the availability of less healthy options in shops and restaurants, were denounced as “underhand interfering”.<br />
Saturated fat in ready meals would be replaced by healthier ingredients while the size of sugary, fatty foods such biscuits and cakes could be reduced.<br />
It is part of the Government’s pledge to cut obesity under the “Responsibility Deal” which currently requires food companies to reduce calories and salt.</blockquote>
<div>
<br />
I know, it's only biscuits, but it's a microcosm of a general problem about the government NOT sorting out the issues that hard-working people care about. When hard-working people go out to Starbucks and buy a gorgeous sugar-frosted blueberry muffin, it's because they want a gorgeous sugar-frosted blueberry muffin.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
What ministers really do is to allow themselves to be driven by sockpuppet fake charities, funded by government, given oxygen by the elite press like The Times and The Guardian.<br />
<br />
If you want my advice, stick a fiver on Labour to win at the next election.</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-16074932567233056222013-04-02T01:16:00.001+01:002013-04-02T01:16:24.160+01:00Idiocy from Polly ToynbeeFrom the Graun:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;">But the purpose of CCGs is to bring in maximum competition. NHS services will find themselves bidding against the likes of Virgin Care or the American giant United Healthcare, which are likely to cherry-pick easy and profitable services – diagnostics, routine pre-planned surgery and simple treatments – leaving behind A&E, the frail, the old and anything that is unpredictably expensive.</span></blockquote>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;">If they're easy, they're not particularly profitable, because if they're easy, lots of people can compete for them. Really, supply and demand economics, do you speak it, Polly?</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;">As it happens, this is exactly what we want. Plenty of people can remove ingrowing toenails, so let there be a market in them. For the tasks like building bionic arms that a couple of people are working on, and will form a monopoly, keep them in the NHS (and once we've got lots of people doing bionic arms, create a market).</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-63148366147858013482013-04-01T22:50:00.001+01:002013-04-01T22:50:57.377+01:00The result of communism - your daughters become whoresI noticed that recently on Tim Worstall's website that there's lots of ads from pretty women from Vietnam looking for husbands. OK, it's not exactly whoring, but well, they're pretty girls looking for rich men in the west, so, well, it's whoring, and well, they are in a communist country.<br />
<br />
The collapse of the Berlin wall led to the porn industry being filled with porn actresses from Eastern Europe.<br />
<br />
I'll bet that when Cuba opens up, that within a few months, the porn industry will be filled with Cuban women.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-19003777525923619802013-02-28T15:41:00.000+00:002013-02-28T15:41:20.683+00:00Eastleigh Prediction1. Lib Dems win<br />
2. Cons 2nd, by not much<br />
3. UKIP take enough votes that they split the vote on the "right"<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-78455566711500565832013-02-18T01:25:00.001+00:002013-02-18T01:25:56.379+00:00Olympic Legacy CostsFrom <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/21206868">the BBC</a><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
Six months on from the London Games, the grand promise to inspire us to becoming a fitter, sportier nation seems to be on track.<br />According to Sport England's latest edition of the Active People survey, published just before Christmas, there's been a 750,000 increase in the number of people playing sport once a week in the last year.</blockquote>
Considering the survey is generally around 15m, that's around a 5% increase. Not much of a "grand" increase.<div>
<br />But let's consider the cost, shall we...<br /></div>
<div>
The Olympics cost £11bn. As a result, we got an extra 750,000 people playing sport. So, for each of those people playing sport, it cost us £16,000. Might have been cheaper just to build them each a swimming pool.</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-5154974520880661612013-01-13T01:12:00.001+00:002013-01-13T01:12:10.048+00:00Follow the MoneyFrom the <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/savile-abuse-victims-set-to-launch-compensation-claims-1-2734722">Scotsman</a><br /><br /><div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
MORE than 50 victims of Jimmy Savile’s decades of sexual abuse plan to bring compensation claims against the BBC, the NHS and the former DJ’s estate, their lawyer has said.</blockquote>
<br />That's "alleged victims"<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
Liz Dux said the number of people coming forward is still growing. “All the victims that we are representing are wanting to pursue civil claims,” Dux said. “Compensation is the only thing we can really do for them but that is not their particular motivation for doing this.”</blockquote>
Oh, of course. By the way, Liz Dux is working for a legal firm that's bringing these cases.<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
“It is for getting their stories out there to get them believed and to prevent it from happening again. You don’t do it for the money. All of them have claims against Savile’s estate, and in addition the BBC and various hospitals and so on where the abuse took place.”</blockquote>
Well, that isn't going to happen, is it. If the BBC or ITV cough up, it'll have a gagging order so that the victim can't tell anyone, The last thing the BBC want is grubby stories coming out about them, and they'll pay for it because it's not their money. In the unlikely event of the BBC or ITV calling their bluff the cases will probably collapse as the evidence ain't going to be there.<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
The full scale of the late presenter’s abuse was revealed in a report published on Friday. His crimes spanned six decades, from 1955 to 2009, his entire career at the BBC, and included sexually touching a teenage girl at the final recording of Top of the Pops in 2006.</blockquote>
"alleged abuse", "alleged crimes."<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
Meanwhile, Mark Williams-Thomas, who presented the ITV documentary that first exposed Savile, has said the number of victims could yet double, with current figures “a mere drop in the ocean”.</blockquote>
<br />Unlikely as Savile is dead.<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-2557617981382108662013-01-02T15:32:00.004+00:002013-01-02T15:32:50.767+00:00Rail Fare RisesFrom the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/02/rail-fare-rises">Guardian</a><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
Rail fares have risen again above inflation, sparking protests nationwide. The government claims it's a 'complicated issue'</blockquote>
<div>
Really, it's not. It's a simple matter of maximising revenue. If you can fill a train with people paying £120, why would you fill it with people paying £110? Arguably, it would be better to allow the companies to remove the cap and just find the right price they want to charge.</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-87339865102563381382013-01-02T10:57:00.001+00:002013-01-02T10:57:24.258+00:00Well, There's a ShockerFrom the <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7ddd4b7e-4d09-11e2-8b70-00144feab49a.html#axzz2Go4biLka">FT</a><br /><br /><div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Hotel occupancy rates suggest the Olympics also failed to act as an advertisement for London as a tourist destination after the games. Jeremy Hunt, the then culture secretary, said in August that the games would “turbocharge” the tourism industry on the back of “a globally enhanced reputation”.<br />Yet in both London and the regions, occupancy rates in September and November have been flat year-on-year, according to hotel consultants PKF.</blockquote>
So, are any of the supposed benefits still standing or is that it?<br />
<br />
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-85461329191885858132012-12-29T19:26:00.003+00:002012-12-29T19:26:47.780+00:00Olympic Success<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9764298/Steve-Redgrave-London-2012-games-created-a-generation-of-superstars-and-transformed-the-way-the-world-views-us.html#disqus_thread">Steve Redgrave</a> in the Telegraph:-<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
The 29 gold medals – not to mention the dozens of silvers and bronzes – won by Team GB not only defined the most spectacular year of sport I can remember, but completely overhauled how we are perceived as a nation.</blockquote>
<div>
Sure, like everyone thought that East Germany was so great.</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-24230894476301003362012-12-16T22:33:00.004+00:002012-12-16T22:34:48.539+00:00Gun LawsThis might be a long and rambling post which is itself driven by the events of Newtown Conneticut. Before I write anything else I will acknowledge the following:-<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>The shooting was a terrible tragedy by a crazy man</li>
<li>The shooting probably wouldn't have happened if there had been gun control (like the UK)</li>
</ul>
<div>
This should put me in with the gun control lobby, but the following quote by Thomas Jefferson puts me on the other side</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
One of the differences between the United States and the United Kingdom is that the US has a designed government system. Men like Jefferson sat and worked out what you had to do with government to make it work and implemented it.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So, they have a constitution, which is full of hard-to-change stuff. Some politician can't go trampling all over freedom of speech because of something like tabloid phone hacking. The process to change the constitution is long and requires a considerable majority in support and the time creates cooler minds. They have a court that defends this constitution made up of senior judges. They have a process for how those judges are elected (by politicians).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
This was all designed to stop tyranny, but what Jefferson recognized is that no system is perfect and that the final defence of freedom is force. That if somehow the system has a fault, and a tyrant gets elected, the people need guns to deal with him, because that's what he will send at them.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
This is described by many as "crazy".</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The UK's approach to dealing with a tyrannical government is to have the army reporting to the monarch. Which then isn't a system relying on self-interest but the goodwill of one individual to help others, which is irrational, but understandable considering the bizarre cult-like adoration that people have in a rather average group of aristocrats.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Now, you might say "but there is no tyrant in the Whitehouse, so let's not worry" which ignores the risks of the future. Making policy based on freak events is nearly always a bad idea, and in the case of school shootings this is also the case. If a tyrant took over the Whitehouse, the number of deaths would be far, far more than the total of all school shootings (Pol Pot: 2m, Mao: 40m, Hitler: 66m, Stalin: 20m).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Is it a price worth paying? I'd rather it wasn't but I think it is. Most importantly, I'd like people to understand that there's a serious side to the pro-gun debate. That it isn't just about hunting or gun fetishism, but about protecting the rights of the people, including those of us that don't want to own a gun.</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-17036073169246276292012-12-03T18:19:00.004+00:002012-12-03T18:19:47.647+00:00The South East MythI've often heard this sort of thing, in the past, even from someone in Wales, but it's good to see it <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9717537/Kelvin-MacKenzie-overtaxed-South-needs-its-own-party.html">in print</a> so I can finally dissect it...<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
Sick and tired of subsidising folk from the rest of the country?<br />You belong to a select club – the club of the hard-working, clever and creative people living in London and the South East who single-handedly are giving the rest of the nation a standard of living they can’t, or won’t, create for themselves.</blockquote>
The problem here is that it depends what is meant by the word "subsidising". Unemployment benefit? Income support? Absolutely. People in the South East are subsidising the rest of the country.<br /><br />But, let's consider the word more broadly, in terms of the transfer of wealth around the country. Not just unemployment benefit and income support, but every single time that someone pays tax to the exchequer, where it goes.<br /><br />So, let's start with the easy stuff like arts, where the 12.5% of people in London receive 32% of the UK's arts subsidies. Then there's lottery money that was spent on building the Dome, the renovation of the Royal Opera House.<br /><br />We could move onto the £3bn in subsidy that London Transport receives each year. There's also other transport subsidies in recent years like Crossrail, St Pancras and HS1.<br /><br />Then the £11bn on the Olympics, the major museums, the embassies (and all the security jobs for them).<div>
<br />Then there's the subsidy for higher cost government jobs that comes from the rest of the country, via London weighting which means that Londoners get cash from the rest of the country.<br /><br />Then there's the bill for housing benefit for London. Now, you might say that Kelvin McKenzie doesn't get housing benefit, but the thing is that many of the people who serve him in shops, restaurants or whatever else do. Therefore, it's still a subsidy.<br /><br />Then we can consider just how much of government is in London, from parliament, to Whitehall to numerous quasi-governmental bodies and quangoes like the FA and the BBFC.<br /><br />And all of this subsidy creates jobs, and distorts the economy towards the South East. A parliamentary lobbyist is going to be based near parliament. They're going to take a minister out to a fancy restaurant near Westminster, not Pitlochry. A government launch is going to use London-based caterers, not Liverpool-based caterers. National newspapers are based in London because they need to be near to parliament. If parliament moved, so would the national newspapers.<br /><br />On top of that, a lot of this feeds into the South East. The people working in London often live less than an hour away. Companies serving governments or people with government contracts are often no more than an hour away (you can move programming to India, but you can't move things like user liaison).<br /><br />I've worked with people all over the country: Glasgow, Manchester, Cardiff, Wiltshire, Bristol, Reading, London, Southampton and Exeter, and honestly, the people in the South East aren't any smarter. The best software teams I've worked in have been in rural Oxfordshire which is barely on the edge of the South East (and I think it's because they get a lot of fresh meat graduates).<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
It has become fashionable for all parts of the UK to seek home rule. I support Scotland’s desire to go it alone, not least because I would be delighted to get them off the payroll.<br />Why should the good people of Guildford have to fund the unhealthy habits of Glasgow? So the Southern Party might even include in its manifesto home rule for London and the South East.</blockquote>
I once tried to explain this to someone calling for Welsh rule, that all this UK government departments that had been placed in Wales no longer would be as they currently are. Wales would still need a DVLA, but it wouldn't be serving Wales and the rest of the UK. The number of jobs would shrink.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If the South East split off, the BBC wouldn't get £4bn of money, most of which flows through London. It would get around £1bn. The other £3bn would be spent on a UK BBC outside.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
And that's why people in London with expensive housing should pay more tax. Because those values aren't created by them being clever, they're created by government spending money there.</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-42012755693681287452012-10-14T11:58:00.004+01:002012-10-14T11:58:53.315+01:00Oh Really, Phil?On publication of the "<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released--chart-prove-it.html?ito=feeds-newsxml">no significant warming for no 16 years</a>" from HADCRUT 4:-<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
Some climate scientists, such as Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, last week dismissed the significance of the plateau, saying that 15 or 16 years is too short a period from which to draw conclusions</blockquote>
From a <a href="http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=2208.txt">ClimateGate memo (07/05/2009)</a> from Phil Jones:-<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
Bottom line - the no upward trend has to continue for a total of 15 years before<br />we get worried.</blockquote>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-24470276694846628022012-10-14T11:17:00.001+01:002012-10-14T11:17:36.044+01:00Well, That's a Turn-up for the Books...<a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/KERI-KARIN-SHOCKING-continued-ebook/dp/B009QEJCY6/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_2">http://www.amazon.co.uk/KERI-KARIN-SHOCKING-continued-ebook/dp/B009QEJCY6/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_2</a><br />
<br />
Not going to do much for that whole "credible witness" thing.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-79266887976700403352012-10-10T22:52:00.001+01:002012-10-10T22:52:33.081+01:00Honest Question About Jimmy SavilleWith regards to all these police investigations, what is the point? The bloke's dead. We're not going to get a conviction or lock him up. Send the women who were felt up to a counsellor and be done with it.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-33870556287415054882012-08-15T10:28:00.000+01:002012-08-15T10:28:04.910+01:00Olympic SupportFrom <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19263251">the BBC</a><br /><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
Roy Hodgson believes the Olympics has been a "wake-up call" regarding the behaviour of both footballers and fans.<br />Hodgson says players and spectators should emulate the spirit of London 2012 - <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19227993">a view which has also been echoed by FA chairman David Bernstein.</a><br />"[The Olympics] is a wake-up call for us all that we don't need that hatred and abuse which footballers have to suffer," said England manager Hodgson.<br />"Certainly we didn't see too much of that in the Olympic Games."</blockquote>
<div>
But there also wasn't the passion of even a club game (I was at a match). And that's what makes football the biggest sport. Fans turn out regularly to see their team.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I'm not condoning abuse. I'm saying that the many fans are passionate about the game, and for some, this spills over. They take things too far. But it's indicative of how much support there is in football, how crazy some people get for it. If you didn't have the crazies, it would be a sign that people were lukewarm about football.</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-72633324998920548882012-08-10T22:59:00.002+01:002012-08-10T22:59:29.839+01:00Fool's GoldAnyone out there like to see my data that our Olympics golds are basically, crap?Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-69131819764057220332012-08-07T12:44:00.000+01:002012-08-07T12:44:03.688+01:00Anyone out there think this is worth it?From the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19144983">BBC</a>:-<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"When Great Britain went to Beijing, the team benefited from £235m investment in training programmes in the years running up to the Olympics - that's a fourfold increase on what was spent [in the run up to Athens]," says Prof David Forrest, a sports economist at the University of Salford.<br />"We spent an extra £165m and got 17 more medals, so that's about £10m a medal."</blockquote>
<br /><div>
That's medals. Not necessarily even gold ones. Anyone out there think it's worth £10m for a canoeing bronze? And if so, name the winner of it.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
About £7m also comes from money raised by Team 2012, mainly through corporate sponsors.</blockquote>
<div>
Which shows just how much all those medals and hopefuls are actually worth. Barclays pays £120m to sponsor the premiership.<br /><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
In Beijing, the most successful sports were those that received the most funding. Between them, athletics, cycling, rowing, sailing and swimming accounted for half of all Olympic team funding. They also accounted for 36 of the 47 medals won.<br /> <br />Which is because lottery funding is based on predicted finishes. Not how globally significant the medals are. If you can win at one-footed monopoly, you'll get more funding than a 100m runner that won't.<br />In fact, there are some sports that are in effect closed to all but the most wealthy nations.<br />"We have identified four sports where there is virtually no chance that anyone from a poor country can win a medal - equestrian, sailing, cycling and swimming," says Prof Forrest.<br />He points to a study suggesting there is one swimming pool for every six million people in Ethiopia.<br />Wrestling, judo, weightlifting and gymnastics, he says, tend to be the best sports for developing nations.<br />For the majority of other disciplines, money is key.</blockquote>
At last, someone from academia backs what I've been saying all along: the medals we've won are in the easier medals, because they're the ones that a large part of the world doesn't take part in, can't afford to take part in and have no financial reward (which was the justification for lottery money).</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-54066281566286289502012-08-05T00:37:00.001+01:002012-08-05T00:37:07.273+01:00Olympic Private School BollocksFrom the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/9446852/Raise-state-schools-to-Olympic-standard.html">Telegraph</a><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
Part of the joy of the Olympics is discovering sports that had been off the cultural radar – especially when Britain turns out to be good at them.<br />So it was rather unfortunate timing that, on the very day the nation learned to cherish double trap shooting, judo and canoe slalom, the head of the British Olympic Association should claim that these sports – or rather, Olympic sport in general – could learn from the bloated, commercialised world of football.<br />Lord Moynihan’s point, which has been made by politicians including the Prime Minister and the Education Secretary, is that elite sport – like so many top professions – is dominated by the products of the private education system. “One of the worst statistics in British sport,” he reminded us, is that half of our medals in Beijing came from the sector: for every state-schooled Bradley Wiggins, there is a Heather Stanning (Gordonstoun) or Peter Wilson (Millfield). </blockquote>
<div>
Let's tackle the first thing here. The Olympics are mostly NOT elite sports. They are mostly minor, amateur sports. If they were elite sports, there would be a huge and constant audience for them, resulting in professional leagues and prizes. Outside the Olympics, major rowing and swimming events are not heavily supported by the public. They can't charge what Man Utd charge or fill such a large stadium even once a year, let alone every week. They mostly rely on lottery subsidy.<br />The interest of many people in the Olympics is simply nationalism. If there was Olympic one-footed monopoly, they'd support it. If that floats your boat, fine, but don't pretend that a sport that you've never heard of means anything in terms of sport.<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
It is true that the estimable Mr Gove does have the air of a man who prefers the library to the sports field, but this is a long-standing problem for which no party or politician can take sole blame. </blockquote>
There isn't a problem. When you look at highly competitive events, the ones that people get paid to participate in (and will therefore draw the best people), you see a different set of facts. Bradley Wiggins? State educated. Lizzie Armistead? State educated. Jessica Ennis? State educated. Mo Farah? State educated.<br /></div>
<div>
The only reason we have a disproportionate number of independent school kids winning medals is because they're doing events that poor kids and poor foreigners can't afford to do. If you don't have the money or access to a rowing club and frankly prefer the benefits of Old Trafford, you're not going to do the rowing. And that applies to everyone around the world. Name a world famous foreign rower. Now do the same with football. Exactly.</div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
To turn this round, schools need not just resources – such as pools or playing fields – but a whole-hearted embrace of sport and its benefits. The motto of these Games is “Inspire a Generation”. We must ensure that it ends up as a mission statement, rather than a slogan.</blockquote>
And little of that will make much difference to Olympic numbers because most kids simply don't have access to the kit to win the easier medals. They play cricket, rugby and football because you can do it in the park with a bat and a ball and for most of them, that's who their heroes are.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The idea that the Olympics will inspire kids through showjumping and canoeing more than Rooney or Beckham have is just a joke, and if you're aiming at improving participation, a very expensive one.</div>
<div>
</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-35640135036393080942012-07-22T11:18:00.001+01:002012-07-22T11:18:00.423+01:00Coe Gets Really Tetchy<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9739000/9739478.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9739000/9739478.stm</a>
<br />
<br />
Enjoy listening to the bastard squirmUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-89924188333331682742012-07-19T23:07:00.001+01:002012-07-19T23:07:46.146+01:00Greater SwitzerlandAccording to <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9411876/David-Cameron-says-Britain-should-not-leave-EU.html">David Cameron</a><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white;">Again, it comes back to this, who are going to be the winning nations for the 21st century. If your vision of Britain was that we should just withdraw and become a sort of greater Switzerland, I think that would be a complete denial of our national interests.</span></blockquote>
<div>
Well, considering that Switzerland are 14 places above us in the GDP per capita table, I do.</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-10199068491561884732012-07-19T14:05:00.002+01:002012-07-19T14:05:45.955+01:00Olympic Strikes<div>
From the <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2175874/London-2012-Olympics-Train-drivers-stage-days-strikes-Games.html">Daily Mail</a></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Members of the Public and Commercial Services Union could go on strike within a week over jobs, pay and other issues, it was announced last night.<br />Meanwhile, the train company, owned by transport giant Stagecoach, said the public will be 'shocked and angry' that strikes are being planned at a time of 'great national pride' for the country.</blockquote>
<div>
Rule of thumb with strikes - you hit people at their weakest. That's why the bus drivers had a strike during the Olympics rather than afterwards. If you do it after, no-one cares. If you do it during the games, you force people to the table.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt claimed unions would be 'completely out of tune' with the public mood if they held a strike during the Games.<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white;">Meanwhile, answering questions after delivering a speech in central London, Labour leader Ed Miliband said: 'People should not be striking during the Olympics. People should not be disrupting the Olympic Games.'</span></blockquote>
<div>
Thing is, I really think that the politicians are out of tune here. A lot of people really, really couldn't care that much about the Olympics. Sure, they'll watch some of it, but they'd watch it if it had been in Paris. The politicians are desperate to create a national unifying event, a "blitz spirit" where people come together (and of course, they lead things) when people come together when they want to. We only came together during the war (and the US came together over 9/11) because we have a desire to.</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-89198240647991453492012-07-18T14:49:00.000+01:002012-07-18T14:49:50.204+01:00Olympic Fascism Strikes AgainFrom the<a href="http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/9821770.Pupils_in_opening_ceremony_get_trainer____guidance___/"> Oxford Mail</a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
CHILDREN taking part in the Olympic opening ceremony have been told they shouldn’t wear branded trainers unless they are made by Adidas.<br />Organisers told the eight Oxfordshire primary school pupils they should wear the German sports label – which sponsors the Games – or unbranded shoes to the Friday, July 27 show.</blockquote>
Can anyone who's still supporting this overpriced EPO festival please, finally, stop talking about the Olympics as being about "community", because there's nothing "community" about telling volunteering kids that they can't wear non-sponsor clothing.<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-78540857554090071192012-07-16T15:21:00.000+01:002012-07-16T15:21:02.304+01:00Olympic Cockup: Paris Helps Out<div>
Oh, very funny <a href="http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londoners-diary/french-offer-to-help-guard-the-olympics-7946258.html">monsieur</a></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white;">Stand back G4S: the French are offering to send over their gendarmerie to sort out the Olympics security problem. Bernard Emié, their ambassador in London, has said that, despite Paris losing out to London as host city, his men would be happy to serve.</span></blockquote>
<div>
I'm still convinced that Chirac played a blinder over the Olympics. Get Blair at his most vain, trying to outdo the French, promising everything to get the Olympics, then on the eve of the vote make some uncharacteristically rude comments about various cuisines, piss off the representatives from a few countries and Britain gets the games. Chirac was a more savvy politician than to not know that he would piss off some people by doing so.</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1547512800973843309.post-40497616111224778132012-07-13T17:28:00.001+01:002012-07-13T17:28:36.519+01:00Olympic Terms of UseApparantly, you're not not allowed to link to the Olympics website in a "misleading, derogatory or otherwise objectionable manner".<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It's all there in the <a href="http://www.london2012.com/terms-of-use/">fucking stupid Olympics terms of use written by some wankers at LOCOG</a>.</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0