In the news

I guess 260 years of data is still a potential blip in the grand scheme of things? How does that trend match up to a 260 year snapshot of any chosen time between the 5th and 11th centuries, for example?

How would that be relevant? Before the Enlightenment and then the scientific developments of the last 200 years life was pretty similar for most people for thousands of years. You could move a person back and forth hundreds of years and they would get along in the world pretty well.
The time we live in now is pretty special, you just have to look at graphs of life expectancy, pollution, population, industrial output etc.
If you look at a large enough time frame then of course nothing matters.

You could move a person back and forth hundreds of years and they would get along in the world pretty well.

Almost like it was a sustainable, albeit very different, way of living?

The time we live in now is pretty special, you just have to look at graphs of life expectancy, pollution, population, industrial output etc.

Only one and a bit of those 4 measures are a positive kind of special though?

If you look at a large enough time frame then of course nothing matters

Agreed.

Almost like it was a sustainable, albeit very different, way of living?

Terrible phone reception though

Yeah, and only 4 t.v. channels, none of which were on 24/7.

Almost like it was a sustainable, albeit very different, way of living?

Nasty, brutish and short, I believe

As it is for most other animals on this planet, and still is for a chunk of humanity living in what we call "the developing world"?

I guess back then folks didn't hope/expect to retire in comfort and live to 90+, so didn't suffer fomo about it either.

Maybe. You can see who has looked at your tax record. ... You can of course check the earnings of the rest of your team if you want to use that to negotiate.

It's possible, but very unlikely to happen:

• The tax you pay doesn't to give a precise picture of your wages. Too many other factors influence your final tax bill. This means you are mostly safe to fib within a 10 - 20% range if you are asked about your previous salary. I assume that's the range which most people exaggerate when changing jobs? If you tried to claim you somehow earned way more than that in your previous job, there are easier ways for your new employer to assess that than logging in and snooping in your tax records.
  
• And yes, like jellybaby says, the snooper can't check your records without leaving a digital trace, so you will be able to see exactly who accessed your records. I can't image any potential employers would want a reputation for snooping into prospective candidates personal affairs. Again, it's not illegal but it would kill your reputation.
  
• It's equally legal to snoop in the tax records of your prospective colleagues, but again I can't imagine a single instance where doing so wouldn't lead to a job offer being withdrawn. Who would want to work with a sneaky cunt like that?
  

Fucking hell another US shooting. Another entitled man using other people as crayons to scrawl his ego on the world.

So basically there aren't any downsides to the Norwegian system unless you are a politician exploring the line between tax evasion and avoidance.

Apparently Ukraine's demand for the Leopard is being used by the Americans as a strategy to undermine Europan tank manufacturing. https://www.nzz.ch/international/kampfpanzer-leopard-2-us-ruestungsinteressen-lassen-scholz-zoegern-ld.1722377

That sounds more sinister than it is, the US industry wants to sell their products which is not surprising. That the German can't replace their own tanks is their own fault.

How long is Zahawi going to try and cling on? The latest revelation is that he negotiated his settlement with HMRC whilst he was Chancellor of the Exchequer. A role whose responsibilities include oversight of HMRC. No conflict of interest there, obviously.

I'd like to say he'll be gone by the end of the day, but I feel like they'll try and style it out and it will blow over...

Agree here - think they've working hard over the years to create an environment of absolute impunity, where no Tory minister ever has to resign, no matter what offences they commit or corruption is uncovered. The Tory press (which is pretty much all of it) and the BBC will always ignore, both-sides or normalise and they'll get away with it time and again. They might give Zahawi a little less leeway because he's brown, but I reckon he'll get through this.

When you've lost the confidence of the lower echelons of the British pro tennis sector you're in trouble. https://twitter.com/Liambroady/status/1617119976418324480

1 Attachment

That is fucking weird

Assumed he must've come from huge wealth, but his Wiki page says 'Simon (his father) sold the family home and downsized to a modest red brick terrace (in Stockport) to fund their travel and coaching'.

He's only made $1.3m over his whole career. How's he got £27m that occasionally just slips his mind - what's the interest rate on this flex saver?

Probably from that time he put £20 in to start up YouGov with his bestest buddy.

Umm, I assume you are being sarcastic in turn, but you do realise that the tweet is taking the piss out of Nadahim Zahawi's tax affairs, right?

I did not realise that. I don't expect incisive political satire from the lower ranks of the Challenger circuit and am still half-asleep.

Anyone that writes out all the zeros in million / billion can safely be ignored.

Insightful stuff

Anyone that writes out all the zeros in million / billion can safely be ignored.

As can people who use M instead of MM to denote millions.

So 100 million millimetres is 100mmmm?