Appalled that Labour is so mealy-mouthed about trying to eradicate child poverty, given the clear long term benefits that accrue.
The relative demonisation of 'chav scroungers robbing the public purse' compared to tax dodgers is illustrative. Only one group gets regularly, widely monstered.

Seems that since the arrival of various social media platforms our print/broadcast legacy outlets have been dancing to whatever tune the socials are getting 'traction' from.
Consequently online lunatics, bad actors and liars set the terms for debate, and legacy gleefully follows on.
A disaster.

My experience of sitting in a Scottish jury was that half of them didn't care and others didn't want to be there. One straight-up said 'I'll agree with whatever the majority think.'
I found the lack of engagement depressing and my faith in the jury system was seriously dented.

"...working like a beaver on meth."
Ha! Excellent.

Even better, now that beavers have been re-introduced to Scotland, I can legit steal and use that phrase. #winwin

Also: great film.

Is it...the marketing, advertising and sponsorship spend of the companies?

You're still playing the man not the ball fella! I want a new ideas and discussion.
Economics coverage and debate in UK media still endlessly talks about 'maxing out the nation's credit cards' and 'think of our national debt like your household debt.'
I'm not convinced these are useful optics.

Is me being called a 'Jock' or a 'Sweaty sock' racist? Should I be offended?
Or only if someone who considers themselves racially superior calls me a 'Porridge wog'?
Or does a lot depend on the context and the relative power of the speakers?

When you replace the eyes and skills of your sub editors with a quick run-through using the in-house AI software....

He (Polanski) is *not* my leader.
I'm asking about an economic theory - MMT - that has gained traction around the world and asking why a modern economy couldn't adapt at least elements of it.
We've all been off the Gold Standard since 1971-73, yet economics is still overwhelmingly 'Classic.'
So...

You are comparing the UK economy, legal system, financial markets and politics to, uh, Zimbabwe?
I know we're not doing great, but, we're not *that* screwed.

If you screw your eyes up and squint, it looks like instead of scapegoating 'migrants' they've done a 180-degree switch and scapegoating 'billionaires' which, in its own way, is just as wide of the mark. Different scapegoat, same poor analysis.
Still, if it gets the respective bases going. LOL.

Trade unions and democratic states are on the slide, Capital is pushing back.
Globalisation can't simply be seen in economic terms (albeit it reduced relative poverty in the world)? Communication, education, transport, connectivity compared to 25 years ago? People can move - and now know how to.

How about that some benefits of globalisation in recent decades have spilled over to nations beyond the global north? This enables citizens of poorer nations to challenge western capital, to rebel and travel, usurping rules and borders. So to reassert control, capital takes an authoritarian turn?

Just, uh, going to take a couple of months off from your account Jamsey boy....

How about if 21st authoritarianism was actually capital's response (or logical extension) to globalisation?

(For argument's sake)

Bizarre, although Starmer/Labour was elected with little enthusiasm.
It does make me wonder how much more 'toxic' the media environment is becoming for government(s), even in the last five years, post-Covid. Trust in authority has evaporated, and the anti-Labour media must still have some clout.

'Look mate, I know me bluddy history alright? We kicked 'em out of Portugal and Spain - OK, 'al Andalus' if you must - in the 14th century 'cos we didn't want 'em. And we still don't want 'em 'ere now! Simples.'

Are you sure a deeper understanding of early European history will help us get along?

Standard.

Angry, lucid and funny, Doctorow was terrific.