I wholly support reselections, since many of these MPs were never "selected" by their constituencies to begin with. It's not like they're just straight up being replaced with Corbyn loyalists, I assume many will hold onto their jobs, it just means that democracy gets a say instead of just the party leadership. Personally I think constituencies having a say in their MP beyond "this guy or the tories" would be a good thing.
Yhe SNP, who are doing really goddamn good as of late in terms of competent politics, already have Mandatory Reselection. It is a good thing for the party, and we should look forward to it.
I missed that Corbyn put a three line whip in for a vote yesterday on PR. To support it, I wondered?
Nope, the whip was to abstain.
This one pisses me off, though. Fuck you, Corbyn! This would have hurt the SNP and they were willing to get behind it - it almost certainly would have helped Labour at this point and you still won't support it? God damn. Of course, this is the shit the PLP decides to go with him on instead of fighting him over like everything else.
God, as a biomedical scientist those remarks on drug development are utterly ridiculous. Either Corbyn thinks that the NHS develops drugs, in which case he's an idiot or he thinks that we should nationalise pharmaceuticals, in which case he's an idiot.
I was curious about whether my my local MP, Ian Mearn (Gateshead), supports Corbyn. Unfortunately, he does - but I did come across the list of people we should support:
John McDonnell MP
Liz McInnes MP
Diane Abbott MP
Richard Burgon MP
Peter Dowd MP
Ian Lavery MP
Jon Trickett MP
Cat Smith MP
Andy Burnham MP
Angela Rayner MP
Emily Thornberry MP
Paul Flynn MP
Clive Lewis MP
Tulip Siddiq MP
Kate Osamor MP
Imran Hussain MP
Margaret Greenwood MP
Rebecca Long-Bailey MP
Grahame Morris MP
Kate Hoey MP
Graham Allen MP
Ian Mearns MP
Dawn Butler MP
When you barely have enough MPs to constitute a full cabinet you'd really think you'd have an issue right?
What's interesting is that the only letter my MP has responded to (including on things that were directly affecting me like the declining availability of gluten-free prescriptions) is one about humanitarian concerns of the Palestinians. The recent issues in the Labour party makes that seem a touch dodgy now really
Corbyn thinks that medical research shouldn't be "farmed out" to big pharmaceutical companies.
Flabbergasting.
Hmm? Most medical research here in North American isn't performed by pharmaceutical companies, at least not on a per-paper basis. Probably not even per dollar, though I'd have to do the math on that and deconvolute how much pharmaceutical companies actually spend on research vs how much they say that a drug cost to develop. The vast majority of biomedical research is performed by doctors and research scientists, who are typically salaried by the government and/or funded by government research grants anyways. (Typically by NIH in the US or CIHR in Canada, but there are a bunch of smaller grant agencies too.) Pharmas just usually take it the last mile, though admittedly it can be a very difficult mile.
Corbyn thinks that medical research shouldn't be "farmed out" to big pharmaceutical companies.
Flabbergasting.
Hmm? Most medical research here in North American isn't performed by pharmaceutical companies, at least not on a per-paper basis. Probably not even per dollar, though I'd have to do the math on that and deconvolute how much pharmaceutical companies actually spend on research vs how much they say that a drug cost to develop. The vast majority of biomedical research is performed by doctors and research scientists, who are typically salaried by the government and/or funded by government research grants anyways. (Typically by NIH in the US or CIHR in Canada, but there are a bunch of smaller grant agencies too.) Pharmas just usually take it the last mile, though admittedly it can be a very difficult mile.
Yup. The pharmaceutical industry's strength in the U.S. is compound formulation and synthesis. The way it usually works is that the NIH/NSF funds basic science research, the NIH funds the development of those insights into clinically useful drugs and then the follow-up first stage clinical trials.
Where the pharma companies come into this is that they fund the research into how to manufacture the drugs for the market and partner with government institutions to do the late-stage clinical trials necessary to bring those drugs to market.
But despite the industries many faults the set up of companies taking it the last mile makes sense:
1. Public Institutions generate treatment candidates
2. Private Pharma companies assemble capital and take the risk of bringing those candidates to production standards.
If they're successful the company gets to profit from taking the risk, and if they're unsuccessful the public is insulated from risk because its private money. Its questionable if public institutions should be performing the high outlay/high risk final stages.
That's a bit rosy version of it.
Basically public side does all the unprofitable research that needs to be done and private corps skim all the profitable ones from the top.
That's a bit rosy version of it.
Basically public side does all the unprofitable research that needs to be done and private corps skim all the profitable ones from the top.
This isn't entirely true. The public sector does a lot of profitable research; we just don't generate any profit off of it. Either it gets privatized (start-ups, bought out by a big corporation, etc..), or it gets given away for "free" as a standard improvement in the medical field. Remember, the vast majority of medical research is not pharmaceuticals. It includes things like blood transfusions, surgical robots, dialysis machines, better stethoscopes, new techniques, etc., and a lot of that is essentially given away for free. We don't, for example, patent surgical techniques, nor do we put the human genome behind a paywall, nor do we turn over new pathology techniques to private companies. That research could be extremely profitable; we just choose to not profit from it and instead distribute the knowledge widely.
While no-one disputes that some deeply disturbing and reprehensible things are said online and that this is sometimes taken further, so that there are genuine fears for people’s safety, the idea that a secret ballot would, in itself, provide significant protection from this seems hard to accept. Moreover, the suggestion – made during the meeting and subsequently stated more explicitly – that Jeremy and his supporters have somehow whipped up an atmosphere of hostility and fear has no credible basis in fact. The vote was nevertheless carried.
Helpfully, Corbyn supporters are pushing a raft of 6 5* candidates out of 11 for the NEC elections to load it with more members of Corbyn's fanclub, which makes the 5 choices I have to make after putting an X next to Eddie Izzard's name a lot easier.
*One was deemed not lunatic enough, and now only 5 are being pushed.
Asked again if he believed that classified documents would eventually reveal the involvement of security forces in Corbyn’s leadership difficulties, McCluskey said: “Well I tell you what, anybody who thinks that that isn’t happening doesn’t live in the same world that I live in.
“Do you think that there’s not all kinds of rightwingers who are not secretly able to disguise themselves and stir up trouble? I find it amazing if people think that isn’t happening.”
McCluskey said he believed that MPs and others who had spoken of death threats and intimidation were exaggerating the extent of those threats.
“There’s a hysteria being whipped up,” he said. “A few people say things they shouldn’t and then it’s blown up out of all proportion, to suit the imagery that the Labour party has somehow become a cesspit, and suddenly it’s a crisis.”
Using an example of something that happened in 1972 to justify this opinion. It couldn't actually be legitimate criticism, it's all down to some bizarre, capitalist ploy, of course.
It's a shame because I want to be on the side of the unions, but this kind of bat-shit insanity makes them look like ideological morons.
Asked again if he believed that classified documents would eventually reveal the involvement of security forces in Corbyn’s leadership difficulties, McCluskey said: “Well I tell you what, anybody who thinks that that isn’t happening doesn’t live in the same world that I live in.
Asked again if he believed that classified documents would eventually reveal the involvement of security forces in Corbyn’s leadership difficulties, McCluskey said: “Well I tell you what, anybody who thinks that that isn’t happening doesn’t live in the same world that I live in.
Is this what I think it means?!?
If you think it means that McCluskey believes MI5 are deliberately posing as Corbyn sympathisers and engaging in a smear campaign, either by sending death threats on behalf of Corbyn supporters or spreading rumours across social media, then yes you are correct.
EDIT: It appears this twitter account has a tweet for every occasion...
Asked again if he believed that classified documents would eventually reveal the involvement of security forces in Corbyn’s leadership difficulties, McCluskey said: “Well I tell you what, anybody who thinks that that isn’t happening doesn’t live in the same world that I live in.
Is this what I think it means?!?
To be fair, he's not wrong. I don't think that's happening because clearly McCluskey doesn't live on the same planet as the rest of us.
McCluskey has gone off at the deep end, it appears. Still, more conspiracy bullshit for the faithful.
Huh, he's accusing the security forces not of infiltration but of abusing the opposition. That, uh... that doesn't really seem in keeping with their behaviour, that is pretty out there.
its worth noting that the whole 'MI5 are rigging the vote'* line was used both by SNP supporters and Brexit supporters before the respective referendums. it was farcical then and its farcical now.
*though granted this seems to go a bit beyond that, but i'm sure they'll land there should Corbyn lose the leadership contest.
its worth noting that the whole 'MI5 are rigging the vote'* line was used both by SNP supporters and Brexit supporters before the respective referendums. it was farcical then and its farcical now.
Oh God, flashbacks to the "take pens with you to vote" fuckbaggery.
its worth noting that the whole 'MI5 are rigging the vote'* line was used both by SNP supporters and Brexit supporters before the respective referendums. it was farcical then and its farcical now.
Oh God, flashbacks to the "take pens with you to vote" fuckbaggery.
local pens, for local people, for local elections!!
Can you please reactivate your doom machine? Things have gotten bleak for us across the pond and I'm no longer distracted by your craven self-destruction, more deer-car-headlighted by our own. Save me, Britain, your despair is my only hope.
0
Options
Werewolf2000adSuckers, I know exactly what went wrong.Registered Userregular
Can you please reactivate your doom machine? Things have gotten bleak for us across the pond and I'm no longer distracted by your craven self-destruction, more deer-car-headlighted by our own. Save me, Britain, your despair is my only hope.
Can we assume you're referring to it turning out that Donald Trump has lowered standards of political discourse so far that him simply managing to read a speech someone else wrote for him off a teleprompter without drooling on himself or announcing how much he'd like to have sex with his own daughter was enough for half of America to proclaim him the greatest orator of our times?
Can you please reactivate your doom machine? Things have gotten bleak for us across the pond and I'm no longer distracted by your craven self-destruction, more deer-car-headlighted by our own. Save me, Britain, your despair is my only hope.
What are you talking about? We got our Iron Lady back, things are just peachy over here.
The pressure is on you to elect some delightful Reagan-a-like so Conservative slash fiction can ensue.
Can you please reactivate your doom machine? Things have gotten bleak for us across the pond and I'm no longer distracted by your craven self-destruction, more deer-car-headlighted by our own. Save me, Britain, your despair is my only hope.
What are you talking about? We got our Iron Lady back, things are just peachy over here.
The pressure is on you to elect some delightful Reagan-a-like so Conservative slash fiction can ensue.
Can you please reactivate your doom machine? Things have gotten bleak for us across the pond and I'm no longer distracted by your craven self-destruction, more deer-car-headlighted by our own. Save me, Britain, your despair is my only hope.
Boris Johnson is the Foreign Secretary, what fucking more do you even want from us?
Can you please reactivate your doom machine? Things have gotten bleak for us across the pond and I'm no longer distracted by your craven self-destruction, more deer-car-headlighted by our own. Save me, Britain, your despair is my only hope.
What are you talking about? We got our Iron Lady back, things are just peachy over here.
The pressure is on you to elect some delightful Reagan-a-like so Conservative slash fiction can ensue.
That happened in 2008 and 2012.
0
Options
GatorAn alligator in ScotlandRegistered Userregular
Can you please reactivate your doom machine? Things have gotten bleak for us across the pond and I'm no longer distracted by your craven self-destruction, more deer-car-headlighted by our own. Save me, Britain, your despair is my only hope.
I know a Portuguese coffee shop owner who is on the pits of despair over her legal status here
She might have to quit everything she worked hard to get here in Britain
So rejoice, her very real suffering is perfect fodder for your glibness!
Can you please reactivate your doom machine? Things have gotten bleak for us across the pond and I'm no longer distracted by your craven self-destruction, more deer-car-headlighted by our own. Save me, Britain, your despair is my only hope.
Better? Here's some of the kind of notes friends got through their letterbox after the referendum*.
At least your racists aren't going to be on the winning side.
I wouldn't be surprised to see May string along the Brexit negotiations for a few years, since she's ambivalent and actually triggering Article 50 would make the last few weeks look like an economic golden age for all that is said about the benefits of stability and ultimately a remain victory should really be a waiting game;
But I think we'll see a practical Brexit for most of the UK funding before that (already happened for science) which will probably only fuel another wave of anti-EU fervour since we've not left and are still cut off whilst the UK government is unwilling and unable to do anything about it.
I wouldn't put it past May to trigger article 50 as the last thing she does in office before the general election. Tories would have had 10-15 years in power, so public might be in the mood for a chance assuming the left (not sure I can call it Labour at this point) can sort itself out, and I think she'd happily see it as the ultimate poison pill and fuck you in politics.
We need to make sure that Article 50 is a parliamentary decision more than anything else in my books.
*Got called by Ipsos Mori this week, asking my opinions about out a Devolved Cambridgeshire should be run...anyone else had this?
Posts
http://steamcommunity.com/id/pablocampy
Damnit you beat me to the pun!
Exclusive photos of Liiya below
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
Reminder: Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell all believe in homeopathy, because of course they fucking do.
EVERYBODY WANTS TO SIT IN THE BIG CHAIR, MEG!
I wholly support reselections, since many of these MPs were never "selected" by their constituencies to begin with. It's not like they're just straight up being replaced with Corbyn loyalists, I assume many will hold onto their jobs, it just means that democracy gets a say instead of just the party leadership. Personally I think constituencies having a say in their MP beyond "this guy or the tories" would be a good thing.
Yhe SNP, who are doing really goddamn good as of late in terms of competent politics, already have Mandatory Reselection. It is a good thing for the party, and we should look forward to it.
This one pisses me off, though. Fuck you, Corbyn! This would have hurt the SNP and they were willing to get behind it - it almost certainly would have helped Labour at this point and you still won't support it? God damn. Of course, this is the shit the PLP decides to go with him on instead of fighting him over like everything else.
(Also his homeopathy stuff is dumb as shit)
Also, for those interested:
NEC member Darren Williams reports on that momentous 12 July meeting
It takes about eight seconds before someone accuses her of making it up and bricking her own window, of course.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
I was curious about whether my my local MP, Ian Mearn (Gateshead), supports Corbyn. Unfortunately, he does - but I did come across the list of people we should support:
John McDonnell MP
Liz McInnes MP
Diane Abbott MP
Richard Burgon MP
Peter Dowd MP
Ian Lavery MP
Jon Trickett MP
Cat Smith MP
Andy Burnham MP
Angela Rayner MP
Emily Thornberry MP
Paul Flynn MP
Clive Lewis MP
Tulip Siddiq MP
Kate Osamor MP
Imran Hussain MP
Margaret Greenwood MP
Rebecca Long-Bailey MP
Grahame Morris MP
Kate Hoey MP
Graham Allen MP
Ian Mearns MP
Dawn Butler MP
When you barely have enough MPs to constitute a full cabinet you'd really think you'd have an issue right?
What's interesting is that the only letter my MP has responded to (including on things that were directly affecting me like the declining availability of gluten-free prescriptions) is one about humanitarian concerns of the Palestinians. The recent issues in the Labour party makes that seem a touch dodgy now really
Hmm? Most medical research here in North American isn't performed by pharmaceutical companies, at least not on a per-paper basis. Probably not even per dollar, though I'd have to do the math on that and deconvolute how much pharmaceutical companies actually spend on research vs how much they say that a drug cost to develop. The vast majority of biomedical research is performed by doctors and research scientists, who are typically salaried by the government and/or funded by government research grants anyways. (Typically by NIH in the US or CIHR in Canada, but there are a bunch of smaller grant agencies too.) Pharmas just usually take it the last mile, though admittedly it can be a very difficult mile.
Yup. The pharmaceutical industry's strength in the U.S. is compound formulation and synthesis. The way it usually works is that the NIH/NSF funds basic science research, the NIH funds the development of those insights into clinically useful drugs and then the follow-up first stage clinical trials.
Where the pharma companies come into this is that they fund the research into how to manufacture the drugs for the market and partner with government institutions to do the late-stage clinical trials necessary to bring those drugs to market.
1. Public Institutions generate treatment candidates
2. Private Pharma companies assemble capital and take the risk of bringing those candidates to production standards.
If they're successful the company gets to profit from taking the risk, and if they're unsuccessful the public is insulated from risk because its private money. Its questionable if public institutions should be performing the high outlay/high risk final stages.
Basically public side does all the unprofitable research that needs to be done and private corps skim all the profitable ones from the top.
This isn't entirely true. The public sector does a lot of profitable research; we just don't generate any profit off of it. Either it gets privatized (start-ups, bought out by a big corporation, etc..), or it gets given away for "free" as a standard improvement in the medical field. Remember, the vast majority of medical research is not pharmaceuticals. It includes things like blood transfusions, surgical robots, dialysis machines, better stethoscopes, new techniques, etc., and a lot of that is essentially given away for free. We don't, for example, patent surgical techniques, nor do we put the human genome behind a paywall, nor do we turn over new pathology techniques to private companies. That research could be extremely profitable; we just choose to not profit from it and instead distribute the knowledge widely.
o rly?
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
*One was deemed not lunatic enough, and now only 5 are being pushed.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
Oh wow, some of that account's gold.
EVERYBODY WANTS TO SIT IN THE BIG CHAIR, MEG!
Story
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Len McCluskey: intelligence services using 'dark practices' against Corbyn
Using an example of something that happened in 1972 to justify this opinion. It couldn't actually be legitimate criticism, it's all down to some bizarre, capitalist ploy, of course.
It's a shame because I want to be on the side of the unions, but this kind of bat-shit insanity makes them look like ideological morons.
Is this what I think it means?!?
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
If you think it means that McCluskey believes MI5 are deliberately posing as Corbyn sympathisers and engaging in a smear campaign, either by sending death threats on behalf of Corbyn supporters or spreading rumours across social media, then yes you are correct.
EDIT: It appears this twitter account has a tweet for every occasion...
To be fair, he's not wrong. I don't think that's happening because clearly McCluskey doesn't live on the same planet as the rest of us.
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
Huh, he's accusing the security forces not of infiltration but of abusing the opposition. That, uh... that doesn't really seem in keeping with their behaviour, that is pretty out there.
*though granted this seems to go a bit beyond that, but i'm sure they'll land there should Corbyn lose the leadership contest.
Oh God, flashbacks to the "take pens with you to vote" fuckbaggery.
Steam | XBL
local pens, for local people, for local elections!!
Steam | XBL
EVERYBODY WANTS TO SIT IN THE BIG CHAIR, MEG!
Can you please reactivate your doom machine? Things have gotten bleak for us across the pond and I'm no longer distracted by your craven self-destruction, more deer-car-headlighted by our own. Save me, Britain, your despair is my only hope.
Can we assume you're referring to it turning out that Donald Trump has lowered standards of political discourse so far that him simply managing to read a speech someone else wrote for him off a teleprompter without drooling on himself or announcing how much he'd like to have sex with his own daughter was enough for half of America to proclaim him the greatest orator of our times?
EVERYBODY WANTS TO SIT IN THE BIG CHAIR, MEG!
What are you talking about? We got our Iron Lady back, things are just peachy over here.
The pressure is on you to elect some delightful Reagan-a-like so Conservative slash fiction can ensue.
*looks around*
Sorry, nothing like that over here.
We've got a discount brand Hitler if that'd work.
Boris Johnson is the Foreign Secretary, what fucking more do you even want from us?
That happened in 2008 and 2012.
I know a Portuguese coffee shop owner who is on the pits of despair over her legal status here
She might have to quit everything she worked hard to get here in Britain
So rejoice, her very real suffering is perfect fodder for your glibness!
Better? Here's some of the kind of notes friends got through their letterbox after the referendum*.
At least your racists aren't going to be on the winning side.
I wouldn't be surprised to see May string along the Brexit negotiations for a few years, since she's ambivalent and actually triggering Article 50 would make the last few weeks look like an economic golden age for all that is said about the benefits of stability and ultimately a remain victory should really be a waiting game;
But I think we'll see a practical Brexit for most of the UK funding before that (already happened for science) which will probably only fuel another wave of anti-EU fervour since we've not left and are still cut off whilst the UK government is unwilling and unable to do anything about it.
I wouldn't put it past May to trigger article 50 as the last thing she does in office before the general election. Tories would have had 10-15 years in power, so public might be in the mood for a chance assuming the left (not sure I can call it Labour at this point) can sort itself out, and I think she'd happily see it as the ultimate poison pill and fuck you in politics.
We need to make sure that Article 50 is a parliamentary decision more than anything else in my books.
*Got called by Ipsos Mori this week, asking my opinions about out a Devolved Cambridgeshire should be run...anyone else had this?