egg

There's waste in all public services worldwide, but saving $2 trillion is not efficiency in the true sense of the word. It's high level austerity. That said, their issue not ours largely, but I suspect one saving will be NATO contributions which impacts us.

Yep, and that suggests that his commercial judgement is a bit crap. Not ideal given his new job.

Indeed. I'm not sure what "success" Musk can have. Anyone can slash spending, but nobody can slash public spending by $2 tr (or any large margin) and improve anything, let alone efficiency. He's the austerity minister with a more palatable name.

Does austerity ever actually improve efficiency?

A winger who can actually do something won't be a bad thing.

It depends how it's done. If it's essentially a paper sign off you'd imagine a Judge could get through quite a few in a sitting day. I'm not sure why it needs a High Court judge personally, and if there's volume, it's hard to see the High Court being able to absorb loads of applications which can't be delayed.

High Court Judge's apparently, almost undoubtedly Family Division. If there's lots of cases I wouldn't be surprised if the jurisdiction trickles down to court of protection or family court judges.

This is tedious and that's a pathetic comparison. Perhaps try being less awkward and explaining what you mean.

Absolutely, and not everyone who says they want to wil really want to.

I asked a question. You failed to answer. Your thrust throughout, until then, was that a terminal diagnosis was enough. We got there eventually.

Choice

So you do agree that it's more than a terminal diagnosis and that there needs to be an exploration as to views. Not sure why you were so reluctant to say that.

Yes, but she wanted to hang on to see various things happen, and managed to. She even told us at the end which day she'd finish on. Remarkable really.

There would be scope for amendment, up or down, if this gets off the blocks. I haven't got any thoughts on the timescale personally. The posts from winnersaint and whitey were really touching on this and have made me a little more open to the principle of it, but I remain very concerned of the coercion aspect that would be very difficult to police, if indeed it's going to be. I'd imagine it'll be little more than a sound mind assesment though as per making a will.

My father was given less than 2 years just before he was 70. He's 79 soon. My mother in law was given 4-6 months and survived another 4 years, enough time to see various significant events. Horrific to think that people in her position could be made to feel a burden and feel compelled to elect death without anyone feeling the need to explore whether that's what she really wants.

Don't misquote me. I said "It's the state of heath, and freedom of choice that need to be satisfied for me". The freedom of choice, and it being satisfied, is the safeguard at 1st instance after the verification of terminal illness. I'm not misinterpreting what you've said. You've said throughout, and yet again, that the terminal diagnosis is pretty much all that is needed. That's the beginning. It's the need for freedom choice to elect to die thereafter that you don't seem to understand. I'll ask my question again - are you saying that a terminally ill person saying that they want to die should should be allowed to without any inquiry as to whether that's their free choice? It's a yes or no.

1st part. The choice part (free choice) has to be satisfied imo. 2nd part. Is that a genuine question? Of course it matters.

To be clear, are you saying that a terminally ill person saying that they want to die should should be allowed to without any inquiry as to whether that's their free choice?

It's not. It's the freedom of choice part that is the main safeguard. You can't approach something as serious as this on the basis that the person is definitely going to pass within the next 6 months and accept that as the main safeguard. Crazy approach. It's the state of heath, and freedom of choice that need to be satisfied for me.

He has misunderstood it, and your interpretation is correct. I haven't read the bill, but my earlier concerns would be allayed largely if the process involves both doctors speaking with person to be satisfied, as far as is possible, that they have freely elected to die.

I think there is a distinction between him as a TV presenter, and as a social media personality. I like him in both capacities, and respect that he puts his personal opinions out there. I suspect people who dislike him, do so because they disagree with his politics. That said, he was paid a daft amount of money and I'm glad to see that money being saved.

I still don't know why you're insinuating that Global poverty is going down. It isn't. The worldbank says global poverty has had its first increase in decades https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/opendata/march-2024-global-poverty-update-from-the-world-bank--first-esti The latest UN figures (not that recent though) has said that extreme poverty has risen https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2022/goal-01/

Have you seen Wood and Edwards play? In a back 3 you play your best 3.

The top won't sack itself - Rasmus is an owner. Regardless, we have a failing manager, and to address that imo.

Ha!! I'd take Puel's "boring" 0-0 and 1-0 wins over RM's boring weekly defeats every day of the week. And his hair looked better.