 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (2)dariusgriffin -crazone ...and 289 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2613454 Today 7 Topics 127500 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"Yesterday a visitor to Westminster could observe the double whammy. Down one end of the corridor the Commons debated some of the harshest parts of the welfare reform bill. A Labour debate highlighted the under-publicised savagery of tax credit cuts that next month take between £3,000 and £4,000 away from low-earning families who can't get their working time up to 24 hours a week. Hundreds of thousands of people and 470,000 children still have no idea of the devastating income cut about to hit them on 6 April. Meanwhile, down the other end of the corridor, the Lords debated the legal aid bill which removes all legal support that ensures people at least get the benefits they are entitled to. Legal aid is abolished for "social" cases, even if people risk losing their homes and livelihoods, even if the Department for Work and Pensions blunders kick away crutches or leave cancer patients in the lurch. Maladministration sees 40% of appeals against disability benefit removal overturned, but there will be no legal help for any claimants' redress. Employers need worry less about regulations, now that their employees can get no legal aid to challenge unfair dismissal or harassment. Though evictions by private landlords have risen by 17%, the bill abolishes legal aid for tenants." |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
everyone in this country is being so quiet about all of this. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
people are going to let this happen. people are unsure and dont want to be uncool and havnt got the energy to bother. even tho the internet makes it seem that there are huge numbers of people dying for a political movement full of big social changes, the proof that those people have no real convictions (if v for vendetta wasnt enough) is here in this country where they have a REAL villain to oppose and do nothing - because it just dosnt have that sexy arab springs vibe. what happened to all the BLIAR people? surely they are the type just itching for a bastard like cameron to be in number 10 so they can justifiably picket downing street. ah but no. its just not the same. its not hiphop enough or something. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Give 'em a chance. Everything is changing fast, and most people are afraid of and unequipped to deal with what we're now quite suddenly capable of. Many of us who reckon we are equipped are likely just as out of whack. Don't stress, keep your clarity and think of steps you can take to even incrementally improve the whole human situation. That's what'll do it in the end, widespread recurrence of measured thought and continuous effort. No one man will give a truly logic-based enlightening moment to the masses. We're still waning as a species from every time even a semblance of that occurs i.e. religions, political parties |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it actually turns out that i know the reason why all of us are doing nothing (not entirely but im getting there). but cmon lets be honest this thread is too tldr (a phrase that holds hands with our societies celebration of selfishness which has left us cold and isolated as well as ignorant). haha like when southpark laughs at disabled people for being disabled because its ok to think of yourself and what you want - your joke is more important than courtesy towards the disadvantaged haha |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i think youre right in one way. well hopefully in a lot of ways. but for example why hasnt our lord charlie brooker said more about all this? its comedy gold i dont get why our media isnt absolutely rolling in this muck |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It's pretty obvious you've not been involved in any social movements. You'd know more about how it is then. lol 'all of us are doing nothing'. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
of course i havnt been involved with any social movements. youve seen my other threadshits. ive been asking what there is. hopefully you have a list |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
btw i think you just tried to measure my social movements penis next to yours and you laughed at me cause yours is bigger. i already like you for having a big penis so dont bother measuring anymore |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ah, tldr works both ways though. I was having lunch with an Economist last week and amongst the things we were talking about was the setting of the threshold of tax on the highest earners (far higher than either of us would ever earn). The after about 20 minutes of discussion, it was clear we agreed that it was in everyone's interest not to just keep raising the percentage of tax taken, whilst lowering the threshold at which this rate of "supertax" occurred. That was about 20 minutes of discussion, between two people who had read books on the subject already (and it turned out our reading lists had overlapped in places) that we could reference and expand upon and were roughly in agreement to begin with anyway. The problem is, these long discussions don't work with most people and not everything can be simplified to the point that everyone can understand, without losing something core to the argument, in that simplification. The masses want a snappy soundbite that even the most stupid and deficient in concentration can memorise and chant. They want a motto they can rally behind, ideally one that paints something/someone specific (which must of course, be something other than them) as the root of all evil, that they can target. Even something as simple as, "Look in the mirror" (asking people to look at themselves and what they have done to cause problem x and what they can do to change it) wouldn't work, despite meeting the other requirements. The reason being, it requires people to look dispassionately at themselves and their own vested interests and biases (no matter how wrong, illogical and hypocritical those might be). |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hahahahaaaaa no I don't have a list and I don't know how to help you. Ever tried to go into your local social centre? I share your frustrations. I recognise in my head the structural and innate state/societal problems around me (an understanding which means almost nothing materially) and I'm not convinced about the efficiency of social movements who operate with a capital M . |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if you want a snappy soundbite for the masses, try, "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself." this sentiment is present in pretty much every religion, including science ("for every reaction, there is an equal and opposite reaction"). reciprocity is not something that requires a lot of discussion to understand; the trick is keeping it in mind as you go about life. if you even give a shit, that is -- there are the problem people that believe it'll never catch up with them, and prolapsed anuses that enjoy being bastards, of course |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I agree that's a good one. Philosophers spend a lot of time deliberating over the (effectively two) variations thereof: Do to others as you would like them to do to you. And Don't do anything to other people you wouldn't want them to do to you. I tend to fall into the camp that believes the latter is the "more realistic" (better? more honest?) of the two. I'd love some total stranger to walk up to me and say, "Here's £100,000, no strings attached. Do what you want with it, have a nice day." At the same time, I am realistic enough to know that this happens so rarely as to be statistically insignificant and that the chances of it ever being reciprocated, were I to sell my house and give the proceeds away is practically nil. Conversely, I don't expect others to do this (no matter how much I might want them to) for me. Instead, me not ripping someone off to the tune of £100,000 is what I avoid and expect from others. I do tend to agree some people are just bastards who enjoy being evil towards people, but my experience is that these are in a much smaller (albeit highly visible and annoying) minority than people are generally inclined to believe and that the overwhelming majority of people are in fact fundamentally decent. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"Thank God for decent people." --Raoul Duke, Fear and Loathing |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well, I don't really want to arm "rebels" in Syria but it's being done in my name. What did the massive march against the war in Iraq achieve? Sweet Fuck. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Oh and with regards my "Look in the mirror" statement: I was advocating that whenever people complain about something, that they look at themselves and what they did that caused, contributed or allowed this to happen and focus on fixing/changing that, rather than something external, over which they have no control. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"Raising Awareness" and protesting is such nonsense way of addressing a problem. Boycotting to a certain extent is good, as it's effectively a means of voting (with your wallet) on an issue and will (provided it matters to enough people) motivate even the most amoral capitalist corporation to "Do the Right Thing". Going out and waving placards and posting about it on the internet though? It's pointless. What percentage of the people who thought the Iraq war was a good idea saw the protest and went, "Shit, I've been wrong all along, lets vote against George Bush" as a result of seeing a protest? You're more likely to just irritate/alienate 'floating voters' who are indifferent to your cause by making them late for work. See #2 of superb article for a good explanation of why "raising awareness" is so pointless and lazy. In fact, read the whole article. It's Rad to the Max. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
this reminds me of psych classes where they told us about INTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL vs. EXTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I read it all and yes, Rad to the Max. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
what was the outcome of the debates in OP? has everything been cut? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Even the people with money aren't going to have any at this rate. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Face it! Brits are going to sit and spin once their 'dole' is taken from them. This is a nation of serfs that still worship monarch figureheads. Those people are entirely useless and stand for something we (the Yanks) rightfully fought against. You lime eaters are, unfortunately, used to the Daddy State taking care of you and are in for a rude awakening. But look on the bright side: none of you are armed so when the Chavs come knocking in the night to steal your shit at least you won't get shot. You won't be able to defend yourself, but that's not a bid deal, right? Have you ever heard someone with a heavy Hindu accent say "Scooby Dooby Doo?" If not I strongly urge you to enlist one. It's almost as entertaining as hearing a sexy young Vietnamese woman say "Me SOOOO Hoooeeeneeeeee." |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Great read, BTW Ceri. Also it linked me to The Last Psychiatrist and that blog is a goldmine. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
That internet research really is working out for you, friend. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I shoulda guessed you'd have taken my prescient statement as a personal criticism of you, haft. Instead of seasoning your fish and chips with your tears why don't you get up and get moving and prove me wrong? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hey ceri i've finished hating you i dont disagree with that article but... close family friend is single mother trying to make things right for her kid who is a bit of a bastard...he might have adhd or something cos he's hell. the kids dad is a cunt. he started sending messages on facebook saying the mother had been hitting the kid. couple weeks later he takes it to the school + social services. he is a stupid but controlling man and has co-opted the child into lying along with him. the kid is flipping out and panicking cos the dad says 'i'll kill myself if i dont have you in my life' (he's notorious for faking epileptic fits and threatening suicide to get what he wants out of people). the single mother has no legal aid. she could EASILY lose her kid. ykno thats the kind of thing this thread is about |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
haha i thought you were just playing the internet fool but i think you actually serious! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
btw dudes ALL of this happened because the UK turned selfish. thatcher was a bitch and thought alan greenspan style economics would make this country great for the go getters so we all turned american. ever since there has been no such thing as society. now we are lonely, respect extortion, feel outraged when anything steps in the way of our own individual destiny, and take it all out on people weaker than ourselves. we give no shits at all and honestly believe its unfair to have to feel guilty. we dont believe in society and will hand the world over to the ones who get an erection when they take from unlucky people |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Even after the "hagus [sic]" comment, you think Ireland means Scotland and/or the UK. You symbolize how retardedly confident in their opinions the ignorant so often are. For the record, nationality means sweet fuck all outside of the law of averages anyway, unless you're from America which is of course #1 in all contests. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
but actually the reason we so easily steered ourselves into being thatcher cunts was because the parental attitude of the state was making anyone who wasnt completely normal feel weird (guilty) about themselves. liberation of the self = free from guilt i want to make choons that bring back guilt but defeat it. check dat awesome shit i do on soudclound |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I'm no European so excuse my ignorance but... as nasty as this stuff is, isn't it all basically necessary? With regards to the UK wasn't the whole Labour boom thing basically just a massive binge on made-up money? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hey dude. i just found this which is basically how i believe things went. "Initially the housing bubble in the USA and the banks funding this were falling giving out bad debts, which meant that they weren’t going to be repayed. This caused a mass drop in the confidence levels, which expanded across the world, leading to banks globally to call in those unpayable bad debts, resulting in what we know as the credit crunch. Some people may say that this was a tradition started, nay positively encouraged by right wing governments on both sides of the Atlantic – yes it was. Unfortunately, by the time Labour got into power in 1997, there was a global neo-liberal dogma about banking regulation, very hard to challenge, which meant that all parties were calling for yet more de-regulation " |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"Currently the Tory-led government has a policy of cutting public services, cutting welfare spending and removing support that keeps people in employment and economically viable. This is not only hurting the most vulnerable, it is actually making it harder for us to achieve stable growth." cant figure out why i havnt heard more people say this sort of thing. i mean, is this wrong? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
That sums it up pretty well. It's like an 18 year old with a credit card that trebles their spending power. For a short time, they enjoy a quality of life that far outstrips what they've earnt. Over time, this quality of life becomes 'normal' for them. When the crunch comes, it hits double hard. Not only do they have to scale back to less than they would have had before the credit card, but the difference feels huge because they compare their post-boom austerity period quality of life, not to the life they had before the credit card (as they ought to), but to the "good times" period when they were racking up the credit card bill. It was interesting yesterday hearing Tories considering one of their peers 'extreme' for proposing that if we are to continue to allow EU immigration, we need to ensure that these people can only claim benefits once they have been here and contributed to the system for a certain period of time. It's quite amusing to me, particularly in the current clime, that this is seen as somehow controversial, particularly amongst the conservatives. Of course, the whole thing is really a power-play to stir up anti-Europe feelings, so the masses will want out of the EU, so they'll vote the Tories in next time, in order to get the referendum that'll allow them to. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I left the UK 12 years ago, I am so glad I did. I can not believe how much of a downturn the country has gone through since I left. But more importantly what happened to all the lovely country pubs? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
wait. youre agreeing with drillrods? we all had a money binge? it's the first time this country wasnt a racist queer bashing spam eating woman hating shit hole full of people with no colour or dreams boxed up in tiny houses you only see on eastenders. i cant believe people actually think this is a return to normality. it's a bit of a wright stuff opinion, no? ykno like noels hq saying the countries gone to the dogs since tax credits helped everyday hard workers meet their bills. complete bullshit when you think about it huh? (even tho i know exactly what people mean ykno. it was a bit of a binge. although binge culture comes from excessive attitudes ((THE 80S)) and not because of a charitable caring government). its the kind of thing people who watched Noel's HQ would say honestly. fuck this country its for arseholes actually |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah fuckit. i'd leave but im basically tied down so i cant maybe. bastards |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The problem lies in the misguided belief that growth was eternal. Economists were warning of this happening for years before. I saw it first hand when manufacturing in Europe shifted to Spain and Portugal a lot of people lost their jobs through this. Then when China stepped in those people in Spain and Portugal lost their jobs and what made it worse there was that the factories they had recently built were not paid for. Britain took full advantage of globalisation in the 80 and 90s but what made Britain strong then, bit it in the ass in the 00s |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you know better than i but i think you are pretty much right. i think if governments and consumers hadnt believed this never ending growth without responsibility bullshit then the financial sector couldnt have got away with doing whatever it was they did. we turned blind eyes cos ykno we wanted to live the dream just like our friend listentoometalk who has a gun to protect his dreams. would have all worked out if we just felt like being responsible instead of being so individual and selfish - so its still all thatchers fault. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
In all honesty, for all the crappy things Thatcher did she made the 80 and 90 very good for the UK |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ampi max: another country must want you for you to immigrate and I don't get the feeling you bring enough to the table. What kind of education, skills and or wealth do you have to offer? Haft: we get it, bro....you think I'm ignorant and that you are better than me yet refuse to refute my statements. Do you do duck lips when you photograph yourself for facebook? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yes. The reasons why her actions, were, in the long term, best for most people in the UK were largely due to chance and external factors and not omniscient insight on her part. Her motives may have been questionable and there have undeniably been unpleasant consequences* as a byproduct. Nonetheless, looking at it dispassionately: A) The coal is still there and is appreciating as an asset all the time. If peakoil ever happens (it won't, but lets pretend it will) this alone will be negate all the perceived wrong she did. B) By "killing off manufacturing" she gave us a head start on forcing us to diversify into a service industry. If she hadn't, we'd still have had this transition, but it would have been vastly sharper and less pleasant, than the 20 year gradient of decline that has been far easier to manage. *"home" for me is the town the majority of the world's coal used to go through, prior to her closing the pits and my grandfather worked on the docks here. I grew up during this and lived through the fallout, so please, no one give me some embittered socialist view of how, "I don't know what it was like" , or claim that I'm downplaying this and that I can't appreciate what it really did to the communities affected. -------- As to the 'personal responsibility' component. It's not just about a Randian expectation that people fight to provide for themselves and fucking the weak over. It's about recognising that for every banker who got rich quick, loaning money to people that had no hope of repaying it, there were a thousand people clamouring to borrow more than they needed** or were able to repay. Every one of those people are at least as much to blame as the bankers and the government of the time who failed to curb it. **These weren't people who were forced into the corner; these were boom times. They had enough, yet borrowed more, in order to fund houses larger than they needed and lavish holidays and brand new cars that they were never entitled to. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yes because as foucault said and implied in the video i linked above, power is dynamic and is exchanged between all participants in society all the time. So yes, people who borrowed at their leisure were part of the problem, they had power. However, the power dynamic between borrower and borrowing institution is not equal to begin with. Borrowers are held to their debt, borrowers don't get bailed out, bankers do. :) The rules are broken by those who have the power to break them when it is needed to (in order to maintain the balance of power). In the context of all the shit that has happened in this country the last few years the news in the OP is pretty sickening. At this point I would say something horrible about the conservative goverment but this is not the problem, the problems are systematic, party politics itself for example. The philosophy behind liberal democracy/capitalism is ugly and should be engaged, definitely not normatively assumed as 'the way things are' as is so often the case in these discussions. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
btw just to be clear, the reason the banks were in debt was due to their own malpractice. Thus their rightful and continued demonisation. :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It's ironic that you say the borrowers don't get bailed out. It's rarer, but it happens. The pay day loans companies are going to be forced to repay money they got from their borrowers, to the borrowers. Now, I think the payday loan companies are reprehensible cockroaches who thrive on the weak and needy, but nonetheless: They provided a service that no one else was prepared to, due to the risk. It's a bit like mercenaries in a war; they have to make the big bucks, because the risks are so high. If the market is sent the message that if you lend to high risk people, who you have little chance of recouping from, you'll have your profits taken away, the consequence is that this sort of lending becomes even riskier. So no one will do it. So these people who genuinely need* them will no longer have this option. Think also of the people who have shares in these companies and the hit they'll take as a result. I know the left love to paint shareholders as a bunch of privileged upper-middle class sorts and some doubtless are. A lot, however, are things like pensions and savings accounts being invested and a poor ROI for them also hurts the working stiffs who are just hoping to put some money aside for their future. *and for those who do, as fucked a model as it is, it's still a better option than the alternative of a loan shark who'll make you hold life-sentence level quantities of drugs for them to 'work off' your debt, or take your daughter as payment. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
thing is the borrower didnt have any power when you think about it from a really human perspective. the mission of many huge cancerous organisations was to hypnotise clueless people into desiring too much stuff. if your view on life is shaped by companies spending millions to make you want to buy and consume then how are you supposed to turn down huge sums of money (from companies that spend millions making you trust them). its a bit like saying the groomed teenage girl is just as bad as the rapey pedo ring cos now she feels loved for the first time and lets it happen. people at the bottom are being punished now but what did they indulge in? it was shitty corporate toys for their kids, bigger tv, booze, plastic food, stuff like that. all of it just seemed like an utterly tragic attempt to be happy and now they need to feel guilty for even trying? they didnt know better and no alternative was ever really given to them. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
See, this is the point where I think our views on the matter fundamentally differ and what causes me to have a different opinion* to you on this. You compare the person making the (bad) choice to borrow and live beyond their means for pointless things to a sexually abused teenager. The reason we have laws to protect the groomed girl is precisely because she isn't an adult yet. I know in reality, maturity and foresight is a gradient and it varies from individual, but we have to draw the line in the sand somewhere and say: After this point, you're an adult and you are now responsible. I think if you don't do that, you can never expect anyone (paupers or bankers) to act responsibly and "behave like a grown up" and with that, have the obligation of personal and social responsibility. It's like when middle class intellectuals talk about the working classes as if their actions were fatalistically determined, but that the intellectuals themselves are intelligent, consequently have free-will and hence, responsibility (both for their own actions and with it, an obligation to do something the problem). To me this seems horribly insulting and means that you're classing the 'victims' as some sort of stupid animals that can only ever be expected to act on base, short-term interest, in response to stimuli from their intellectual superiors. Then they make the viewpoint even more offensive, by suggesting that this isn't true for all humanity, just for "the proles" and that only the bad guys (corporations, religions, those with the power) etc. and the good guys (the intellectuals who see this as wrong and want to do something about it) are really truly sentient. The 'victims' become mindless chattel in this model. I prefer to believe we all have the capacity for free will and a responsibility (both for ourselves and for the greater collective of society) to exercise it. *Not that this any ways indicates which of us is really 'right', just analysing why we differ. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
raped teenage girl analogy: the point here is that a victim is psychologically assaulted to the point of blind compliance, something advertising corporations have invested absolutely millions into doing - and it works. ceri its not fair that you are saying 'well she shouldnt have let it happen, she should have put up more of a fight, and she shouldnt have enjoyed it' cos thats what your 'taking responsibility' means here. '...the reason we have laws to protect the groomed girl is precisely because she isn't an adult yet' no. we also have laws to protect adults including men in abusive relationships because they are just as vulnerable to assault. imagine 'raped housewife' was the example cos its exactly the same. would you say to the housewife 'take responsibility' because shes grown up now and theres a 'line in the sand'? bullshit. it dosnt matter what age you are, most the time in this world its impossible to take responsibility and solve your own crisis. people everywhere including you need lots and lots of help to get even the basics done. in a thread about evil bastards exploiting the unfortunate you seem to have focused on the unfortunate as people who wont take responsibility (which has systematically been made nearly impossible), almost as if they are worse than the awful fuckers who are payed to tinker with peoples minds, feed them poisonous information, and move the goal posts when ever they feel like it. i honestly cant see how people are supposed to take responsibility when they've had it taken from them. (honestly ceri i get what you saying of course i do. i havnt got the time and patience to care for every fucker who cant make their own good decisions in life. but im saying im wrong to think like that. we all are) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The coolest part is; That you can make music on your computer or online. And also run it remotely, no matter where you are... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
