It won't surprise you to know this cluster is another one linked to a marketplace. Even if it stops circulating amongst humans, it's in the wildlife.Originally Posted by Yevrah
It won't surprise you to know this cluster is another one linked to a marketplace. Even if it stops circulating amongst humans, it's in the wildlife.
Marcus has won his victory. It really is a shambolic failure of leadership that a footballer has to make these things happen. There is an incontrovertible Conservative case for shoring up the weakest in society - free school meals is not commie redistribution, it's affording everyone the most basic of opportunity - but with this lot it's Brexit do nothing Brexit do nothing.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-12007880
Mon the pubs
Free school meals are fucking huge. My potential future thesis advisor did a lot of groundwork in India doing RCTs relating to free school lunches for children and found that that policy alone had a dramatic impact on future wellbeing and productivity. Equivalent to something like 3 additional years of schooling. Not to mention the simple moral imperative of not letting kids walk around emaciated
Everyone will just have glaucoma and early cataracts instead.
I'm a twit
You can have your free school meal in school. On the other hand, the Foreign Office has absorbed the Department for International Development, so I'll put off calling Boris Johnson shit for another week, by which time it will have turned out that the absorption went the other way and overseas policy is now subject to a gayness audit.
Starmer is donning Borris senseless since he took over.
You've never met an American conservative in that case.
Come to think of it, Giggles would fit in perfectly in rural America. Swap Irish football for the local high school baseball team and you'd be set.
You could have at least given me high school football instead of that swill.
This cunt thinks he is the Mayor of New York.
Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews has ignited a cross-border war of words, questioning why anyone would want to go to South Australia after its borders were opened to travellers from some states but not others.
Key points:
Daniel Andrews questioned why people would want to visit South Australia
His comments have prompted a backlash from some, including the SA Premier
South Australia reopened its borders to WA, NT and Tasmania overnight
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-...ening/12363630
Last edited by Queenslander; 17-06-2020 at 04:33 AM.
Ooff what a headline!
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-...itain/12364838Jacinda Ardern assigns military leader to oversee NZ quarantine after two travellers with coronavirus released to visit dying parent
My vision of proper conservatism is about keeping things the same, which to my mind means a mixture of A. staying out of people's lives and money (for example by not taxing it and spending on ill-advised shite), but B. also having the capacity to stop people from falling off cliffs, whether of their own making or otherwise.
The key to both is removing the ego from the politician/body politic. British Conservatives have been awful for some time, with one faction (the David Cameron types) wanting to follow Blair in being deeply involved in A, while the other (Boris Brexiteers) are fine with A but not interested in B. The two have to come hand-in-hand, because a sink-or-swim society generally only rewards luck or existing wealth, but a heavily interventionist or socialist setup stifles talent and innovation.
American conservatism seems to me more like some warped form of enforced libertarianism which forms the worst of both worlds - insistent on keeping people in line, especially if they're poor or black, but with no interest in keeping them afloat. 'The American dream' is just rich men justifying themselves.
Last edited by Jimmy Floyd; 17-06-2020 at 08:20 AM.
That post is what rubs me the wrong way about your politics.
You can see the conservatives are "awful", you can see they are currently allowing vulnerable people to go off their various cliffs unhelped, but you will still just vote for them anyway. It comes across like "yeah I guess that's kind of bad for kids to starve but I don't care enough to not actively support the people responsible".
It's consistent with viewing them as the least shit option.
You're voting for a government and the interests of the most vulnerable are only one of many things that go into your decision. Welfare is only part of a government's job. I think socialism (especially of the type put forward by J.Corbyn in the last election) is more morally wrong than most other things and it would need to be the least bad option on the table before I voted for it.
At its heart, socialism is Person Y in an office somewhere deciding they know better than Person X what Person X's interests are, and giving themselves the power to enforce that opinion. Social democracy is the same thing but with a few more checks. I don't think I will ever be able to get on board with that philosophy as long as I live.
And on the point about kids starving, let's be fully honest with ourselves here. Do any of us really care about kids starving?
I think we all would prefer it if fewer or ideally no kids starved. Can we do anything about the fact that kids starve? Yes, we can - I could volunteer at a food bank, or I could donate to charities that prevent kids from starving. Doing this would have a direct impact on the number of starving kids - you could probably even quantify the number of kids that you personally had prevented from starving, if you really wanted to. So why don't I do either of those things? I can only conclude that it's because I just don't care enough about kids starving that I do not prioritise other things (mainly my own needs and wants) ahead of it.
Why, then, would I pretend that I'm a good person and that stopping kids from starving is my priority by convincing myself that a certain general election vote every five years is the way to do it? It's just dishonesty.
The most moral thing I do is work and pay taxes and trust the government of the day to allocate them appropriately for everyone's benefit.
Well, no, as you've already made clear you vote for a government you fully believe won't allocate the funds for everyone's benefit.
The "volunteering for a charity" thing is a red herring if an argument, given its something extra you'd actively have to do, whilst voting is something you already do.
You essentially say yourself there that no, you don't really care. Which is what I've always said comes across, and what I've always said I find unlikeable about you, so it's nice to see it laid out.
Do YOU care more, and if so, do you do anything differently to me about it other than voting Labour, the effectiveness of which is pretty much solely to make you feel good about yourself?
What you are doing is confusing 'the benefit of the most vulnerable' with 'the benefit of everyone', which is not the same thing at all and gives one a saviour complex which I don't think is terribly helpful.
Last edited by Jimmy Floyd; 17-06-2020 at 01:43 PM.
I've been giving to the food bank regularly which we've set up at work for a charity which helps to feed kids. But no I'm not going to pretend to be a superhero.
The one thing I can do which could actually make a significant difference is voting to try and elect a government which is more caring of the vulnerable. Unfortunately it is ineffective, because the majority seem to care more about GETTING BREXIT DONE and having a bit more of their own disposable income than they do other people.
Even that act of minor superhero-dom will be far more effective than any Labour vote you ever put into the ballot box, even when they win power again. Similarly, the Tories always disappoint me as outlined above, but that doesn't mean I'm necessarily going to stop voting for them until something else presents itself more in line with what I believe central government should be about.
Wouldn't you vote for one of the even more demented socialist parties if you really, really cared?
I don't see any point in voting for a party which has literally no hope of winning anything. I wrongly hoped Labour had some actual chance of being elected last time out.
I'm not a communist, btw.
Didn't the New Labour years see a large reduction in child poverty?
The goodness of a society is obviously measured by the quality of care afforded to the worst off and most disadvantaged. Rich people will always be fine. The only valid point that any conservative party has is that too much help makes an economy inefficient (distortions!!1) and unable to compete, which down the road could make everyone worse off. Which would be a good argument in some universe, but certainly not in our mind-bogglingly unequal world, and due to the inherent/inherited benefits of wealth we'll probably never be at a point in a Western country where more support for the poorest (and thus an improvement the productivity and usefulness of the poorest, if you want to think about it in those terms) will send a nation into pauper territory
Not in Iraq.
New Labour did loads of great stuff around welfare which the Corbyn people like to ignore thanks to Iraq - which is exactly what I'm saying about central government being much more than a welfare dispenser.
Ffs
Has Taz done a blank post there? Good representation of his overall contribution.
Someone confirm that's a technical issue on RL's part so I can shit up his nostrils appropriately.
I see it.
I am also unfortunately seeing Taz posts.
God, I'm so wet rn. Come with a towel of the finest premium Egyptian cotton and a mighty mighty threadcount, RL.
I reckon you could still amuse yourself for an afternoon looking up rude words in the dictionary.
Fucking hell I'm such a miserable cunt on here lately. I'm sure you're all lovely people.
Were clearly not.
Keep it up
The thought of museums being all one-way, single-file systems boils my blood.
Of all the restrictions it's museums in particular that gets you going?
When they came for Greggs I was silent...
Greggs is out of my life now. There's something about a single-file system that implies a commitment. Sometimes I just want to look at shit or skip shit entirely. I don't want to be stuck at an exhibition on prehistoric housing because the queue feeds me there.
IKEA would do your head in.
It does. It's a windowless pine prison.
Good luck getting a look in with the Chinese tourists anyway taking a picture of everything.
Sacking it off and having my parents and Mike round for breakfast in the garden on Sunday.
RIP mum.
I'm a twit
I've been at my grandma's for the past 4 days. Will report back in 10.
I'm sure this guy is a known specimen in the UK, but i hadn't heard of him before this. Did a little skimming what a lunatic he is:
This is what happens when you let 'libertarians' think they're smartHitchens is an outspoken opponent of British Summer Time and describes the practice as "fanatical and dictatorial" and says the system amounts to "lying about the time".
What does that even mean?
We put our clocks forward by an hour in the spring, then back an hour in the autumn. He's right about it being a waste of time and it isn't even in the top 1000 things that he's been an insufferable cunt about.
Damn that sucks.
We dont have day light savings time in QLD.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
