UKMT Red October 2015: Basically D&D's Communist Motherbase

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > UKMT Red October 2015: Basically D&D's Communist Motherbase

«‹›191 »

Jack the Lad: Jan 20, 2009; Feed the Pubs

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad posted:

While on the subject of DWP successes http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34588859
quote:
Work Programme 'fails to find work for 70% of claimants'

The Work and Pensions committee says 70% of Work Programme participants are still not getting longterm jobs and "we owe it" to them "to do much better".

The MPs said the �5bn Work Programme - launched in 2011 - was "not working well" for people with complex problems.

Ministers say it is "a real success".
trebles all round! (at a4e)

Very much worth noting on this, the Work Programme launched in June 2011 and it's still literally worse than doing nothing at all. People in the Work Programme are less likely to get a job than people who aren't.

For example: The MPL (Minimum Performance Level) for Work Programme contractors was originally set at 5.5% and applied to 3 of the 9 claimant groups, which jointly constitute the majority of the Programme: JSA claimaints aged 19-24, JSA claimants aged 25+ and ESA claimants expected to be fit for work in the near future. The 5.5% MPL was calculated as a 10% improvement on the number of people that would be expected to find work by themselves (5%) and the contractors were to have achieved it by 31 March 2012. They didn't even come close:

Overall none of the three claimant groups saw results better than 1%, which means that Work Programme contractors somehow managed to stop more than 4 out of 5 people who would have found work without their help from finding work.

In the chart above you can see that the Work Programme caused 19,769 fewer people to find work in the period June 2011 - March 2012 than would have it hadn't existed.

Because contractors are paid by result (�14k per person who finds a job while on the Programme) they tend to focus their efforts on the people most likely to find jobs - who are also the people least likely to need help. Many of these people would find work with no help at all, and when they do find work while on the Programme it's often not because of anything a contractor has done. You can be assigned to the Work Programme, forced to attend pointless groups, classes, sessions with coaches etc, find your own job despite all the hassle from them... and have them take credit for it and receive a payment of �14k from the government for doing such a good job.

Contractors have also been paid contractually mandatory non-performance-based bonuses of millions of pounds every year of the Programme.

The Programme is due to cost �5bn over 5 years.

Maybe the Tories should have cut the Work Programme instead of Tax Credits?

Jack the Lad fucked around with this message at 10:36 on Oct 22, 2015

# ? Oct 22, 2015 10:27

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 30, 2024 11:29

Pissflaps: Oct 20, 2002; by VideoGames

Oberleutnant posted:

All crisps are working class in the absolute sense as cheap snack food. But where would leftists be if we weren't picking at threads to decide who's the proliest of all on the flimsiest of evidence?

Do you think the queen hastily rustles up a batch of tomato ketchup mixed with mayonnaise, with a good quirt of lemon juice before pouring it over recently defrosted prawns before every Christmas dinner? Of course she doesnt. But my mam does and I love it. Prawn cocktail is working class as hell.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 10:44

communism bitch: Apr 24, 2009

Pissflaps posted:

Do you think the queen hastily rustles up a batch of tomato ketchup mixed with mayonnaise, with a good quirt of lemon juice before pouring it over recently defrosted prawns before every Christmas dinner? Of course she doesnt

You don't know that

# ? Oct 22, 2015 10:47

Tesseraction: Apr 5, 2009

She enjoys a hearty meal of whatever it is lizards eat.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 10:49

Kegluneq: Feb 18, 2011; Mr President, the physical reality of Prime Minister Corbyn is beyond your range of apprehension. If you'll just put on these PINKOVISION glasses...

Pissflaps posted:

Do you think the queen hastily rustles up a batch of tomato ketchup mixed with mayonnaise, with a good quirt of lemon juice before pouring it over recently defrosted prawns before every Christmas dinner? Of course she doesnt. But my mam does and I love it. Prawn cocktail is working class as hell.

She puts her cereal in tupperware boxes, you don't know how she lives!

Also doesn't marie rose sauce have brown sauce in as well? I'm sure in my pub kitchen days we did it like that (out of sachets no less).

# ? Oct 22, 2015 10:54

Pissflaps: Oct 20, 2002; by VideoGames

Kegluneq posted:

Also doesn't marie rose sauce have brown sauce in as well?

No.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 10:54

TACD: Oct 27, 2000

Here's a good read. I was going to bold parts but honestly I think the whole thing is worth reading:

quote:

A strange thing has happened in the British political scene since the financial crash of 2008. On the one hand, many mainstream economic commentators have begun to question the orthodoxy that prevailed prior to (and which was largely responsible for) the crash and its continuing fallout. This deeper (self-)analysis has occurred even as orthodox ideas have continued to dominate mainstream political debate and public understanding of how the economy works. By contrast, political commentators have for the most part failed to subject their own received wisdom to anything like the same degree of scrutiny. This is all the more surprising given that politics, like the economy, has experienced monumental disruptions and transformations during this period. The first thing I want to do here is to simply point out this strange divergence. The second is to offer a couple of possible explanations for why it might have occurred.

Let�s first be clear: I do not argue that economic orthodoxies do not persist in the mainstream media. They do. One only need pick up any edition of The Economistduring the last seven years (barring a brief period of bewildered near-humility in the few months following September 2008) to see the persistent hold of �zombie neoliberalism�. However, in other quarters the sheer scale of the crisis has forced many commentators who take their jobs seriously to at least be open to alternative ideas. With disastrous public finances (which Osborne�s deficit fanaticism has barely touched), private indebtedness creeping back towards 2007 levels, rock bottom interest rates, and the high probability of another crash that will almost certainly be more serious than the last, we are in uncharted territory. Under these conditions, as the more astute economic observers have noted, the orthodoxy looks not only irrational but positively extremist.

Let us, for example, take the media response to the policy of �People�s Quantitative Easing� (PQE) mooted during Corbyn�s leadership campaign, which proposed to use debt-free money created by the Bank of England to finance large-scale infrastructure spending. His Labour leadership rivals, Conservative ministers and hacks of various stripes (typically those with a limited grasp of the economic argument) dismissed the proposal out of hand on the basis of pre-crash orthodoxy, evoking Weimar Germany, Zimbabwe and other ill-founded comparisons in the process. Curiously, however, Fleet Street�s more informed economic commentators offered qualified backing for the idea. Far from being limited to those on the left, these included Martin Wolf of the FT, Ambrose Evans Pritchard of the Telegraph, and Anatole Kaletsky in Prospect. Following the healthy exchange of ideas that the proposal of PQE stimulated the policy seems to have been side-lined for now, largely due to a persistent (and perhaps idealised) dominant belief in the Bank of England�s current political independence. However, the fact that it is instinctively dismissed by (in many cases ideologically sympathetic) generalists and yet taken seriously by (even ideologically opposed) specialists speaks volumes. The difference is between those who have internalised the rules of the game and now police them officiously, and those who realise that rules are always contingent, that the current ones are failing, and that they should therefore be up for discussion.

This brings me on to the second part of the argument, which is that the kind of healthy exchange of views that accompanied the proposal for PQE has been conspicuously absent in the more narrowly political analysis that has accompanied Corbyn�s rise. Apart from a clutch of columnists from the more iconoclastic wing of the Guardian (Seamus Milne, Owen Jones, Zoe Williams, Aditya Chakraborty and that�s about it) and Peter Oborne, playing his lonely role as a non-doctrinaire and non-hysterical voice on the British right, there has been a resolute refusal to give Corbyn even a fair hearing, let alone any credit. This is hardly a surprise within the dominant right-wing media, but is a sorry state of affairs for publications like The Guardian and New Statesman, which should supposedly encompass a wide spectrum of opinion within the Labour party (including the 60% who voted for Corbyn) and the left more generally.

In particular it has been depressing to see formerly dispassionate and professional, if somewhat insider-y, journalists like George Eaton and Rafael Behr accost Corbyn in increasingly tetchy ways for not following the �rules�. According to them, the Labour leader was obliged to discuss the party�s election defeat in his conference speech and make a �pitch to Middle England�. Apparently his failure to do so was further evidence, if any were still needed, that he is neither serious nor electable. (Who knew that conference speech writing was so prescriptive?) Meanwhile George Osborne�s supposed �pitch to Labour voters�, at the same time as slashing the tax credits of the hard-working families he is so fond of, was �clever politics�. The message is clear: it doesn�t matter that Osborne is pushing through an extreme policy that will make millions of working people dramatically poorer, the simple fact that he declares himself to be on the centre ground automatically makes it so. Or to put it another way, if you brazenly lie you deserve to be taken seriously. Those are the rules. Like it or lump it.[1]

This mental prison in which these mainstream left-liberal commentators have caged themselves has become more clearly visible since Corbyn�s rise, but it has been there all along. These iron laws (read bars) were built on the reverses of the 1980s and the electoral success of New Labour, just as the collapse of the Soviet Union and the so-called �Great Moderation� underpinned resurgent neoliberal orthodoxy in the business pages during the same period. Such rigid thinking may be understandable, if not excusable, in such a context, but why have the dramatic convulsions British politics has experienced since 2010 done so little to shake it? During this time we have seen, among other events, the rise and fall of the Lib Dems as a potential party of government; UKIP becoming a serious political force and bullying the Conservative front bench into offering a referendum on Britain�s EU membership; the SNP wiping out Labour and the Lib Dems in Scotland; and Corbyn�s own victory within the Labour party. From the vantage point of 2007, these events (especially the last two) would have looked unthinkable. They certainly were not predicted by the purportedly serious journalists who now prophesise doom for the Labour Party. And yet here we are.

So what accounts for this woeful lack of imagination, self-reflection and, indeed, humility on the part of seemingly intelligent and informed political commentators? There are certainly several, among which the cosiness of the Westminster village and the over-representation of London-based and middle class journalists are certainly important. We can clearly add the gravitational pull of the predominantly right-wing press in setting the media agenda. The sheer offence some seem to have taken to Corbyn�s rise may be to do with something as petty as the fact that they have lost their privileged access to the top of the Labour Party. However, I would like to proffer two other reasons that reveal more endemic failures of political commentators in the post-2008 world.

The first failure relates to the nature of the object of study. Despite its misplaced self-perception as a quasi-science, macroeconomics is built upon paradigms that have the advantage of, to some extent at least, being refutable. If the neo-classical orthodoxy clearly fails to account for observed conditions in the post-2008 world, those who are not entirely blinded by ideological commitments (still a majority, sadly) are forced to at least engage with alternative explanatory models. The equivalent premises of the current political orthodoxy, by contrast, are far more abstract. These include the oft-repeated claim that Britain is an inherently �conservative country� and the assumption that Labour must always fight on the �centre ground� (whatever that means, if even Osborne can claim to inhabit it!) It is the sheer blandness of such clich�s that has allowed them to survive in the face of steadily mounting evidence to the contrary since 2010.[2] This is not to say there are not aspects of the UK�s political-institutional DNA or important cultural reference points that might exercise a moderating influence over political life. There may well be. But accepting these as the natural laws rather than partial and contingent configurations amounts to an act of self-lobotomy.

A second failure is that political commentators haven�t even begun to grasp the role of big data on (mis)forming perceptions of where political �gravity� lies. I don�t know how many standard deviations May�s Conservative majority was from the dead heat the pollsters had consistently predicted in the election, but it is certainly large enough to warrant contrition from commentators who based their views on such measures. Ironically, it may not be that the calculations were entirely wrong (as was the case with regard to the ratings of sub-prime mortgages for example) but that events in the lead-up to the election ��specifically the �threat� of a Labour-SNP coalition ��swung voting dramatically in the final weeks. Either way, the polling was a very poor predictor of what would actually happen. Yet such data, along with the even more methodologically dubious use of focus groups, continues to form the basis of much journalistic analysis, as well as political strategy. Unforgivably, the refusal of Corbyn to play by such demonstrably flawed logic is now taken by his critics as proof that he will inevitably fail. The story of politics since 2010 is of wild, unforeseen swings, and yet we are still told that we live in a predictable political world governed by natural laws.

Both of these points ��the persistence of zombie centrism and the failure to understand the inherent flaws of big data-based analysis ��point to a common fact that many economic analysts are beginning to grasp, but most political commentators still do not: that the defining features of the post-2008 world are complexityand uncertainty. The liberal-left commentariat seems to be trapped in a weird, geometric world in which the rhetorical �centre� plays an equilibrating role equivalent to the neo-classicals� invisible hand. Unfortunately for them, and us, this bears little resemblance to the world the rest of us inhabit, where assumptions of orderliness and predictability have only passing relevance at best. That doesn�t mean Jeremy Corbyn has a good chance of winning the 2020 election. With most of his own parliamentary party ranged against him, in a country in which the vast majority of the print media is owned by a handful of oligarchs, and with a hostile City of London and security establishment lurking in the wings, I�d say the chances are pretty slim. But that will not be because he does not follow etiquette in his conference speeches, dress his programme up in centrist rhetoric, or obsess about what pollsters say the voters don�t like about him. Indeed his refusal to play by such rules probably improve his chances, because they at least leave open the possibility that he might help to shift the rules of the game in his favour.

Let me end by illustrating my key point with the example of Corbyn�s rise itself. Transport yourself back to late-2012. In a story you never would have heard at the time, an allegation emerged that trade union officials had wrongly interfered in the selection of a Labour parliamentary candidate in the Scottish constituency of Falkirk. Several months later the event gained national attention in a hugely overblown scare story in the right-wing press. Reacting to media pressure, then Labour leader Ed Miliband proposed and managed to pass reforms to the party�s relationship with the trade unions. The same package also replaced the electoral college system that had won him the leadership with a �one member one vote� system. Two years later, following Labour�s electoral defeat and Miliband�s resignation, this new system allowed Corbyn, a token backbench left-wing candidate who didn�t expect even to make the ballot, to sweep his mainstream rivals aside as new and existing members voted for him their droves. In less than three years the Falkirk butterfly had produced the Corbyn hurricane. To those who confidently predict that Labour�s abandonment of the �centre� will leave them out of power for a generation I ask: unknown to us now, what butterflies are beginning to flap their wings?

Apologies if I hosed up any paragraphs, I'm copy/pasting on my phone.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 10:55

serious gaylord: Sep 16, 2007; what.

I like to imagine the queen doing things like a normal grandma tbh. Making some cakes, spoiling the grandchildren with noisy toys their parents will hate. You know, the works.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 10:56

Kegluneq: Feb 18, 2011; Mr President, the physical reality of Prime Minister Corbyn is beyond your range of apprehension. If you'll just put on these PINKOVISION glasses...

serious gaylord posted:

I like to imagine the queen doing things like a normal grandma tbh. Making some cakes, spoiling the grandchildren with noisy toys their parents will hate. You know, the works.

Dying and leaving them a house they could never afford themselves

Pissflaps posted:

No.

That was a rhetorical question and I choose to believe you are wrong :colbert:

Kegluneq fucked around with this message at 11:00 on Oct 22, 2015

# ? Oct 22, 2015 10:58

The Supreme Court: Feb 25, 2010; Pirate World: Nearly done!

serious gaylord posted:

I like to imagine the queen doing things like a normal grandma tbh. Making some cakes, spoiling the grandchildren with noisy toys their parents will hate. You know, the works.

"Here you go Prince George, your very own invincible-class battlecruiser. If you're very good, you'll get the Falklands for Christmas"

# ? Oct 22, 2015 11:00

Puntification: Nov 4, 2009; Black Orthodontromancy
The most British Magic; Fun Shoe

Tesseraction posted:

She enjoys a hearty meal of whatever it is lizards eat.

Human babies.

With marie rose sauce.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 11:02

Guavanaut: Nov 27, 2009; Looking At Them Tittys
1969 - 1998; Toilet Rascal

Kegluneq posted:

She puts her cereal in tupperware boxes, you don't know how she lives!

This is why the pinboarding of certain things as proley or not is bad.
If you're a retired docker who buys a small boat to tool around in, that's still proley, if you're a hereditary monarch who lives off of your massive estate holdings and put your cereal in tupperware boxes, that's still not authentically proletarian.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 11:10

serious gaylord: Sep 16, 2007; what.

The Supreme Court posted:

"Here you go Prince George, your very own invincible-class battlecruiser. If you're very good, you'll get the Falklands for Christmas"

tbf I'd have loved a battleship when I was 8.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 11:13

Phoon: Apr 23, 2010

serious gaylord posted:

I like to imagine the queen doing things like a normal grandma tbh. Making some cakes, spoiling the grandchildren with noisy toys their parents will hate. You know, the works.

i like to imagine her being deposed

# ? Oct 22, 2015 11:19

Tesseraction: Apr 5, 2009

TACD posted:

Here's a good read. I was going to bold parts but honestly I think the whole thing is worth reading:

Apologies if I hosed up any paragraphs, I'm copy/pasting on my phone.

Looks fine to me, and I agree wholeheartedly. It's pretty sad to see that Krugman's Very Serious People are out in full force in the UK. Not surprising, or new, just sad.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 11:23

Kegluneq: Feb 18, 2011; Mr President, the physical reality of Prime Minister Corbyn is beyond your range of apprehension. If you'll just put on these PINKOVISION glasses...

Phoon posted:

i like to imagine her being deposed

tbf my gran isn't queen either

# ? Oct 22, 2015 11:23

Ernie Muppari: Aug 4, 2012; Keep this up G'Bert, and soon you won't have a pigeon to protect!

serious gaylord posted:

tbf I'd have loved a battleship when I was 8.

owning a battleship is a lot of responsibility if you're not rich though

# ? Oct 22, 2015 11:36

Gonzo McFee: Jun 19, 2010

TACD posted:

Here's a good read. I was going to bold parts but honestly I think the whole thing is worth reading:

Apologies if I hosed up any paragraphs, I'm copy/pasting on my phone.

This was very good. Summed up my feelings on the subject but with proper words n' poo poo, yeah.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 11:37

Fluo: May 25, 2007

Ernie Muppari posted:

owning a battleship is a lot of responsibility if you're not rich though

Form a cult and get the cult members to maintain it for you.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 11:41

TomViolence: Feb 19, 2013; PLEASE ASK ABOUT MY 80,000 WORD WALLACE AND GROMIT SLASH FICTION. PLEASE.

Fluo posted:

Form a cult and get the cult members to maintain it for you.

That's pretty much how the armed forces work, yes.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:03

Fluo: May 25, 2007

TomViolence posted:

That's pretty much how the armed forces work, yes.

But you don't have to pay them

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:04

serious gaylord: Sep 16, 2007; what.

Ernie Muppari posted:

owning a battleship is a lot of responsibility if you're not rich though

yeah but everyone at school would be your friend

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:04

Helen Highwater: Feb 19, 2014; And furthermore; Grimey Drawer

Zephro posted:

Britain is full of decadent bourgeois counter revolutionary crisp flavours, Mexican chilli being merely one of their number. Correct Thought recognises only the pure and uncorrupted flavours of Ready Salted and Salt and Vinegar.

Proper British Crisps are one of the things I really miss now that I have departed the shores of Dear Old Blighty. Here in Ukraine, they only have awful crisp choices - some terrible sweaty cheese flavour, Alleged Crab, So-Called Bacon and some weird thing that appears to be sour cream and mushrooms. The only edible flavour is Paprika.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:10

Guavanaut: Nov 27, 2009; Looking At Them Tittys
1969 - 1998; Toilet Rascal

Would they be better or worse under Russian rule, or is it a case for EU membership?

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:13

Angepain: Jul 13, 2012; what keeps happening to my clothes

serious gaylord posted:

yeah but everyone at school would be your friend

well, everyone left after you fire the first few warning shots, that is

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:16

Acaila: Jan 2, 2011

Is putting cereal in tupperware proley? I wouldn't have thought so. Not as bad as putting it in mason jars, but still....

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:21

OwlFancier: Aug 22, 2013

Oberleutnant posted:

I don't think you can get a more bourg crisp flavour than prawn cocktail unless it's like caviar and champagne flavour.

Except it doesn't really taste like prawns it tastes like cocktail sauce which is like, salad cream and tomato sauce, which is hardly fancy.

serious gaylord posted:

I like to imagine the queen doing things like a normal grandma tbh. Making some cakes, spoiling the grandchildren with noisy toys their parents will hate. You know, the works.

I like to imagine she has some army surplus trucks in the back garden of buckingham palace and spends a few hours every day doing donuts in them.

OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 12:28 on Oct 22, 2015

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:23

TomViolence: Feb 19, 2013; PLEASE ASK ABOUT MY 80,000 WORD WALLACE AND GROMIT SLASH FICTION. PLEASE.

There's all kinds of fancy-arse artisanal crisp flavours that are much bourgier than prawn cocktail. Anything that comes in a white packet loudly and proudly proclaiming its many seasonings probably qualifies.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:27

Guavanaut: Nov 27, 2009; Looking At Them Tittys
1969 - 1998; Toilet Rascal

Acaila posted:

Is putting cereal in tupperware proley? I wouldn't have thought so. Not as bad as putting it in mason jars, but still....

Is that because there's something inherently wrong with mason jars? Because if so Comrade Corbyn's jam club would like a word.

Guavanaut fucked around with this message at 12:32 on Oct 22, 2015

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:30

darkwasthenight: Jan 7, 2011; GENE TRAITOR

Acaila posted:

Is putting cereal in tupperware proley? I wouldn't have thought so. Not as bad as putting it in mason jars, but still....

Tupperware is inherently proley imo because why would rich people have any need to save leftovers?

Who can truly say what is proley in this crazy mixed-up world though? I went to Alnwick Castle last month and in the middle of their staggeringly gaudy posh lounge (as seen on Downton and other staggeringly gaudy TV) they have a standard edition foosball table, which I thought were relegated to student digs and late night kebab shops these days tbh.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:32

communism bitch: Apr 24, 2009

darkwasthenight posted:

Tupperware is inherently proley imo because why would rich people have any need to save leftovers?

Who can truly say what is proley in this crazy mixed-up world though? I went to Alnwick Castle last month and in the middle of their staggeringly gaudy posh lounge (as seen on Downton and other staggeringly gaudy TV) they have a standard edition foosball table, which I thought were relegated to student digs and late night kebab shops these days tbh.

Alnwick, like our castle, is set up so the public bit is used as family residence part of the year, so you can see all kinds of really incongruous poo poo sometimes. Down here you only have to go slightly off the tour route to see portraits by gainsborough or van dyck hanging right next to the present Duke's daughter's year 8 landscape painting of unicorns frolicking in a field with rainbows and mummy and daddy flying through the sky, or the previous duchess' paintings of anthropomorphic dogs working as postmen.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:39

kapparomeo: Apr 19, 2011; Some say his extreme-right links are clearly known, even in the fascist capitalist imperialist Murdochist press...

OwlFancier posted:

I like to imagine she has some army surplus trucks in the back garden of buckingham palace and spends a few hours every day doing donuts in them.

The papers seem to have a bit of a giggle every time the Queen is spotted behind the wheel but given the intermittent squabbles over ministerial chauffeurs (I remember early on in the Coalition when Cameron got on his bike to go green but still had a car with his papers following on) I reckon that she probably drives herself around more than most cabinet members.

She does look dwarfed by that steering wheel though I have to say.

kapparomeo fucked around with this message at 12:44 on Oct 22, 2015

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:41

hookerbot 5000: Dec 21, 2009

darkwasthenight posted:

Tupperware is inherently proley imo because why would rich people have any need to save leftovers?

Who can truly say what is proley in this crazy mixed-up world though? I went to Alnwick Castle last month and in the middle of their staggeringly gaudy posh lounge (as seen on Downton and other staggeringly gaudy TV) they have a standard edition foosball table, which I thought were relegated to student digs and late night kebab shops these days tbh.

I'd say it's the opposite now though. Things that used to be proley like making your own clothes and storing food in jars (that they didn't originally come in) is now what middle class people do. Kind of like breastfeeding too. The pattern seems to be, working class people do something, get sneered at, stop doing the thing, middle class people start doing it and sneer at the working class for not doing it. This theory will probably not stand up to any scrutiny though, I just made it up.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:42

DesperateDan: Dec 10, 2005; Where's my cow?

Is that my cow?

No it isn't, but it still tramples my bloody lavender.

Guavanaut posted:

Is that because there's something inherently wrong with mason jars? Because if so Comrade Corbyn's jam club would like a word.

If you have mason jars at this time of year that aren't full of sloes and gin, or blackberries and vodka, you are really missing out on things

hookerbot 5000 posted:

I'd say it's the opposite now though. Things that used to be proley like making your own clothes and storing food in jars (that they didn't originally come in) is now what middle class people do. Kind of like breastfeeding too. The pattern seems to be, working class people do something, get sneered at, stop doing the thing, middle class people start doing it and sneer at the working class for not doing it. This theory will probably not stand up to any scrutiny though, I just made it up.

I'm pretty poor and fruit/fruit booze that's very cheap/free is nice.

You can distinguish the bourgie people because they buy fancy jars to put jams e.t.c in rather than just re-capping some old ragu jars

DesperateDan fucked around with this message at 12:47 on Oct 22, 2015

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:45

Kokoro Wish: Jul 23, 2007; Post? What post? Oh wow.
I had nothing to do with THAT.

Oberleutnant posted:

Alnwick, like our castle, is set up so the public bit is used as family residence part of the year, so you can see all kinds of really incongruous poo poo sometimes. Down here you only have to go slightly off the tour route to see portraits by gainsborough or van dyck hanging right next to the present Duke's daughter's year 8 landscape painting of unicorns frolicking in a field with rainbows and mummy and daddy flying through the sky, or the previous duchess' paintings of anthropomorphic dogs working as postmen.

My hometown, and I can attest that these are, infact, very, horrifically real. Also the grand hall full of the decapitated heads of animals all over the walls that made several of my classmates cry.

Kokoro Wish fucked around with this message at 13:09 on Oct 22, 2015

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:46

communism bitch: Apr 24, 2009

hookerbot 5000 posted:

I'd say it's the opposite now though. Things that used to be proley like making your own clothes and storing food in jars (that they didn't originally come in) is now what middle class people do. Kind of like breastfeeding too. The pattern seems to be, working class people do something, get sneered at, stop doing the thing, middle class people start doing it and sneer at the working class for not doing it. This theory will probably not stand up to any scrutiny though, I just made it up.

Marx does a great bit about the destruction of what you might call Home Economics - the self-manufacture and repair of clothing and furnishings, dedicated care of children etc, as a deliberate bourgeois strategy to expand consumption behaviour and grow markets which was necessary for the growth of capital. It's harder to sell people baby formula or new clothes or ready-made, freeze-dried food if they have the time to do these things in the home from raw ingredients, and certainly if they are able to maintain and repair things over a long service life (furniture and clothes especially).
Of course a lot of these activities were traditionally relegated to women, so a whole aspect of women's rights and independence enters into the discussion which makes it a minefield to discuss.

Point being I guess is that those that have the time and money to do these things now are those who aren't working three jobs just to keep the wolves from the door.

communism bitch fucked around with this message at 12:50 on Oct 22, 2015

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:48

serious gaylord: Sep 16, 2007; what.

kapparomeo posted:

The papers seem to have a bit of a giggle every time the Queen is spotted behind the wheel but given the intermittent squabbles over ministerial chauffeurs (I remember early on in the Coalition when Cameron got on his bike to go green but still had a car with his papers following on) I reckon that she probably drives herself around more than most cabinet members.

She does look dwarfed by that steering wheel though I have to say.

I like the security guy making the face every man over 30 does when in the back seat of a car. I bet he's doing the phantom brake pedal push too when getting to junctions.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:48

LemonDrizzle: Mar 28, 2012; neoliberal shithead

Could there be a more stereotype-matching Tory backbencher?

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:49

Lord of the Llamas: Jul 9, 2002; EULER'VE TO SEE IT VENN SOMEONE CALLS IT THE WRONG THING AND PROVOKES MY WRATH

TACD posted:

Here's a good read. I was going to bold parts but honestly I think the whole thing is worth reading:

Apologies if I hosed up any paragraphs, I'm copy/pasting on my phone.

I enjoyed most of the article until the author reached his "big data" section. Polling is literally the opposite of big data as it's using a small sample to estimate the true proportions using a model, i.e. the weightings. The models were flawed (although the FPTP system massively exaggerated how far off the polls were) and this is actually not a surprise in retrospect due to the multiple seismic occurrences in UK politics as mentioned and the pollsters having no new ground truth data to recalibrate their models against prior to the election. Ironically the author's lack of understanding here kind of proves their point - that the commentariat don't understand these things well yet use them to back up their opinions constantly.

Lord of the Llamas fucked around with this message at 13:03 on Oct 22, 2015

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:49

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 30, 2024 11:29

OwlFancier: Aug 22, 2013

I went to chillingham once and I think that's still lived in. It's weird having like this dropping to bits stone castle that someone's just stuck a suite in.

# ? Oct 22, 2015 12:50

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > UKMT Red October 2015: Basically D&D's Communist Motherbase

«‹›191 »