|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:That noted socialist institution - consumer rights protection - has somehow slipped an extra ace into its hand under the Tories' watch Changing refunds from a reasonable time to 30 days might be a bit of an issue. If I bought a washing machine and it broke after 3 months I would have expected my money back as 3 months is not a reasonable amount of time but 30 days (especially for a product that is only used sporadically) might not be long enough for the flaws to be uncovered. These days warranties and stuff make that statutory right kind of a second thought I guess but still I liked the wiggle room of 'reasonable time'.
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 08:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:54 |
|
|
Junior G-man posted:Have we at long last reached Peak Grauniad? This one stands out to me http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/30/i-didnt-get-the-prenatal-tests-for-downs-syndrome-heres-why#comment-60532804 "Why does a shop assistant appear shocked when I tell her I have no plans to abort my baby after she asked a completely innocuous and unrelated question?" The actual point she is making could be interesting if it wasn't buried in a smug and stupid article. Also a while back there was an article about why it isn't anti feminist to teach her daughter how to cook. I was so relieved she had cleared that up - teaching my children life skills that might pigeon hole them as 'someone who needs to eat occasionally' was filling me with guilt.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 11:09
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:How many hours do we think it takes to hand make one of those? Any knitting experts here? Not that long for the crochet, the putting together would be the worst part. Do we do ever do Secret Santa in this thread? Cos I could whip up a few of those I am sure.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 11:41
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:cookingchat is always good. Apparently the slimy water from tins of chickpeas is a great egg white substitute.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 14:15
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:No, I mean because he's called Nigel. It seems a weirdly... possessive thing for a parent to do. Loads of people up here do it, families have a big Bob and a wee Bob. It's more common for fathers and sons - I don't know any mums and daughters with the same name. Never seen a father/daughter one before and Nigella always makes me think of the bit in Terry Pratchett where there was a character called Nigella and the footnote was *The name means oops we wanted a boy.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I don't understand how we match thread page numbers to dates any more. Is it numberwang? I think some people do "This date in .... something happened" and some people do "In year [connected to thread page number] something happened"
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
Also children, fathers who take more than a passing interest in their offspring are 'new men'. edit: Not my opinion by the way, but how it is presented.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
Now I have to go make cheese scones 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
I still think that a lot of people aren't going to really register that they are going to stop getting a significant amount of their tax credits until next March/April when the renewals go out. A lot of people don't really get how the taper works, where it is now and how changing it will affect them personally.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I'm the squeezed middle. You might get help with childcare costs even if you don't get it not counting them. It's always worth checking after changes in circumstances.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Oh, I've been told to mention that while the staffing costs are enormous, that doesn't translate to good pay for the workers. A lot of the costs come from training and certification which needs to be redone regularly, combined with the high turnover since its quite a poo poo job. Yeah I was going to say that. Bad wages, and not much respect I don't think - or not so much not much respect but like so many careers caring for people it's not really seen as important work. Which is obviously a pile of poo poo, because making sure kids (or any vulnerable person) is looked after properly is really important but what they do is pay them poo poo wages, run down the profession and then if anyone does it badly then they say that caring for people is just a basic human thing with the unsaid implication that really it's not worth good wages because looking after people should be it's own reward. Also the fact that these careers are predominantly done by women which for some people automatically translates to 'unimportant'. Someone can say it better than me, but basically it's a big pile of crap. Now I'm going to eat the last of my cheese scones.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I make excellent cheese scones. I like to add a little bit of chilli powder. Cayenne pepper in mine. Was possibly a mistake to let the kids add it as a sprinkle turned into a giant lump, but still tasty.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
RobotNinjaHornets posted:What the gently caress What a load of bollocks, a nice positive stick to beat people with. It's not going to make a difference. The kids I know who were persistent truants (a friend of my sons and my husbands younger brother and sister) don't give a gently caress that their parents are going to lose out. One of them actually got taken into care and still refused to go to school. And it's not like they don't do anything now - social work get involved and in one of the cases I knew the kid got taken into care for six months because his mum couldn't get him to go to school.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
PlantHead posted:There is no solution to the problem but something has to be tried I guess. I don't think there is any evidence that this measure will make any difference to truancy rates. Personally I believe that it is much like the bedroom tax - a way for the government to take money away from people dressed up in a way that makes it sound like they are trying to solve an issue through financial incentives but really the key part of the strategy is to cut payments and if they can make it sound like the person is unworthy - either because they are hogging a mansion sized council house or not bothering to send their kids to school because waking up is too much hassle - then so much the better. Parents of truants will already be getting a lot of attention from social work and for most families that is already punishment and incentive enough.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 14:39
|
|
|
PlantHead posted:Money is definitely the motivation, although I do have some sympathy for not paying parents child support money, when they aren't sending their children to school - does nothing to solve truancy of course. I think you are over estimating how much control parents have over their children if they don't want to play along. In the examples I gave (which i know are purely anecdotal and are possibly not the norm with truanting children) the mums (dads were either completely absent or really really not very positive role models) wanted their children to go to school but the kids refused. When you are a 9 stone woman with health issues and your 13 stone son refuses to get out of bed what do you do? And assuming you manage - possibly with winches or something - to get them out of the house and to the school gates how do you ensure that they stay there? I don't know the answer - I think based on my experiences with parenting that it's a long burning problem that would be helped by more intervention at early stages to help parents develop whatever it is that is missing in those families.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
I thought this was the shittiest line [quote] The Work and Pensions Secretary said it was not the role of government to pay the disabled enough to stop them being poor. [\quote] It would be interesting to make all politicians write a paragraph on what they consider the role of the government to be. Ensuring that the vulnerable members of society don't starve to death seems like one of them I would have thought.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:There's been a bunch of TV shows where someone does what should be the real definition of 'benefits tourism', spending a day or a week slumming it and then going back to their nice life instead of having to face that reality stretching out ahead of them Yeah, a couple of weeks on benefits isn't going to make anyone change their mind. It's like walking in the rain knowing that either A) you can go back to your nice house and have a lovely shower then sip some delicious hot chocolate by a roaring fire, or B) you'll also be sleeping in the rain in your wet clothes. Then tomorrow it will rain some more and you can't really see a time when you'll be able dry your clothes or get rid of the sound of dripping on the top of your skull. With Option A you might think that the rain was ghastly at the time but you'll forget soon enough and romanticise or downplay how it felt.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 08:55
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:If you exclude the intellectual content, Cameron's speech is a lot better and often more quote-worthy than Corbyn's. You can put lipstick on a pig....
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 12:37
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:Right, because England is a tropical paradise. I think it might be compared to Scotland. Certainly going by all the whining my brothers do when they come to visit after moving to Brighton and Liverpool.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
XMNN posted:If anyone wants to see if the author is a racist, she's on Sunday Morning Live with some woman who just asked why British Muslims aren't loudly condemning terrorism when they were perfectly happy to protest against Israel defending itself. Is that article lady or other lady? Did article lady turn out to be a horrible racist?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2015 10:37
|
|
|
In some kind of bizarre coincidence my 13 year old and 4 year old are having a very similar conversation over the dinner table about when it is okay to kill other people (this was after my 13 year old spent a while hypothesising about how he would assassinate the queen). Apparently the answer is 'it's okay to kill people when they are zombies'.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:good lad It came about after talking about his homework where he has to research an act of terrorism. I don't think the teachers really thought it would end with him putting hard thought into how to commit one. Guavanaut posted:Does that include p-zombies? Nah, just brain eating ones.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Makes me think that it'll be amusing seeing those who argue for an independent Scotland using the opposite arguments when discussing Britain's place in the EU. What I'm kind of vaguely expecting to happen is a load of people in Scotland who want another referendum to vote to leave, so that in the event that No wins Scotland can say 'leave the EU over our dead body - we're off!' But obviously that wouldn't actually work seeing as people will be able to see who voted what and will just point out that a load of people in Scotland did want to leave (or at least voted that way).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:I think the idea is to push the overall numbers so that Leave wins, so they can then turn around and demand a second referendum. Yeah basically. Having the possibility of another independence referendum and the Euro referendum voting no so linked in peoples minds might lead to people trying to vote No tactically. Or it might lead to people voting to stay when actually they think the best thing for the country is to leave. Hopefully not though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:I don't know. It was one side of a telephone conversation that got repeated to me. How does your friend know it was David Cameron they were talking about and not Cameron Smith from accounting? Lets hope if it is him then it's something that doesn't just bounce off him like usual.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
Pantsuit posted:Whats fora Way back but yeah. I used to have to write it all the time copying out reports and minutes about third sector fora, the health fora etc. Don't know who Xkcd or whatever is but it is a real word that real (albeit pretentious and pedantic) people use as well. Pantsuit posted:I like Pissflaps Me too. hookerbot 5000 fucked around with this message at 10:26 on Oct 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 09:20
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:
I think some people (not necessarily you but some people) are too snobby about emoticons. Many a misunderstanding or simmering resentment could have been avoided if an email or text had included an appropriate smiley face.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
I made kale crisps. The first few I made I thought 'hey these are really good!' but the more I ate the more I realised that they were in fact disgusting and bitter.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 14:17
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:Well, of course you can take him at his word! He said he didn't want to do it, wasn't planning to do it, and didn't need to do it, but he never actually said that he wouldn't do it, even when repeatedly asked. He was strictly honest at all times. Yeah. It was all over the papers at the time that he said that he was going to cut child tax credits because he didn't use the magic word combination. He made a 'vow' whatever the gently caress it is that he does to show that honestly he really does mean it for child benefit (which for most people is far less - I get £135 a week child tax and £45ish a week child benefit for comparison) and I think a lot of people probably conflated the two in their heads.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:Err. It can be twisted. It's not going to fall but less people are going to be entitled to it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:That's a lot of twisting even for a Tory politician... Yeah I know, we're losing £1,400 a year in my household and the changes to the number of children that can be included in a claim is going to create a bit of a headache when I go back to work in a year or so. I'm not happy about it or hand waving it but it was going to happen from the moment that more people voted for Conservatives than any other party. They used weasel words and only promised to ring fence Child Benefit turning the attention on to that as much as they could. They probably think they were honest.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 13:41
|
|
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:I'm not sure how it is actually done in this country, but when I was studying in Poland all my public finance lecturers made a really big point of emphasising that one of the rules of good budgeting is that you don't have separate pots. You don't have taxes from one thing meant to go to a separate thing. They are, in fact, all supposed to go into one pot, then get distributed according to need. At least that's the economic theory of how things should be run, I'm aware that the reality might very well be extremely different. The way it went was; Conservatives: We're going to cut £12 billion from welfare but we're not going to say how. General Public: Huzzah! Media (well, the Guardian): The lib dems say they're going to cut child tax credits General Public: Boo! Conservatives: The lib dems are massive liars, we would really really hate to cut tax credits, we haven't cut tax credits in the past and we solemnly swear not to cut child *cough cough* benefit. General Public: *votes Conservative* Conservatives: *evil laughter* So they never specifically said that they would not cut child benefit in the same way that they solemnly swore not to cut child benefit or pensions. But they definitely tried to make it look like they wouldn't without outright lying.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:I presume you mean "child tax credit", but he did. The idea that they specifically never said they'd never reduce child tax credit has taken root in this thread but has no basis in fact. Och, yes I did. How does the thread feel about Full Fact? It's the most concise article I can find about it. The thing is though is that i remember how it was because child tax credit makes up a portion of my income so I paid a lot of attention to it in the run up to the election. https://fullfact.org/factcheck/economy/child_tax_credit_cut_promise-46421
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Yeah, it was a stupid post. Although if you do want an explanation – a Muslim writing for the Daily loving Mail being an apologist for white supremacy and Islamaphobia is, and has, got similar comments from a lot of BME people I know. That's a terrible apology.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 09:27
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Lethal Drizzle isn't whiter than me. Jesus Christ. Apologising isn't a weakness or anything. You posted something that caused people offence and maybe hurt their feelings. Fine, maybe you just didn't realise. Refusing to apologise until lots of people asked about it then making the most mealy mouthed non apology which frankly was probably more offensive ("my BME friends say it's fine!") is a lot worse than if you had just said "poo poo I didn't realise, sorry about that" after the first couple of people called out the post. I am very white though so you can ignore my opinion on basic human decency and how to react when you offend people.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 09:52
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:I've always taken "household bills" to mean council tax + utilities; £271 is more than enough for that, even assuming a badly insulated and energy-inefficient house. As for 7%, that's the long-run average return from stocks and shares over the last couple of centuries, so not an unreasonable starting point given the multi-decade time frame of retirement savings. More to the point, a defined benefit scheme would also be reliant on investment yields; it's not like you can magic the need for good returns away by making the employer rather than the employee bear the risk of underperformance. My council tax is £134 a month, and my electric is £170.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
Kin posted:Oof, where about in the city are you (you're in Edinburgh too right?) and what kind of heating setup do you have? Nah, I'm in the back of beyond up in Argyll. The electric is high because it's a four bedroom converted mill (the mice are particularly friendly)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
darkwasthenight posted:Tupperware is inherently proley imo because why would rich people have any need to save leftovers? 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
|
|
|
Edit: Being bitchy, sorry 
hookerbot 5000 fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Oct 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:54 |
|
|
I think my kid would have been pretty amused to have random internet people introduce themselves to him at uni (unless they were massive perverts or murderers of course). He would have expected them to buy drinks though because he was a poor student who had already spent all his money on booze.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 21:21
|
|