|
Welcome to the April thread. You all know what goes on here by now. This is the thread where we talk about what foods we like or are currently eating, what is the best biscuit, what crisps are preferred, and other culinary delights. Occasionally politics creeps its ugly head in too, but such things are rather crass for the dinner table, so let's try to keep that to a minimum. UK Meal Talk  Suitable Topics of Conversation • Entertaining a party. • Making and keeping a list. • Conservative selection of starters and canapes. • Place setting. • Correct party dress code. • The best way to cut sandwiches. • Light lunches for boating. • The correct name for a bread roll. • Which condiments will be banned under the Psychoactive Substances Act. • Swiss eggs. • •     Set Menu UKMT March 2016 UKMT February 2016 UKMT January 2016 - Not The Best Month UKMT December 2015 - Happy Xmas (War Is Over (lolno)) UKMT November 2015 Kinder Surprise Paedogeddon/Press Corruption Thread Battered Promises Scotpol Thread Egg Whites EDL/Fash Thread Continental Wankfest Europol Thread Complimentary Cuppa (£1.95) Trainchat Thread McMurtry's Quarter Scrounger Political Cartoons Thread Illinois Roast Chicken #ukgoons on synIRC. It's mostly active during Question Time, but there's always some people around (thanks crispix). Enjoy your meal everyone! 
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 19:55 |
|
|
Since I just posted it, my rant about the new contract from the last thread. So the government have finally got around to publishing the new junior doctor contract, and no surprise, it's loving terrible. Aside from the pay cut for most of us, it includes various other malicious things like: - If you want to do any work outside your contracted hours you must offer your labour to your own trust first, for whatever rate of pay they choose. If you don't then you may not work for another trust or a locum agency. - If a shift starts on a Friday then it will not be counted as being a weekend shift, even if it ends on the Saturday. So working 9pm Friday to 9am Saturday is not working at the weekend. - If Christmas Day, Boxing Day, or New Years Day falls on a weekend (and so the bank holiday is transferred to Monday) and you are required to work that day you get nothing in compensation. No percentage of pay, no time in lieu. - Payments for filling in cremation forms will now as a standard be paid to the hospital rather than the doctor. - If you wish to raise a concern about being made to work unsafe hours, or hours beyond the contractual limit, this must be raised via your educational supervisor. This is the person who determines if you pass or fail your year of training. If you fail there is no means of appeal and it could potentially wreck your career. And that's before we get on to the 'Equality Assessment'! Yes, the government assessed what impact the new contract will have on women and other protected groups. Here is an excerpt (apologies for terrible picture):  Note the following phrases: "any indirect adverse effect on women is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim" "while these changes may, in isolation, disadvantage women... this must be balanced with the 13.5% increase in basic pay" "While this may disadvantage lone parents (who are disproportionately women)... in some cases this may actually benefit other women, for example where individuals have partners" The whole document is shot through with phrases like those. Flat-out admission that the new contract disproportionately hits women, and particularly single parents, but it's OK because it's all in the name of achieving a 'legitimate aim'. Basically the whole contract is 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Thanks  I was trying to quote it in as a doublepost.It seems pretty  but is it actually better or worse than the previous proposed contract? (Not that both weren't sacks of poo poo)
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
jabby posted:Since I just posted it, my rant about the new contract from the last thread. Sadly that's not an April Fool's, is it?  It's loving disgusting they're forcing this poo poo. Guavanaut posted:Fantastic Culinary OP I'm going to a wedding this month, and need to know proper etiquette so I don't look like a complete tit; red, or white wine with Roast Beef monster munch? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
Pesky Splinter posted:I'm going to a wedding this month, and need to know proper etiquette so I don't look like a complete tit; red, or white wine with Roast Beef monster munch? On the one hand, the beef flavouring would suggest a full-bodied red wine, but the corn-based munch itself might call out for some refreshing white. Tough call.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
You could go with Rose for the worst of both worlds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
Red is normally preferred with red meat, but since the closest that roast beef monster munch has come to a cow is that the packaging designer saw one once, I think Irn Bru. What's even the point of having an Equality Assessment if it's just going to be "yeah this will gently caress over single mothers but yolo" and then moving on?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Thanks The government have never released a 'finished' contract before. Most of the stuff, like the pay cuts and the threat of losing your job if you report unsafe hours, is as we expected. Some things like not getting any compensation for working holidays and certain shifts not counting as weekend work is new. Under this contract a first year junior doctor working the most antisocial hours can expect to lose about £3,500 a year. The joke that is the equality assessment is just another slap in the face. Basically this will destroy the NHS. I love working in England, but this contract just drives pay and conditions through the floor along with introducing the very real prospect of being exploited by your employer to a totally unsafe degree. All I can say is that if this comes into force Scotland and Wales will no longer have a shortage of doctors. And if you live in England, don't get sick 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
I didn't see this in the last thread: UK current account deficit at new high http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35931968 How hosed does this make us?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:How hosed does this make us? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy7OdvPvFyU&t=24s
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
"a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim" is such a lovely way of putting "it'll gently caress you over but we don't care", I'm going to have to steal it for my own day-to-day usage
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
Guardian is off to a good April fools start. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/01/exclusive-royal-family-considering-dramatic-brexit-intervention That contract is a joke, I never thought I would live to see the destruction of the NHS but oh well. J_RBG posted:On the one hand, the beef flavouring would suggest a full-bodied red wine, but the corn-based munch itself might call out for some refreshing white. Tough call. StoneOfShame fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
Well the legitimate aim is 'destroy the NHS'
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:That contract is a joke, I never thought I would live to see the destruction of the NHS but oh well. Hopefully you are either a) in good health or b) rich if you want to live much longer than that. If anyone hasn't contacted their MP about the contract debacle it would be much appreciated. Every little helps.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
Detailed consideration has been given to the various components of Full Goon Monster Munch Communism: (a) as to eating the rich, we consider that their flesh will be tasty and nourishing, and any indirect adverse effect on the leadership of the Tories is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
A positive at least, is that the BMA is attempting to start legal action against the contract.quote:Junior doctors have begun legal action against the government to try and stop it imposing its unpopular new contract on 45,000 medics working in the NHS.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
jabby posted:Hopefully you are either a) in good health or b) rich if you want to live much longer than that. Well with the amount I plan to drink later to drown out the horror of turning 28 later I may not actually live to see it!
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
quote:“The contract is fair and justified and is good for both staff and patients. We consider that the new contract will advance equality of opportunity.” The contract itself admits it's unfair, but it's only unfair because it has to be and you just don't understand GOD. *Runs to room and slams door*
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
blowfish's post on the history of British nuclear power was basically on the money. I think it's important to note that, in the late 40s and 50s, and indeed the 60s and 70s to some extent, Britain was a world leader in quite a few areas of new technology. Space flight was another, with the BAC Mustard being essentially a mini-space shuttle twenty years early, with an awful lot of time and effort being devoted by de Havilland, the universities, et al to the problems (both scientific and military) of the atomic age. For a military example, Britain had ICBM silos (well, one test facility) back in the 50's but the missile designed to be fired from them (Blue Streak) used a rather nasty fuel mixture, for political reasons, that had to be pumped in slowly (the American design: kerosine and liquid oxygen) rather than the British design of the time (hydrazine and hydrogen peroxide, still nasty but much more stable - and far ahead of the Russian or American fuels of the time). That meant that having missile silos was worthless as the fuel would never pump fast enough in response to a pre-emptive strike. Silos were scrapped, and instead we moved to the submarine based nuclear weapon platform we all know and love. But for a few different decisions back in the day, Britain could easily have had the world's most advanced space programme - Dan Dare, Doctor Who and the rest weren't so far fetched back at the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Hydrazine and hydrogen peroxide were also famously used as the bipropellant rocket fuel-oxidizer mix in the Messerschmitt Me 163b Komet WWII interceptor. Famous because they were hypergolic, they'd explode from simple contact inside or outside of the rocket chamber, to the extent that the two fueling teams would wear different colored protective suits to avoid contact. I'm not sure what measures were taken by the silo crews to make that safer than kerosene and liquid oxygen, but that mixture has always red flagged to me as a 'step away' sign.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
It's rocket fuel, it's not going to be nice. As far as I'm aware, though, you can pump it much much faster than you can LOx or Kerosene in particular. (Space thread would know more, I'm going off stuff I remember from way back)
MrL_JaKiri fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
"Ignition!" is a cracking read if you get your hands on a digital copy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Firos posted:"Ignition!" is a cracking read if you get your hands on a digital copy. http://www.sciencemadness.org/library/books/ignition.pdf http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ignition-Informal-History-Liquid-Propellants/dp/0813507251 Or you can just buy this copy for a grand
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
Angepain posted:A proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Tony Blair's excuse for Iraq. Fans posted:The contract itself admits it's unfair, but it's only unfair because it has to be and you just don't understand GOD. *Runs to room and slams door* Beginning to suspect that all Tories are god-tier metaphysical solipsists. Of course the contract is fair and justified, because in their mind it is, and nothing exists that is not their mind.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:I think it's important to note that, in the late 40s and 50s, and indeed the 60s and 70s to some extent, Britain was a world leader in quite a few areas of new technology. Still quietly seething about the cancellation of the national optic fibre rollout that came up in the February thread. gently caress the Tories forever, seriously.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:Tony Blair's excuse for Iraq. I think that's just good old stupidity rather than any purposefully held philosophy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
Until now most of their attempts to screw everyone over hasn't even hurt them because they just say "Party of Tough Decisions, Economic Future, Corbyn Scruffy" and the press ran with it. The worse they acted the more credible they were painted as being. And I mean I guess it makes sense, it's easier to believe that they're doing something unpleasant but necessary, than that the Tories are just carrying out the most vicious cuts in living memory for purely ideological reasons that have not only not achieved their stated objectives, but left the country weaker than other. I hope and pray to Christ that the tide has finally turned and enough people are being hurt badly enough that it's not going to work anymore, but who even knows?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 04:50
|
|
|
lol at the idea of trying to force highly educated young people with plenty of options for alternative employment to eat poo poo and like it why don't people want to work for us as doctors and teachers normally I would leap straight to deliberate incompetence as an explanation but if the nhs is hosed in a way that is obviously and unambiguously their fault then it's not very plausibly deniable like setting it up for long term financial ruin apparently is E:in response to prince John re social housing in Luton from the last thread, I wasn't really criticising them for profiteering as such, just that if they think they can make a reasonably steady income from social housing stock (and why wouldn't they with virtually guaranteed rents) then it seems like the government should be doing that even totally ignoring the obvious social good of having social housing, factor in the presumably enormous cost savings from not having to put people up in temporary accommodation in b+b s and it seems even more obvious. I guess they're probably factoring in the increasing value of housing stock which would presumably be negatively effected if everyone in the uk had a place to live but that's a pretty monstrous counterargument. Also the lack of risk associated with right to buy is a bad argument seeing as that is the government deliberately hamstringing social housing rather than some immutable law of nature XMNN fucked around with this message at 07:32 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 07:02
|
|
|
I don't like monster munch because you only get about 7 of them in a bag these days. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 08:28
|
|
|
imagine being the lawyer getting the equality assessment and trying to figure out how to write that section
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 08:45
|
|
|
Angepain posted:"a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim" is such a lovely way of putting "it'll gently caress you over but we don't care", I'm going to have to steal it for my own day-to-day usage I'm writing it on my guillotine. Edit: Actually I know it's the first of the month but thread title change please?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 08:51
|
|
|
Angepain posted:"a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim" is such a lovely way of putting "it'll gently caress you over but we don't care", I'm going to have to steal it for my own day-to-day usage It's language straight out of the 2010 Equalities Act (and I think the various prior anti discrimination acts).
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 08:51
|
|
|
Phoon posted:imagine being the lawyer getting the equality assessment and trying to figure out how to write that section I think that's standard language - 'there may be a tiny negative impact on a protected group, but it's not significant enough to need amendment, and will be amply countered by the rising tide lifting all boats'. The two real problems are the grotesque overselling of that 'rising tide', and that awful little bit about single mothers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 08:59
|
|
|
My standard response to anyone who uses the "a rising tide lifts all boats" argument is "but you're screwed if you don't own a boat."
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 09:26
|
|
|
It can apply if you've got two groups in relatively similar circumstances (i.e., men and women at the same stage in the same job), though. It's obviously far less sensible for applying to society as a whole.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
Payndz posted:My standard response to anyone who uses the "a rising tide lifts all boats" argument is "but you're screwed if you don't own a boat." Also if your boat has holes in it. Also tides don't lift waves by percentages of their previous height. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 09:43
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:I don't like monster munch because you only get about 7 of them in a bag these days. Thanks.  
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 09:51
|
|
|
Happy April, we're all fools.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 10:02
|
|
|
The Guardian's April Fool's article is well worth it: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/01/exclusive-royal-family-considering-dramatic-brexit-intervention quote:the anger runs through the generations at Buckingham Palace: there was fury at the claims about “workshy” Prince William, a campaign mounted by two papers with an anti-EU stance, the Daily Mail and the Sun. And there was a feeling last week that rock bottom had been hit with a story in the Mail that Kate was now posher than the other royals.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 10:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 19:55 |
|
|
Junior G-man posted:The Guardian's April Fool's article is well worth it:
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 10:20
|
|