|
The woman was a scientist I doubt it took that long.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:15 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 09:38 |
|
I wonder if it was Jimmy Savile who explained it all to her
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:16 |
|
Pissflaps posted:The woman was a scientist I doubt it took that long.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:17 |
|
Pissflaps posted:The woman was a scientist I doubt it took that long. Her area of scientific expertise, was chemistry - specifically the invention of Mr Whippy. Not biology...empathy...the human condition, etc.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:19 |
|
quote:Once I encountered Willie Whitelaw in the Smoking Room. He was white faced and cradled a bucket of whisky in his hand. http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2014/06/jerry-hayes-my-time-in-parliament-drunkenness-obscenity-and-thatcher.html
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:19 |
It's hilarious partly because how common a practice it seems to have been with all of her male contemporaries. What an odd collision of personalities that must have been.
|
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:21 |
|
Gonzo McFee posted:There's also the story about how Thatcher had to be sat down for an hour and have it explained to her how anal sex works, but she refused to believe it was real. I've heard that story before, but it was Queen Victoria who needed the explanation. I suspect it's apocryphal on all counts.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:26 |
|
Jedit posted:I've heard that story before, but it was Queen Victoria who needed the explanation. I suspect it's apocryphal on all counts. IIRC, it was the concept of lesbians with Victoria - to which she supposedly replied that "Ladies do not do that sort of thing". Most likely apocryphal, yeah.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:28 |
|
Thatcher spent her whole career loving miners in the butt. Much like close personal friend Savile.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:38 |
|
Gonzo McFee posted:Thatcher Thatcher Buttplug Snatcher. Banning stuff even the Victorians were ok with Guavanaut posted:It was explained by analogy with soft serve ice cream. There's a 99 joke here but I can't pick one
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:48 |
|
baka kaba posted:There's a 99 joke here but I can't pick one A 99! Like a 69 but 30 worse! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBFqe_3M2Z8
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:53 |
baka kaba posted:Banning stuff even the Victorians were ok with Buttplugs and heroin. Those very much were the days.
|
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 14:54 |
|
The Victorians were absolutely filthy though. As long as you kept it behind closed doors, they would think modern 24/7 D/s relationships involving branding and scarification to be vanilla. Anyway, glad my Leicester comment provoked a lot of discussion on that one loving building, and glad to see that I wasn't actually just an insane person hallucinating a geometric Lovecraftian horror near the train station.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 17:38 |
|
I quite like that big blue building. Cities need more colour and not to be tedious concrete, glass and redbrick.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 17:40 |
|
There were even enterprising souls who combined the two.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 17:40 |
|
Oberleutnant posted:I quite like that big blue building. Cities need more colour and not to be tedious concrete, glass and redbrick. It is actually right next to a tedious concrete and glass tower block so it does liven the place up I suppose.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 17:55 |
|
Ddraig posted:There were even enterprising souls who combined the two.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 17:57 |
|
Kegluneq posted:The Byker Wall, Newcastle. Built in the 1970s, now a Grade II listed building. Granted, it's part of the Functionalist Romantic rather than Brutalist tradition. I thought Ddraig was referring to combining heroin and buttplugs, but what do you know, this works too.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 18:06 |
|
I still think they should paint spaghetti junction a bunch of bright colours
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 18:17 |
|
Kegluneq posted:The Byker Wall, Newcastle. Built in the 1970s, now a Grade II listed building. Granted, it's part of the Functionalist Romantic rather than Brutalist tradition. I was thinking more along the lines of the Victorian love for buttplugs and heroin
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 18:30 |
|
Ddraig posted:I was thinking more along the lines of the Victorian love for buttplugs and heroin I imagine you could find both of those in Byker, if you knew where to look? (It's been a long day, I am bad reader)
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 18:32 |
|
Buttplugs aside, there have been some other interesting bits of information from the national archives for 1985-86: "OK, this is terrible policy but it's going to piss the unions off so we're doing it. Welcome to enlightened leadership." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4309304.ece quote:Margaret Thatcher brought in GCSE exams in 1986 because she did not want to seem weak against the teaching unions. The former prime minister despised the exams — which have been sat by millions of pupils since then — because she thought they lacked rigour, offered more scope for teachers’ “bias” and would create a “can’t-fail mentality”. Sometimes civil servants understand policies and their implications better than ministers: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4309282.ece quote:The country’s top civil servant warned of the “unscrupulous” activities of the City in the months before the Big Bang, which ushered in the “loadsamoney” era of conspicuous consumption. Grrr filthy lefty biased beeb: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/medianews/article4309365.ece quote:Margaret Thatcher waged a clandestine campaign to cut the BBC “down to size” in the mid-1980s because she believed that it was biased and flouted public decency, according to documents released today.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 18:34 |
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/state-papers/anglo-irish-agreement-a-triumph-of-persistence-and-backdoor-diplomacy-1.2043042quote:The 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement was a triumph of persistence and backdoor diplomacy for the Dublin government, which was confronted with a divided British cabinet and an increasingly sceptical prime minister in Margaret Thatcher, it emerges in newly released British state papers. On the plus side...
|
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 18:37 |
|
I wonder what kind of poo poo is going to come out in 30 years' time about the current government. Or hell, even the Blair government.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 18:38 |
|
I did wonder why there was a whole new slew of murky, terrifying Thatcher news cropping up. One of my favourites so far has been present-day MP Oliver Letwin being a rabid cheerleader for instituting the poll tax in Scotland first because a) it's a really good idea, honest guv, no really and b) gently caress it, there's no tory seats in the frozen north, who cares? A lot of people wonder why the independence referendum happened in the first place, shite like this is your answer.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 19:12 |
|
LemonDrizzle posted:For the past three decades leading Conservative politicians have sought to reform GCSEs, the latest being Michael Gove who, before being removed from his post, failed to replace the system. Hmm yes, not proven by evidence or anything, just revealed through The Teachings of Thatcher, who's clearly someone to be trusted on things
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 19:20 |
|
dadrips posted:I did wonder why there was a whole new slew of murky, terrifying Thatcher news cropping up. One of my favourites so far has been present-day MP Oliver Letwin being a rabid cheerleader for instituting the poll tax in Scotland first because a) it's a really good idea, honest guv, no really and b) gently caress it, there's no tory seats in the frozen north, who cares? Christ, even plenty of the bloody Tories told everyone they could behind closed doors "No, this is a loving stupid idea, if you do it we'll be neck-deep in poo poo." but he pressed relentlessly ahead anyway.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 19:40 |
|
Thatcher also worried that giving Catholics rights in Northern Ireland would result in it becoming a Marxist State. http://www.channel4.com/news/n-ireland-thatcher-couldnt-understand-civil-rights-calls quote:Files marked "secret", just released in Dublin's National Archives, reveal that Mrs Thatcher was concerned that Northern Ireland was on the way to becoming a "Marxist society" and that she was warned against redrawing its borders to counter the perceived threat by Ireland's then Taoiseach Garret FitzGerald. She really doesn't seem to like the Irish. Or the Scots. Or the Welsh. Or any English who aren't from the Home Counties.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 20:39 |
|
KKKlean Energy posted:I wonder what kind of poo poo is going to come out in 30 years' time about the current government. Or hell, even the Blair government. Probably the most devious poo poo imaginable regarding the justifications of the Iraq war. And all those anti-terrorism laws enacted to "protect" us. --- Any suggestions for the next thread title?
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 20:51 |
|
KKKlean Energy posted:I wonder what kind of poo poo is going to come out in 30 years' time about the current government. Or hell, even the Blair government. You're in luck, as the first Blair cabinet papers will be released in 2020, as the National Archives are moving to a 20 year rule.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 20:53 |
|
quote:The Taoiseach asked his British counterpart where else in the world could one sixth of the population say they had relatives imprisoned.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 21:20 |
Guavanaut posted:Is the answer "Black America"? Winner winner chicken dinner.
|
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 21:30 |
|
Disinterested posted:Winner winner chicken dinner. How very racist.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 22:04 |
|
LemonDrizzle posted:Buttplugs aside, there have been some other interesting bits of information from the national archives for 1985-86: For fucks sake. And I thought the British left were pointlessly adversarial. What a bloody stupid waste. Speaking of dumb political conflicts, what are all yalls thoughts on the Turner controversy? I only stumbled across it recently, but it seems like the kind of thing this thread would have Opinions on. His ideas of an agrarian utopia are aggressively idiotic, but the rest (hey guys maybe this whole socialist revolution thing will take a while longer than we'd like, also it's possible we don't have to literally murder the rich) is stuff that's been floated here before.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 23:41 |
|
If you ever wanted to know if the country is more or less equal than in 1986 then you are in luck, because the government has published a useful graphic to help: Except that you have to ignore the top and bottom data points that they so helpfully point out, because both are caused by legislative distortions - specifically minimum wage (which the tories thought hard against) and lower taxes rates courtesy of Thatcher. Now, you might say, top decile receiving about double the benefit of the bottom one isn't so bad. Except that adjusted for inflation GDP is roughly 80% higher than in 1986. Meaning that only about 65% of the growth is reflected in growing wage, with the rest going almost exclusively to the top 10% (and majority of which to the top 1%). The only thing worse is the overall asset distribution. While the amount of assets held by the bottom 50% of the population has always been very low, standing at 10% in 1986, it has been lowered to less than 5% by 2013. And it cannot be meaningfully computed for lowest deciles because of negative equity.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 23:43 |
|
Renaissance Robot posted:also it's possible we don't have to literally murder the rich dis
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 23:45 |
|
You can metaphorically murder them by seizing their assets and stuffing them in a cozy council house, how's that? TinTower posted:You're in luck, as the first Blair cabinet papers will be released in 2020, as the National Archives are moving to a 20 year rule. I will be very surprised if he doesn't attempt to pull some flimsy excuse out of his arse to have the date continually pushed back. (I'm sure this was done previously on some FOI thing, can't recall for the life of me though)
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 23:47 |
|
Private Speech posted:
The graphic says the 1986 figures are already adjusted for inflation so those gains are real gains, I'm not sure how you've gotten that 65%. Also this is hourly pay, not income so the gain for the top decile will be even greater due to capital gains and such, as you sort of mention.
|
# ? Dec 30, 2014 23:53 |
|
namesake posted:The graphic says the 1986 figures are already adjusted for inflation so those gains are real gains, I'm not sure how you've gotten that 65%. Also this is hourly pay, not income so the gain for the top decile will be even greater due to capital gains and such, as you sort of mention. Which is exactly what I am saying? It says specifically in terms of wages. And the 65% is the difference between increase in GDP and median wage - i.e. mostly capital gains. Admittedly not all of that goes towards capital gains income (or even stays in the UK) but fair chunk of it does. Edit: I'm not in any way disputing that there has been an increase in wages in real terms for everyone (as is the case in practically every country in the world because of better technology) - although even taking the above disparity in income growth into account, the amount of assets (per capita) held by the bottom 50% of the society has actually decreased since then. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Dec 31, 2014 |
# ? Dec 31, 2014 00:01 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 09:38 |
|
Bottom 10% Crew represent
|
# ? Dec 31, 2014 00:05 |