|
TinTower posted:Which is complete bullshit, as due to the rules of the EAW, Sweden couldn't do that without our consent. How loving stupid are you? Countries choose when to follow laws. If the US, Sweden and the UK want to ship him off to the US for good or bad, they will. Laws won't have anything to do with it.
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 23:44 |
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:How loving stupid are you? Countries choose when to follow laws. If the US, Sweden and the UK want to ship him off to the US for good or bad, they will. Laws won't have anything to do with it. So your scenario is that the US is ignoring the incredibly easy UK->US extradition process but not by using it's incredibly close relationship with the UK authorities (who have been complicit in extraordinary rendition from the very beginning) so that it can either pick him up off the street (or out of a prison cell) in Sweden, with whom they have far less cordial relations, or to encourage the Swedes to break their own laws plus the international treaties governing extraditions? How loving stupid are you?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
Either way, it is a simple fact that the chances of him being extradited to the US are far lesser when he's holed up in some cramped embassy than him being held in custody either in the UK or Sweden. The biggest indication that he's unlikely to be shipped off to the US by black transatlantic helicopters is the (other) simple fact it never happened while it could have.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
KKKlean Energy posted:It might help to consider that the desire for kids is just genetic programming. Everything we find desirable about kids is just a way to make the entire endeavor tolerable, while our basic urges carry out the sad, soulless covert operation of putting our genes in a fleshy sack and fattening that sack up until it does the same. Are you this much of a patronising prick in real life?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
Munin posted:I leave this without comment since I don't know what comment I could make to make it justice: Tilbury is an unfortunate example because, as a town, it has to collapse. It is wedged awkwardly into London's green belt:  which leaves it no space for investment, even as transformation into a bedroom community. It's already-built residences surrounded by a downriver Thames, the belt, and the docks. So without its sole employer, there's no economic activity to be done there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
Munin posted:I leave this without comment since I don't know what comment I could make to make it justice: e: ok no what I mentioned is actually one of the least bad bits. I'm not sure I've ever read anything so patronising outside of D&D. big scary monsters fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Aug 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Which is complete bullshit, as due to the rules of the EAW, Sweden couldn't do that without our consent. Is there any reason the UK government wouldn't give it? They're not exactly going to piss off Sweden and the US over a guy they don't particularly like.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
Fans posted:Is there any reason the UK government wouldn't give it? They're not exactly going to piss off Sweden and the US over a guy they don't particularly like. You see, newspapers are both well informed and highly critical of bullshit extraditions, so will dissect the fault as being with Britain within the day and cause national outrage. Or the UK will pass him off to Sweden and then wait a year and then he goes to America, which means it's not their problem as far as the voting public are concerned. The sun is the most popular newspaper in the UK, anyone expecting attention to the details of international extradition laws from the general public should be starring in a farce.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:I think my favourite bit is the description of Tilbury as "a shithole and beyond" followed by directly comparing it with northern towns. Yes, everywhere outside of the radiant warmth of London's pleasant glow is a shithole. For me it is the closing paragraph. Sample: quote:... the answers to Tilbury’s and Britain’s white left-behinds are not obvious. Yet they surely lie within their own hearts. State aid, of which they have had plenty, cannot fix a cultural failing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
Munin posted:For me it is the closing paragraph. Sample: That's pretty loving close to a call for a cull.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
Theres no jobs, the education they got was iffy at best and there is a shortage of social housing. If only there was something the British government could do using it's resources and money... Nah intervention only works in far flung middle Eastern countries.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
Umiapik posted:Just keep trying until you like it, you big baby. Hahahaha you are of course absolutely right, I'm just out of practice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
JoylessJester posted:Theres no jobs, the education they got was iffy at best and there is a shortage of social housing. If only there was something the British government could do using it's resources and money... Nah intervention only works in far flung middle Eastern countries. So you're saying they should hit Tilbury with drone strikes?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
tl;dr: first-person whining about starving the beast goddamnedtwisto posted:making sure no one person is completely indispensable and fostering a good enough team ethic that people are happy to work around those sort of arrangements Guess what my department in a particular northwestern NHS trust is completely failing to do  My managers are lovely people but have been specifically barred from solving their problems by hiring more permanent staff, and nobody's particularly open to creative solutions due to being stressed out and demoralised from the overtime they feel compelled to work since we're both understaffed to begin with and missing two permanent staff to long term leave. The only help they've been permitted to summon is temp admin support, and while it would theoretically be possible for us temps to do all the grunt work while the [authorised] permanent staff just rubber stamp everything, that falls squarely under the heading of "creative solutions" and thus would get right up everyone's noses since they all have their own way of doing things. I don't know that I really have a point in telling you this, except that I think it's funny because if I don't laugh I'll get depressed again 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Working class whites: Worse than foreigners. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
Poverty is another country.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
Meanwhile, Cancer girl Mum gets sued by Council in what is surely not quite as simple as this BBC News article suggests. My experience is that primary schools are generally pretty understanding of long-standing health issues. For a school to take this sort of action against the parent of a child who's known to have had cancer suggests that actually school don't think the child is being kept out of school on legitimate grounds. The fact that the mother's legal team have taken this to the press tells me that they're hoping they can kick up enough of a stink that the Local Authority will settle. Which, in turn, hints that they don't think they can win, possibly because it's not the child's health that's the issue here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
kingturnip posted:Meanwhile, Cancer girl Mum gets sued by Council in what is surely not quite as simple as this BBC News article suggests. Correct me if I'm wrong but this seemed to be the mum keeping her off school for checks as the barest hint of something which suggested the return of the cancer? This is armchair parenting 100% but waiting one day to get permission from the school for an absence is not going to be a fatal delay should there be a relapse... Although I sympathise with the mother being stressed as gently caress about her child potentially having cancer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 08:11
|
|
|
Lord Twisted posted:Correct me if I'm wrong but this seemed to be the mum keeping her off school for checks as the barest hint of something which suggested the return of the cancer? From what I read the mum didn't call in to report her child absent, then didn't go to any of the meetings arranged to discuss why the little girl wasn't at school. So it's not so much for the absence as for not reporting why she was absent. Schools do get really shirty about that kind of thing - I want to say it's because of new legislation that means if a pupil is absent they have to contact the parents because of child protection/the woman who died in her flat with her toddler and the toddler was left alone with the corpse for two weeks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 08:39
|
|
|
TheHoodedClaw posted:Are you this much of a patronising prick in real life? Sorry. I guess it doesn't help everyone to think of it in those terms, but it helps me at least. Evopsych has ruined me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 09:14
|
|
|
I have a couple of questions about universal minimum income (UMI) v universal credit (UC). One of the problems identified is that giving a large lump sum to some people would be a really bad idea (recovering drug addicts at risk of relapse) wouldn't this be true for UMI? Another would be the dreaded sanctions, with UC one strike and you're hosed, wouldn't the same be true for UMI? Or would we remove the threat of sanction?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 10:52
|
|
|
Munin posted:For me it is the closing paragraph. Sample: This is how almost all economist articles end, "the state can't help" is the final conclusion even if its contradictory to the main body of the story.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 11:06
|
|
|
notaspy posted:I have a couple of questions about universal minimum income (UMI) v universal credit (UC). UMI by definition cannot be sanctioned. It's not something you apply for, it's automatic through your life from when you're eligible. The lump sum problem is removed by increasing the number of payments, addicts and vulnerable people can deal better with bills if they are budgeting weekly rather than monthly. In UC and current systems, this would be ridiculously difficult to oversee. UMI has no constant oversight; people are put on, and then theyre taken off when they die, the system can be fully automated and the amount of appeals against wrong sanctions drops to zero because the system doesnt have it. If someones not on the system you can find out why but the answer will always be "but they should have been". This is the reason the Libertarians love it: it completely removes all benefit and pension systems, and their related oversights and tendancies to go "missing" while not being used.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 11:06
|
|
|
The big difference is the complete absence of sanctions. Universal citizen's income is universal, the only qualification is being a citizen. That means that there's no hoops to jump through before you have been deemed to have earned the right to a minimum standard of living, and even when you get a job you will still get it. This does mean that millionaires will still receive it, which some people might find distasteful, but they would be paying more than that in tax for the system, so it's no more distasteful than the existence of the obscenely wealthy in the first place. It also means that workers have a lot more say in how they work, and depending on the level of mincome, means that a lot more people will choose to do other non-economic activities like volunteering or creative arts for creative arts sake. Of course some people believe that if you take away the looming threat of starvation and homelessness everyone would just stay at home and smoke weed while playing PlayStation, but those are usually the same people that simultaneously believe that job creators should be taxed less because the wealthy will only put in effort and strive when they get full reward, whereas the proles are too feckless to strive for more than mere comforts, so gently caress those people. You raise a valid point with respect to recovering addicts and people with mental illnesses requiring more support than just a lump payment. Personally I'd envisage that as taking the form of good social and health services in addition to mincome, there's no reason why the two need to be exclusive (although there are some right-libertarians who believe that mincome would remove the need for social healthcare althogether, that falls into the usual people-as-rational-robots trap).
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 11:07
|
|
|
Some good points, as with most things good social services sort most issues but we all know that if the current pile of wank on either side of the commons implemented it there would be no back up. Just like what they are doing with implementing the Scandinavian model for dealing with prostitution. Next question is the affect on inflation, with everyone getting a fat pay increase could that lead to a rapid (but not run away) inflation, almost to the point of negating the benefit?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 11:17
|
|
|
There wouldn't be any sanctions under mincome, you just allocate a sum of money for that person and pay it on a set date each month. That's the whole point - you aren't using money to cajole people in working, you just give them a basic sum to survive on and let them work it out for themselves afterwards. Most people would get immensely bored with nothing to do all day and relatively little money to do anything with, so they would naturally find work or some other way of occupying themselves and/or getting extra cash for luxuries. As for the people who don't, simply giving people cash and letting them spend it is a good stimulus to keep the economy turning over, so we wouldn't just be throwing money into a bottomless pit. As for what people spend it on, well, essentially you're saying money itself is problematic because people can spend it on things, which is true, but unless we want the government controlling every single purchase people make then the solution is probably more robust social care, not imposing draconian controls on people's spending habits. edit: what those guys above me said. Doctor_Fruitbat fucked around with this message at 11:30 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 11:21
|
|
|
Pork Pie Hat posted:I'm pretty sure it is possible. Loads of pound shops sell PAYG SIMs and I doubt they'd ask you to fill out a bunch of paperwork.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 11:43
|
|
|
Munin posted:I leave this without comment since I don't know what comment I could make to make it justice:  that first comment. Britain is such a rotten classist society - segues into a conservative screed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 12:55
|
|
|
notaspy posted:Next question is the affect on inflation, with everyone getting a fat pay increase could that lead to a rapid (but not run away) inflation, almost to the point of negating the benefit? well that's a bit complicated if you're talking a mainstream, contemporary understanding of 'inflation' as a general increase in the price level for a generic normalized basket, then the answer is no, since money is withdrawn from the economy at the same rate (via taxes, if funded by tax increases, or via spending reductions, if funded by changing programmes, or via bond sales, if funded via debt) if you're referring to an older understanding with income-class-specific baskets of goods, then... maybe? the low-income do spend disproportionately on certain goods and from certain stores. Tesco, Lidl, etc. may expand relative to higher-market supermarkets. If the supply of those goods can't expand, then their prices will instead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 12:55
|
|
|
Zephro posted:OK, thanks. That helps makes sense of what I was reading. No worries, if you have problems getting hold of one I'm more than happy to get one for you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:So your scenario is that the US is ignoring the incredibly easy UK->US extradition process but not by using it's incredibly close relationship with the UK authorities (who have been complicit in extraordinary rendition from the very beginning) so that it can either pick him up off the street (or out of a prison cell) in Sweden, with whom they have far less cordial relations, or to encourage the Swedes to break their own laws plus the international treaties governing extraditions? Also, recall that it took ten years for us to be rid of Abu Qatada, and only then because he voluntarily left after his objection to extradition was dealt with. Plus, Assange is white. The press is very reticent to support extraditions of white people to America. Never doubt the power of conspiracy theorists to try to make a convoluted plot out when an easier method for their enemies to fulfil their gains exists. Reminds me of the argument I had last night with someone who was convinced that a consumer protection law regarding stolen smartphones is secretly giving powers to the police to brick phones in protests (when they already have the power to overload the cell and confiscate phones). TinTower fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
Rail fares are going up by 3.5%!BBC News posted:In the meantime the Department for Transport defended the planned rise. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:21
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Also, recall that it took ten years for us to be rid of Abu Qatada, and only then because he voluntarily left after his objection to extradition was dealt with. Reminds me of the saying - never prescribe to malice what can be attributed to stupidity
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:21
|
|
|
Quick question: just moved to the UK and I'm curious as to whether the NHS is overcrowded and lovely everywhere, or just in London? I'm about to pop off to A&E for god knows how long to deal with a minor issue (which I know for a fact will take ten minutes of a nurse's time to clear up) after being told by a walk-in clinic to go to my GP, told by my new GP which I registered at today that registration takes 2-5 business days to complete and I can't use them until then (presumably because I might be an illegal immigrant who could steal a precious 10 minutes of a taxpayer-funded nurse), and told by my old GP that they can squeeze in an appointment with a nurse - a nurse, mind you, not a doctor - next Wednesday. At 3.00. When I'll be at work. Back home I could have gone to a GP this morning, paid $30 for it, and had it over and done with. Mostly the irritating thing is that you have to register at one GP (aside from being inconvenient, what are you meant to do if you want a second opinion?) and that all the GPs seem to be open Monday to Friday 9-5 and maybe Saturday morning if you're lucky. What the gently caress. I know I'm being an enormous whinger and that there's a lot more to a health system than just GP visits, but on that metric so far I'm very irritated.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:27
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Quick question: just moved to the UK and I'm curious as to whether the NHS is overcrowded and lovely everywhere, or just in London? Yeah, the system is kinda predicated on you having signed up to a GP. You can generally get quick free appointments once that it done. I have been able to get seen by a doctor at my GP practice same day/next day when I had something requiring more immediate attention come up. If you haven't done so yet I would also recommend that you register with a dentist to save you a wait if you have any issues with your teeth. [edit] Also, do note that they do do some triaging. Also, if it is something you want looked at quickly (but is obviously not a OMG I need A&E matter) you should make an effort to get into your GP around the time they open. vvv Walk-in center told him to go to his GP. Munin fucked around with this message at 14:35 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:31
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Quick question: just moved to the UK and I'm curious as to whether the NHS is overcrowded and lovely everywhere, or just in London? There will be a walk in centre that is closer and more convenient where you can wait to be seen by a doctor without being registered at a GP's. Google for one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
Did you tell the walk in centre that you didn't have a GP? My girlfriend was seen at one a week or two ago because the GP she's registered to is miles away, so there was no chance of getting there any time soon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Also, recall that it took ten years for us to be rid of Abu Qatada, and only then because he voluntarily left after his objection to extradition was dealt with. That's because the European Court of Human Rights believed Jordan would use evidence gained through torture against him and that was a breach so they stopped the UK from extraditing him. The UK was quite keen to do it the whole time and it finally went through when they got assurance from Jordan they wouldn't torture him. I'm finding it really hard to believe the EU Courts are going to step in to stop Assange going to America because he's liable to be tortured. Even if America does occasionally torture some folks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
Munin posted:Yeah, the system is kinda predicated on you having signed up to a GP. You can generally get quick free appointments once that it done. I have been able to get seen by a doctor at my GP practice same day/next day when I had something requiring more immediate attention come up. Yeah I had a semi-urgent thing a couple of weeks ago and got an appointment that day by physically going down there at 8am when they opened, apparently they reserve some slots, but I was lucky it happened to be my day off. The thing that really does bug me is that no clinics around here are really open much outside of business hours - do they not realise their patients have jobs too? My ill-informed opinion so far as that Australia's mid-tier system is better, in which you can get free medical care if you need it but you can also get subsidised medical care, generally of a better quality, for about $30 (15 quid) a GP visit. I absolutely believe that free healthcare is a right every citizen should have, but realistically, providing a second-tier subsidised system both a) allows middle-class people like me to spend our money on better healthcare, and b) therefore takes a lot of the strain off the free system. It also means if you need to see a doctor today, and happened to sleep past 8am, you can ring up a bunch of GPs in your neighbourhood to see which one has an available appointment rather than waiting two weeks for you local one to free up. edit - is it much more socially acceptable in the UK to take time off work for a GP appointment?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 23:44 |
|
|
freebooter posted:Quick question: just moved to the UK and I'm curious as to whether the NHS is overcrowded and lovely everywhere, or just in London? I've nearly always been offered same day appointments when I've called my GP, any time I've had to wait longer it's because I've needed to make an appointment at a specific time/day to fit in with childcare. And if they offer me an appointment with a nurse it's because the nurse is the person who deals with that particular procedure - I've never seen it as an inferior option. But then whenever I move I register the family with the closest GP straight away rather than waiting until there's a problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:44
|
|