|
CoolCab posted:That's kind of interesting, I've lived here 8, since I was 19, and I don't my Canadian accent has gone away in the slightest. I've lived here for 14 years since I was 21 and don't sound like I come from here at all. But then I don't sound like I come from anywhere - too much moving around has given me a mongrel accent.
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 08:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
Coohoolin posted:It's been five, and I'm only 23. Stop misrepresenting me. Stop being baited. Don't let this become the Coohoolin megathread again. You have PMs, send them PMs if you absolutely must correct them on things they have no intention of being correct about.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 08:56
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:gently caress off, Pissflaps. Blood and soil.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 10:27
|
|
|
HortonNash posted:Are there any products in the UK that use HFCS though? I thought HFCS overuse in the US was a symptom of the ridiculous subsidies that Maize growers get and the need to find something profitable to do with the glut of Maize, and the UK lacking that kind of Maize overproduction and the cheapness of homegrown sugarbeet means that good old sucrose is far cheaper and more plentiful, no? Pretty much all supermarket bread in the US has some kind of sweetener in it. HFCS or normal corn syrup are the most common ones. Its horrible
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 11:04
|
|
|
hookerbot 5000 posted:I've lived here for 14 years since I was 21 and don't sound like I come from here at all. But then I don't sound like I come from anywhere - too much moving around has given me a mongrel accent. I prefer "transatlantic", it sounds classier.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 12:02
|
|
|
They use immature grain in bread these days which keeps it softer for longer but irritates the bowel and that's why more and more people are getting intolerant to gluten.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 12:08
|
|
|
Surprised nobody's mentioned Paul Mason losing his rag about RBS over the forex fixing scandal on the news the other day: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wf7a53y9RRM Also, more news of the "people are wrong about everything" variety: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e05843de-6423-11e4-bac8-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3J2ZEIop3 quote:The appetite among British voters for more austerity is evaporating, polling for the Financial Times shows, in findings that present a big political problem for the winner of the next election. The Populus poll shows that only two in five voters now believe that more austerity and cuts will be needed in the five years after the 2015 election, even though the budget deficit is forecast by the OBR to be £75.2bn in 2015-16.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 13:11
|
|
|
Channel 4 news has a piece on WOT R LEGERND potentially being a corrupt piece of poo poo, if you care to spare 12 minutes (it's a pro-watch): http://www.channel4.com/news/catch-up/display/playlistref/131114/clipid/131114_4ON_property_pm_13
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
BBC asks whether a disabled person should be allowed to use the disabled space on busses or whether mums should be able to use it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-ouch-30001656 quote:Claire Muller, a mother who recently had to get off the bus for a wheelchair user, feels as entitled to that space as a wheelchair user. She says that people could end up resenting disabled people. "At the moment you're firstly hoping there's not another pushchair on there, and then at every stop you're hoping there's not a wheelchair user," she says. "It shouldn't be the case, but it is."
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 13:42
|
|
|
I suppose its an issue of what we as a society need more, children or disabled people. In the short term, we need to arrest our declining birth rate, but in a global level, we actually need fewer children.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
What the hell is this? I really hope to god there is no truth to these allegations...quote:Police investigating allegations of historical sexual abuse are looking at information on "possible homicide".
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
Fold up the baby perambulating device and carry the baby? Oh, right:quote:In February 2012, wheelchair user Doug Paulley was not allowed to board a bus in Leeds because the wheelchair space was taken by a pushchair. The mother, not wanting to wake her sleeping baby, refused to move Some people are just pure cunts, I forgot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 13:59
|
|
|
I strongly object to the new operation name
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:00
|
|
|
Burqa King posted:I suppose its an issue of what we as a society need more, children or disabled people. In the short term, we need to arrest our declining birth rate, but in a global level, we actually need fewer children. Like bollocks it is! A disabled person is not in their situation by choice so we must do everything to help them live a life as effortless as the rest of us. A woman with a child by and large chose that situation. If we have to prioritise one over the other the disabled person must come first.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:00
|
|
|
gorki posted:Fold up the baby perambulating device and carry the baby? Oh, right: If the driver wanted to give the wheelchair user priority (as I think it's the driver's choice, but I might be wrong on that) then he should have held the bus at the stop. I've seen them do that before. If the baby can sleep through dozens of annoyed passengers getting off the bus then it can probably sleep through getting off the bus itself. Burqa King posted:I suppose its an issue of what we as a society need more, children or disabled people. Which one are you? I'll pick the opposite of that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:03
|
|
|
gorki posted:Fold up the baby perambulating device and carry the baby? Oh, right: You forgot to read the rest of the article: quote:"Public transport is not a joyous experience at the best of times, but if you're travelling with a young baby in a pushchair there might be all kinds of reasons why it can't be collapsed," she says. There could be reasons why it couldn't be collapsed, although I guess that might be too charitable to this particular lady. For avoidance of doubt, I think the disabled user should have priority. I think that's the legal position too. I can understand why an individual bus driver, faced with causing an awkward scene, might have made the decision he did at the time though. Prince John fucked around with this message at 14:06 on Nov 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
A few years ago you werent allowed to take a pushchair onto most busses unless it was folded up. The relaxation of that rule seems to have bred the contempt that we see now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:08
|
|
|
KKKlean Energy posted:If the driver wanted to give the wheelchair user priority (as I think it's the driver's choice, but I might be wrong on that) then he should have held the bus at the stop. I've seen them do that before. If the baby can sleep through dozens of annoyed passengers getting off the bus then it can probably sleep through getting off the bus itself. I do kind if feel sorry for the driver as he is in between a rock and a hard place. Either way he goes he gets to wrong in the eyes of the people on the bus and maybe even his company, so this case is an wonderful opportunity to clarify the law as it should come down on the side of the disabled. Proper solution is buses with lots of these areas but that ain't going to happen due to cost.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
notaspy posted:Like bollocks it is! A disabled person is not in their situation by choice so we must do everything to help them live a life as effortless as the rest of us. A woman with a child by and large chose that situation. That's a bit simplistic; both disabilities and children can come about by accident and they can both come about by being careless too. The only difference is you can stop a child in the process of happening, but I'd hardly use the argument "well if you aborted you wouldn't have so many problems with disabled people on the bus  "notaspy posted:Proper solution is buses with lots of these areas but that ain't going to happen due to cost. I would not be opposed to a solution which involved one space for a pushchair and one for a wheelchair, with neither space being used for the other. It's not optimal in terms of space allocation, but it ought to piss off the fewest people. Microplastics fucked around with this message at 14:12 on Nov 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
If you buy a pram that's designed to not collapse that's your own stupid fault. It's not even a price thing. "I chose this faulty product, but somehow that's everyone else's problem not mine"
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:10
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:A few years ago you werent allowed to take a pushchair onto most busses unless it was folded up. The relaxation of that rule seems to have bred the contempt that we see now. How do they justify this, anyway? Surely having a free wheeling piece of debris is dangerous on a bus even before you stick an infant in there. People in wheelchairs are required to use a handbrake.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
CoolCab posted:How do they justify this, anyway? Surely having a free wheeling piece of debris is dangerous on a bus even before you stick an infant in there. People in wheelchairs are required to use a handbrake. Pushchairs have brakes too. If that's not a legal requirement for them it's probably done by every manufacturer anyway, just by convention nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
Cerv posted:If you buy a pram that's designed to not collapse that's your own stupid fault. It's not even a price thing. Almost all push chairs fold up in some fashion so they can be transported in the car. Not doing this either means they've got a vintage buggy from the 1900's or they're just too lazy to do it because they've got half their house on the bottom tray.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:19
|
|
|
Holding a baby in a moving vehicle is not particularly safe, hence child seats and so on for cars. I think not wanting to take a child out of a pram/buggy can go beyond laziness or entitlement, and actually be a safety concern. Although seatbelts aren't mandatory on buses either so I guess just gently caress poors who use public transport? Of course, all this gets in the way of yet another argument over who is being hosed over the hardest and why it should be [group-I'm-not-in] instead of me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
If you are taking a pushchair on a bus you are likely to be too poor to have all the cars you need. Whereas disabled people who use buses may be very wealthy, but unable to drive. In that case, means testing is probablt the brst solution. Disabled people with enough money should be encouraged to pay for taxis and not access already overstretched public transport provision. Especially those who brought their disability upon themselves (drunk drivers, the obese, war veterans etc).
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:25
|
|
|
Burqa King posted:If you are taking a pushchair on a bus you are likely to be too poor to have all the cars you need. Whereas disabled people who use buses may be very wealthy, but unable to drive. In that case, means testing is probablt the brst solution. That's awfully generous of you to pay the extra taxes needed for the sake of a very expensive means testing program for such a relatively trivial issue. Your dedication to fairness is boundless.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:28
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Almost all push chairs fold up in some fashion so they can be transported in the car. Not doing this either means they've got a vintage buggy from the 1900's or they're just too lazy to do it because they've got half their house on the bottom tray. It's more that they fold up but are pretty much the same width/depth so there's still nowhere to put them. With a lot of them the bit that the baby is in is basically a moses basket that doesn't fold up and from what I remember about buses the space to stick stuff isn't big enough to accommodate them. Also folding them up is a bitch (especially when you're holding a baby). It's a difficult one. Probably assigned space that people with prams can't use ever would be the easiest way to avoid the same thing happening but in reality that would just be wasted space a lot of the time. I used to get the bus nearly every day and I'd say about 50% of the time there was someone else with a pram apart from me but I don't think there was ever anyone in a wheelchair.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:31
|
|
|
Don't buses have a load of standing room at the front these days? I don't think I've been anywhere big enough to use full size buses for years, but I seem to remember it was going to be a thing in London at least.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
Just pop the moses basket across the wheelchair armrests and job done. But be careful the baby's vitality is not sapped by the invalid positive natural tropism for chi. (Similar to the dangers of sitting on a rock for too Long.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:38
|
|
|
Wolfsbane posted:Don't buses have a load of standing room at the front these days? I don't think I've been anywhere big enough to use full size buses for years, but I seem to remember it was going to be a thing in London at least. No, there is less room at the front than nearly anywhere. There is a shelf for shopping but they shout at you for sitting there and I imagine babies would not be exempt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Almost all push chairs fold up in some fashion so they can be transported in the car. Not doing this either means they've got a vintage buggy from the 1900's or they're just too lazy to do it because they've got half their house on the bottom tray. I wouldn't necessarily call it lazy; they could have easily just been to the supermarket or something and using the push chair to carry stuff. Or they might have loads of baby stuff in there - clothes, nappies, bottles. Folding up the push chair could mean holding lots of poo poo and then on top of that a squirmy unhappy baby. That being said, I think someone in a wheelchair should get priority, but it's not necessarily as simple as "just fold up the chair, dummy!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
Burqa King posted:I suppose its an issue of what we as a society need more, children or disabled people. In the short term, we need to arrest our declining birth rate, but in a global level, we actually need fewer children. I give up, which behavioral-economics blog did you take this quote from?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 15:05
|
|
|
It seems to me to be less a problem with accessibility and more a problem with capacity. I don't think a wheelchair user or someone with a pushchair should be turned away from a bus that has spaces available for them to use, but being turned away from a bus that is already full is pretty universal. The difference is the number of spaces available. If you gave wheelchair users priority what do you do in a situation where the pushchair doesn't fold? You are in the uncomfortable position of having to throw someone off the bus to make room for someone to get on. Do you refund their ticket? Is it right to leave them in what could be an unfamiliar part of town? What if it is the last bus of the day? Seems to me the best solutions are to build more spaces into the buses, and then either keep the first-come-first-served system or designate some to wheelchairs and some to pushchairs. Inefficient, but fair.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
Cameron announces plans to turn the entire army into ex-pats:
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
Burqa King posted:In the short term, we need to arrest our declining birth rate, but in a global level, we actually need fewer children. What if everyone else is saying that too? Also, do we really need to increase birth rates? Births minus deaths already creates a net population increase enough to fill an additional Aberdeen every year, and housebuilding is nowhere near matching population growth, keeping the bubble propped up. Coincidentally, the long term population of Britain looks an awful lot like that 'anatomy of a bubble' graph, although I wouldn't really take anything from that. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 15:29
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Cameron announces plans to turn the entire army into ex-pats: Be right back, digging up Eric Blair's grave. Seriously though where does this leave UK Private Military Contractors? Though I'm sure there is an 'in the British National Interest' clause in there big enough to drive an avowedly 'for training purposes only' light armored vehicle through.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 15:44
|
|
|
Desiderata posted:Be right back, digging up Eric Blair's grave. Cameron's office hasn't really figured out Twitter; see his tweet not so long back about making children illegal. The plans, I believe, actually do exempt the Army.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
Desiderata posted:Seriously though where does this leave UK Private Military Contractors? Okay, wishful thinking.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
jabby posted:It seems to me to be less a problem with accessibility and more a problem with capacity. I don't think a wheelchair user or someone with a pushchair should be turned away from a bus that has spaces available for them to use, but being turned away from a bus that is already full is pretty universal. The difference is the number of spaces available. more like being turned away from a bus that isn't quite full, but someone's keeping their shopping bags on a seat and refusing to give up the space for you Cerv fucked around with this message at 16:05 on Nov 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
TinTower posted:Cameron's office hasn't really figured out Twitter; see his tweet not so long back about making children illegal. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 15:58
|
|