|
AceOfFlames posted:That's essentially what she said. But how the hell is that supposed to help? At best you sound like you are calling your patient a liar at worst you sound like an utter psychopath. A general rule of therapy is that you can't impress your therapist with how miserable you are, because your therapist has almost certainly seem someone way more impressively miserable than you. The question is one to engage with at face value. Why are you in therapy if you are utterly convinced that there is no point in it? A therapist cannot give you the desire to improve, only tools. If you're insistent that you don't want to improve they aren't going to drag you there. And if you actually don't want to improve then why are you in therapy?
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 10:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
Up next: Dumb British Blonde Stripped and Humiliated By American NOT-Stepdad
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 10:57
|
|
|
Hello everyone when is Bloody Stupid Johnson going to gently caress it today, please
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 10:59
|
|
|
This can't be right https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1168820548232777728 If so the FTPA has to be the worst piece of legislation ever drafted.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:00
|
|
|
Chuka Umana posted:Plot twist: the government will be saved by the Lib Dems and Change UK today. It's only a plot twist if it's something that isn't obviously going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:00
|
|
|
ukle posted:If so the FTPA has to be the worst piece of legislation ever drafted. Well yeah
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:02
|
|
|
ukle posted:This can't be right Not really, the FTPA was basically just to make it hard for the coalition of 2010 to collapse prematurely. Parliament is and always has been sovereign and if it wants to call a general election all you've ever needed was a majority of one. But generally it's going to have to be the government to push that bill. All it takes is a simple majority to overturn the FTPA permanently anyway, this way is just lower effort.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:02
|
|
|
ukle posted:This can't be right Parliamentary Sovereignty!  Not only is Parliament supreme over other elements of the government, the current Parliament is supreme over previous Parliaments.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:03
|
|
|
ukle posted:This can't be right Nah it's always been obvious. Parliament can pass any law it likes with a simple majority, so you can hardly bind it by requiring a 2/3 majority if it can just vote to ignore it. It's just not been convenient for the government to ignore the FTPA so far.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:03
|
|
|
ukle posted:This can't be right Yeah, I’m not buying this as possible until I’ve seen something more on it E: well never mind then 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:03
|
|
|
AceOfFlames posted:My therapist ended my process in which even she recommended I go see someone else with "I am going to write to your GP that you are feeling better". Now I don't know if that can be a basis for my insurance to gently caress me over if I go somewhere else. Well better not try then This is a brilliant life philosophy to protect you from misery
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:04
|
|
|
ukle posted:This can't be right No parliament can bind a future one, it's an extraordinarily stupid piece of legislation that only works if the government doesn't To say nothing of the fact a simple majority could just repeal the FTPA whenever it wanted to as well, it just takes a while.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:04
|
|
|
Chuka Umana posted:Plot twist: the government will be saved by the Lib Dems and Change UK today. I seriously worry the CUKers will abstain. They all thought they were Macron and now they're being asked to vote to end their careers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:04
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:https://twitter.com/SamGyimah/status/1168815558437085187 The hell is up with this background? It looks like the backdrop of an Hieronymus Bosch painting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:07
|
|
|
AceOfFlames posted:That's essentially what she said. But how the hell is that supposed to help? At best you sound like you are calling your patient a liar at worst you sound like an utter psychopath. It's meant to help because therapy only works if you are willing to engage. And if you're deeply buried in a hole of your own making, be it "for protection" or any other reason, you're not going to engage. So the first step is forcing you to admit that there is a tiny part of you that still has the capacity for hope and optimism or else you'd not be wasting your own time in this potentially unpleasant and even traumatic endeavour. And yes, therapy can be traumatic at first. Sometimes you have to confront something horrible before you can move on and "get better" for want of a better term. That's not psychopathic and while I don't think it's calling you a liar, I do think it's entirely fair for a therapist to call you out if you are deluding yourself. That's not passing judgement on your lying to yourself but you can't move on if you believe something patently false like how you're better just surrendering to the despair than kicking back against the pricks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:08
|
|
|
Zalakwe posted:I seriously worry the CUKers will abstain. They all thought they were Macron and now they're being asked to vote to end their careers. I am entirely sure they will all abstain.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:09
|
|
|
The problem with the FPTA is entirely the stupid effects it has when the government is incredibly weak such as the 14 day returns period after a VONC
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:09
|
|
|
The problem with the FTPA is the Lib Dems came up with it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:10
|
|
|
ukle posted:This can't be right you can say it's an issue with westminster systems, but it's really an issue with all systems. written constitutions and separation of powers are really intended to make it harder to alter the population's expectations. sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:15
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/alanferrier/status/1168184926895820801?s=21 Speaking of rich psychopaths: https://twitter.com/spconnolly/status/1168108704077688832?s=21
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:17
|
|
|
a great example is how the american executive can run wars without congressional approval despite that being explicitly forbidden in the constitution, thanks to a century of executives pushing public expectations on that particular topic
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:17
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:a great example is how the american executive can run wars without congressional approval despite that being explicitly forbidden in the constitution, thanks to a century of executives pushing public expectations on that particular topic Wasn't this compounded with the AUMF that Bush passed
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:18
|
|
|
Yeah, the FTPA imposes a political barrier, not a legal one. As mentioned above, it can be sidestepped temporarily or permanently with a single line in any future legislation. The idea is (theoretically) that you force whoever is looking to do so to face political pressure from the public/other MPs/etc. Unless there's a pressing need (or there's no political cost because the electorate just doesn't care) people aren't going to bother trying to overturning it. All this, of course, assumes a rational government and electorate. I'm sure you can see the problem.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:20
|
|
|
Useful reminder that you should join Labour Against Private Schools and get your local CLP to pass their motion to get the issue debated at conference.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:22
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Wasn't this compounded with the AUMF that Bush passed
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:24
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:a great example is how the american executive can run wars without congressional approval despite that being explicitly forbidden in the constitution, thanks to a century of executives pushing public expectations on that particular topic quote:Surely, this will be the last opportunity for me to address you. The Air Force has bombed the antennas of Radio 5 Live. My words do not have bitterness but disappointment. May they be a moral punishment for those who have betrayed their oath … Given these facts, the only thing left for me is to say to workers: I am not going to resign!
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:25
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:Right, but MPs earn over 100k at the moment and are still corrupt as gently caress. The second idea works but only if the same individual can’t immediately walk into a private sector job at several multiples of that salary. As for the first one, well, just across the border in China politicians have a very low official salary - mid-senior level officials in Beijing can be paid as little as RMB 5,000 (GBP 500) per month, in a city that can be as expensive as London. You can decide for yourself whether that makes them more likely to think like the regular citizen or highly motivated to find ways of monetising their power, despite the literal death penalty that accompanies official corruption. We have a different type of corruption in the UK; it’s well institutionalised and operates through the massive wealth transfer to the oligarchy. Underpaying public servants isn’t the answer. I mean, it sucks that we have to bribe people not to abuse their power but we’re all just highly evolved apes unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:30
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:As for the first one, well, just across the border in China politicians have a very low official salary - mid-senior level officials in Beijing can be paid as little as RMB 5,000 (GBP 500) per month, in a city that can be as expensive as London. You can decide for yourself whether that makes them more likely to think like the regular citizen or highly motivated to find ways of monetising their power, despite the literal death penalty that accompanies official corruption.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:42
|
|
|
Normal MPs earn about £80k don't they? Not over £100k. I'd be happy to pay them more but have a severe crackdown on allowing them to have second jobs, directorships and other sources of significant income. Also make it properly loving illegal for them to be landlords.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:43
|
|
|
The best (or “best”) thing is that these speeches will be written by 12-year-olds.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:46
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:Another part of FT's series on the Corbyn Economy is up and I just wanna lel with these types of policies it seems like labour is more interested in running a general erection than an election
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:46
|
|
|
peanut- posted:Normal MPs earn about £80k don't they? Not over £100k.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:47
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1168827856824229888?s=09 I don't think Dominic Cummings has thought this through rationally.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:50
|
|
|
For those of you who don't check CSPAM, there's a thread with one of those silly little leftist political compass style quiz where they ask you 70-odd questions before concluding if you're a tankie or a succdem Because it's important to know if we the thread has been as properly radicalised towards anarchism as it sometimes feels like.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:52
|
|
|
As far as I know yeah labour could just amend any bill the government needs to pass with a no deal block.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:53
|
|
|
peanut- posted:Normal MPs earn about £80k don't they? Not over £100k. Honestly I really have no problem with MPs being paid (very) well, as long as they're good and faithful at their jobs. It's 24/7 madness and a lot of travel with a (at least some?) responsibility, definitely more if you're leading a Committee or are in the Shadow Cabinet. I'd rather they're paid well enough by the people in order not to 'need' to take sidejobs with the City. The thing we need to figure out is what to do with them when they're done. At the very minimum a blanket ban on any lobbying activities (that's actually enforced for a change) for like 3 years. I think the European Commission forbids its high officials from being lobbyists in their sector for a few years, and specifically forbids them from interacting with their previous department. I'd be OK with that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:56
|
|
|
notaspy posted:https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1168827856824229888?s=09 Don't amendments have to be specifically related to the bill they're amending though?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:57
|
|
|
I'm also looking forward to the SNP absolutely butchering the ScotTories in the event of an election, especially without Ruth Davidson being in charge there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 11:59
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:Honestly I really have no problem with MPs being paid (very) well, as long as they're good and faithful at their jobs. It's 24/7 madness and a lot of travel with a (at least some?) responsibility, definitely more if you're leading a Committee or are in the Shadow Cabinet. I'd rather they're paid well enough by the people in order not to 'need' to take sidejobs with the City. The thing we need to figure out is what to do with them when they're done. At the very minimum a blanket ban on any lobbying activities (that's actually enforced for a change) for like 3 years. If it were up to me I'd say once you become an MP you get the salary for the rest of your life, but any income beyond that gets taxed at 100%. You take the job and that's you for life, anything else you do after is strictly volunteering.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 12:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
Midnight- posted:Don't amendments have to be specifically related to the bill they're amending though? "...for the purpose of parliamentary sovereignty, allowing article 50 to expire during the prorogation of parliament due to the election is not allowed, and an extension sought at the first opportunity."
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 12:04
|
|