|
|
Post by Minge är en jävla besserwisser on Mar 2, 2018 18:33:37 GMT
Who the hell thinks the DM is anti brexit? |
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 61,016
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 2, 2018 18:35:27 GMT
I don't think even staunch remainers deny that the BBC has a massive pro-remain bias. |
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 61,016
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 2, 2018 18:40:06 GMT
Who the hell thinks the DM is anti brexit? I've seen more than one poll looking at voting by political party supported and about 4-5% of Ukip voters appear to have voted remain. Weird. I suppose the point about UJ's poll is that a lot of people must have to guess at which way media outlets lean. Most people are all that interested in politics so it might be that a significant number of people don't know and have a wrong guess. |
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 61,016
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 2, 2018 18:41:34 GMT
I appreciate your candour. Link? |
|
bertruss2
New Member
https://wallpapercave.com/w/wp3765741
Posts: 5,596
|
Post by bertruss2 on Mar 2, 2018 20:14:52 GMT
Too much in favour of balance. When that's between bonkers and a rational position, it's a distortion of reality.
|
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Mar 2, 2018 20:22:06 GMT
Too much in favour of balance. When that's between bonkers and a rational position, it's a distortion of reality. Ah. The authentic voice of Radio Bonkers. |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 2, 2018 21:49:06 GMT
“But it remains difficult to grasp how the Tories could effectively have taken what was to everyone else a fringe issue and used it to attack the interests they had until very recently represented: the City of London, big business, the Union, even Whitehall.”
This alone is a real disincentive to continue reading the rest of the article. The anti democracy “why did the Tories make an election pledge and then act on it” argument is tiresome.
And to dismiss negative feelings towards the UK relationship with the EU as a mere “fringe issue” is either dishonest or shows that the continued problem we have with out media and political personalities - living in a closed off bubble and being baffled at the idea that there are people out there who see things differently to them.
Edit: That said, ironically, this was also partly what led to Cameron offering the referendum. Stave off certain elements in his party under the sure impression that there was no way the UK would vote to leave. That he couldn’t even perceive the degree of anti EU sentiment is really quite troubling.
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 2, 2018 21:57:14 GMT
“An alternative perspective on that achievement is that hardship has forced people into worse jobs, demanding fewer skills and lower capital investment, so that Britain’s productivity growth has stalled to a degree not seen since the Industrial Revolution. That is what happens when work is framed as a moral duty, to be engaged in at all costs.”
I am not sure what’s wrong with seeing work as a more duty. I recall leaving uni and was always surprised at other students who felt it better to go on the dole rather than secure a relevant position instead of doing a crappy job while seeking a better one.
It’s also puzzling that the author posts these this as a bad thing:
“Only pain forces people to adapt and innovate. In practice that may mean all sorts of things: migrating, reskilling, sacrificing weekends or family time, selling property, the ‘gig economy’ and so on.”
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 2, 2018 22:00:37 GMT
I do agree with him however that some people take an incredible simplistic approach to the “moral hazard” argument.
|
|
|
|
Post by flatandy on Mar 2, 2018 22:47:32 GMT
f**k me. Despite all the mountains of evidence, people still believe the BBC is Remain? Despite every Question Time having A UKIP, a Brexit Tory, a DUP or some kind of lunatic journalist, Kate Hoey, and one token remainer? Despite it spending all of the last two years reporting Boris Johnson and Telly May with a straight face? Despite it repeatedly placing comedy moron Jacob Rees Mogg on such a pedestal that suddenly he's the next leader of the country? Despite it people populated by Actual Tories who also always go along with the government, like Marr and Kuennsberg? Of course, that survey is a survey of the public view, not of actually how the BBC acts. So it's massively subjective. But how the f**k does anyone think the BBC is anything but an organ designed to follow the government's main policy agendas? It's as establishment as is possible to imagine. |
|
|
|
Post by flatandy on Mar 2, 2018 22:54:40 GMT
Interesting that Van actually does basically agree with the moral hazard argument. That you need to make peoples lives utterly miserable in order to make them change and improve themselves. It's a form of Gordon Brown's miserable presbytarian puritanism.
It views working hard as inherently a morally good thing
It assumes that its the government's job to make sure that the public adhere to the new puritan hardworking morality
It doesn't trust the public to just be good people, basically, and work because they want better lives
There's no evidence that it works, but it's become a part of the common language, the entire concept of "scroungers" who we must despise and must not help, and if their lives only get more miserable, then that's got to be a good thing because it's the only thing that'll force them to get on their bikes.
I think, fundamentally, too many people have actually believed the moral tale of Atlas Shrugged, that you need to destroy society utterly and completely so that the truly strong survive and create a New Utopia. It's a bonkers hybrid of Trotksyite nonsense and even more insane Social Darwinism.
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 3, 2018 2:51:09 GMT
It’s weird that me thinking working hard is a morally good thing has translated to “We need to make people’s lives as miserable as possible so that they can improve themselves.”
Even weirder when I expressly said “people take an incredibly simplistic approach to the moral hazard argument.”
You can’t just make stuff up you know.
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 3, 2018 2:53:13 GMT
That said I do look down on genuine scroungers. No idea why I shouldn’t.
|
|
|
|
Post by Minge är en jävla besserwisser on Mar 3, 2018 7:16:05 GMT
Interesting that Van actually does basically agree with the moral hazard argument. That you need to make peoples lives utterly miserable in order to make them change and improve themselves. It's a form of Gordon Brown's miserable presbytarian puritanism. It views working hard as inherently a morally good thing It assumes that its the government's job to make sure that the public adhere to the new puritan hardworking morality It doesn't trust the public to just be good people, basically, and work because they want better lives There's no evidence that it works, but it's become a part of the common language, the entire concept of "scroungers" who we must despise and must not help, and if their lives only get more miserable, then that's got to be a good thing because it's the only thing that'll force them to get on their bikes. I think, fundamentally, too many people have actually believed the moral tale of Atlas Shrugged, that you need to destroy society utterly and completely so that the truly strong survive and create a New Utopia. It's a bonkers hybrid of Trotksyite nonsense and even more insane Social Darwinism. That's not the moral hazard argument, but carry on anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by unclejunior on Mar 3, 2018 7:59:59 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2018 8:01:13 GMT
“An alternative perspective on that achievement is that hardship has forced people into worse jobs, demanding fewer skills and lower capital investment, so that Britain’s productivity growth has stalled to a degree not seen since the Industrial Revolution. That is what happens when work is framed as a moral duty, to be engaged in at all costs.” I am not sure what’s wrong with seeing work as a more duty. I recall leaving uni and was always surprised at other students who felt it better to go on the dole rather than secure a relevant position instead of doing a crappy job while seeking a better one. It’s also puzzling that the author posts these this as a bad thing: “Only pain forces people to adapt and innovate. In practice that may mean all sorts of things: migrating, reskilling, sacrificing weekends or family time, selling property, the ‘gig economy’ and so on.” Clue to 'bad thing' ^^^ |
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Mar 3, 2018 8:06:03 GMT
You're a pain but it's not necessarily a bad thing. You can sometimes be funny but mainly you're a useful comic foil and a useful indicator of the bremain mentality. You and Bert.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2018 8:08:47 GMT
I know. You'd be lost without me.
|
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Mar 3, 2018 8:11:19 GMT
Quite possibly. I'm only tweaking your nips. You love it really.
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 3, 2018 8:11:33 GMT
“An alternative perspective on that achievement is that hardship has forced people into worse jobs, demanding fewer skills and lower capital investment, so that Britain’s productivity growth has stalled to a degree not seen since the Industrial Revolution. That is what happens when work is framed as a moral duty, to be engaged in at all costs.” I am not sure what’s wrong with seeing work as a more duty. I recall leaving uni and was always surprised at other students who felt it better to go on the dole rather than secure a relevant position instead of doing a crappy job while seeking a better one. It’s also puzzling that the author posts these this as a bad thing: “Only pain forces people to adapt and innovate. In practice that may mean all sorts of things: migrating, reskilling, sacrificing weekends or family time, selling property, the ‘gig economy’ and so on.” Clue to 'bad thing' ^^^ Good point. I should have been better in my quoting. It’s the “in practice” onwards that caught my eye. Also to add thinking if you cause people pain they will automatically make more responsible choices is incredibly simplistic and naive. |
|
