FlyTheNest

Morning all.

Morning.

Interesting piece on taxation.

In short, if this study is correct, HindleA was right

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... axes-study" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Plays well with gallery (at least some) not necessarily with those you need to attend.Rather sums up the whole failing overall tactic to me.

In presentational terms.

IE "radical,radical radical"-largely satisfies those you don't have to at the expense of putting fear into those you need to persuade.


I suppose the trick is to be radical but more surreptitiously.In many ways of course it wasn't radical at all but rather mainstream ,or used to be.It wasn't radical enough in my areas of interest

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... ns-process" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Morning all.

A commentary on the Sabisky in Downing Street thing.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


including this bit.

Dr Adam Rutherford
@AdamRutherford
1h1 hour ago
More
His presence at the Intelligence conference held on UCL grounds is problematic, as it is mostly attended by scientifically semi-literate cranks, actual white supremacists, and utter fools, whose self style heretical pose masks not just weirdness, but ignorance and bigotry 5/n

"The ignorance and bigotry gene"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ble-people" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another interesting thread - this time demolishing Simon Jenkins' arguments (yeah I know...) on HS2.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0742s4t" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Morning.

Interesting piece on taxation.

In short, if this study is correct, HindleA was right

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... axes-study" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes but "punitive" is a bit of a loaded term innit, and its not like the Labour manifesto said we would go back to 98% marginal rates or anything.......

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... ght-to-buy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.labour-party.org.uk/manifest ... esto.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Agreed,the mis(presentation) not aided some would say with the "radical" stuff,a sort of mutual reinforcement

RIP Harry Gregg - not many survivors of that day left now.

HindleA wrote:IE "radical,radical radical"-largely satisfies those you don't have to at the expense of putting fear into those you need to persuade.


I suppose the trick is to be radical but more surreptitiously.In many ways of course it wasn't radical at all but rather mainstream ,or used to be.It wasn't radical enough in my areas of interest

(cJA bold)
Yes, that seems to be what's required.

Good afternoon, everyone.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Morning.

Interesting piece on taxation.

In short, if this study is correct, HindleA was right

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... axes-study" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes but "punitive" is a bit of a loaded term innit, and its not like the Labour manifesto said we would go back to 98% marginal rates or anything.......

Effectively communicating good policy to people isn't easy or straightforward.

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... ght-to-buy

http://www.labour-party.org.uk/manifest ... esto.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting website
http://www.labour-party.org.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I've not done more than flip through their home and 'who weren't not' page yet.

citizenJA wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Morning.

Interesting piece on taxation.

In short, if this study is correct, HindleA was right

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... axes-study" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes but "punitive" is a bit of a loaded term innit, and its not like the Labour manifesto said we would go back to 98% marginal rates or anything.......

Effectively communicating good policy to people isn't easy or straightforward.

I'm writing the obvious as though it were some extraordinary piece of information.

I don't know tbh,spouting repetitive meaningless phrases and evidential bollox that is somehow interpretated by enough people as good and believable seems to be the way.

As far as yesterday's comments on the BBC are concerned, perish the thought that pissing off so many previous friends of theirs for the past decade might have been not such a good idea.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... -athletics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


The real reason is,of course is I didn't get in

"Organisers said that all registered runners would be allowed to defer their entry until next year – however they would have to pay again and would also not get their money back from this year’s race"

Just as well

Just a reminder

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... q-comments" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Whatever you may think of the value of IQ tests it is surely relevant to a conversation about equality that as many as 16% of our species have an IQ below 85"


Er..

http://lartsocial.org/maths" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.newstatesman.com/society/20 ... s-disabled" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Beatrice Webb declared eugenics to be “the most important question of all” while her husband remarked that “no eugenicist can be a laissez-faire individualist”.

Similarly, George Bernard Shaw wrote: “The only fundamental and possible socialism is the socialisation of the selective breeding of man.” Bertrand Russell proposed that the state should issue colour-coded “procreation tickets” to prevent the gene pool of the elite being diluted by inferior human beings. Those who decided to have children with holders of a different-coloured ticket would be punished with a heavy fine. HG Wells praised eugenics as the first step towards the elimination of “detrimental types and characteristics” and the “fostering of desirable types” instead.

None other than William Beveridge, the architect of the post-1945 welfare state, was highly active in the eugenics movement and said that “those men who through general defects are unable to fill such a whole place in industry are to be recognized as unemployable. They must become the acknowledged dependents of the State... but with complete and permanent loss of all citizen rights - including not only the franchise but civil freedom and fatherhood”.

Yes, belief in eugenics was once widespread. There are good reasons (and not just the Nazis) why that stopped being so.

I don't know if anyone else here saw the documentary Sally Phillips made about the new test for Downs Syndrome and the impact it's had in Iceland, but it's well worth a watch. At the very edge of the eugenics debate, it makes for uncomfortable viewing. Yet we now appear to have people in government comfortable with making far more arbitrary propositions about who they deem worthy of existence based on what, exactly? People with Downs Syndrome may not have high IQs but many of them are capable of being happy and kind and living fulfilling lives. Which is more than can be said of some of the miserable, emotionally stunted arseholes currently occupying our government.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-37500189" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A world without Down's syndrome?

" who they deem worthy of existence based on what, exactly?"


Not being them

I would advocate elimination of those that believe in elimination,apart from the obvious.

Storm destroys eco egret guise to reveal the new Environment Secretary (6,7).

I can't really imagine what it must be like to know a Society does not think you should exist.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/202 ... st-science" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/science/202 ... st-science

So many assumptions, not least that a "developed" society is a superior one.

Swanky seabird destroyed in resignation (6,7).

"character assassination"

Goodnight, everyone.
love,
cJA

If the eugenics resignation was supposed to distract from this, it hasn't entirely worked:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/ ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Boris Johnson works from Kent country house by a lake instead of visiting flood victims