Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Kilkrazy wrote: If it was illegal not to pay interns and an intern doesn't want to be paid they could waive their fee or donate it to charity, but as you say, there is a wide expectation that interns work for nothing, and this creates a strong bias in favour of the children of rich parents.
As we haven't seen the details of what is proposed it's difficult to say anything for certainty. However given the information I'm not sure it will work at all.
My understanding (but admittedly limited) is that a lot of internships are because someone (probably parent) knows someone else (there's some evidence that suggests 'middle class' parents do their utmost to ensure their apples don't fall too far from the tree). This doesn't help someone that has no contacts and would like to get into the area but have few, if any, 'friends' in the right places.
In terms of the proposals it could make the situation worse rather than better. There may still be internships but my guess is they will become fewer simply because of the cost to the company. They will effectively become the first step on the employment ladder. It does not stop anyone 'volunteering' to work for a company (you can't ban these because many councils now rely on volunteers to provide services, such as libraries and there is an argument you are reducing peoples civil liberties too). In effect then rather than unpaid employee (which likely have some terms and conditions) they will get a volunteer that the companies only have to be responsible for with regards health and safety. That means people are even more open to exploitation as how much 'volunteering' you do may then be used to determine whether you get an internship.
The alternative is the companies hire people on 'gigging' contracts at negligible rates (say £0.01 a year) and they scrap internships altogether.
Both these result in the same (or potentially worse) situation for the pre-internship candidates, as it leaves them even more easily exploitable. I'm sure there are companies looking at these options as we speak.
The issue you are always going to have is that where there are hundreds of people per post in these specific areas then those that can afford it and really want to get in the area are always going to have the advantage because the individuals are willing to be paid nothing.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In other news it appears May is now suggesting she will match Trumps promise on corporation tax which would be 15% IIRC.
This is as I feared, that they will bend over backwards to keep companies in the UK. The disadvantage is that Hammond has stated he is also going to stick with austerity. The money has go to come from somewhere - so if we assume no tax rises then it's got to be the public services that are going to suffer (again!)
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2016/11/21 09:11:43
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
This is as I feared, that they will bend over backwards to keep companies in the UK. The disadvantage is that Hammond has stated he is also going to stick with austerity. The money has go to come from somewhere - so if we assume no tax rises then it's got to be the public services that are going to suffer (again!)
Regardless of what he's 'stating', public borrowing seems to have gone up again. Austerity has been ditched in all but name, or so I've read.
As we leave the EU, several of the major corporation tax dodges will be removed as viable alternatives. May's also said 'firms need to do "more to spread those benefits around the country, playing by the same rules as everyone else when it comes to tax and behaviour, and investing in Britain for the long-term". So thinking it over, I suppose it could be fine for corporation tax dropping if in turn more corporations are made to pay the full tax instead of their current pittance. The total could potentially be a net gain. I'm not hopeful (I've heard the same words from Cameron's mouth which never came to anything), but I'll wait to see results before passing judgement, any cabinet this fresh deserves a minimal benefit of the doubt.
There'll be plenty of time for recriminations a year from now if they bugger it up, after all.
According to the news today also, May's going to pledge 'an extra £2bn a year in funding for scientific research and development by 2020. '
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38044015 That'll reassure the academics at least. I suspect (hypothesizing here) though, that the new funding will not be as broadly available as previous EU funding, and be more science focused. Less humanities grants and phds on dolphin watching, and more towards things like the specified 'robotics and biotechnology'.
Which makes me sad because history is my department, but considering most of the funded stuff I see, I don't think much of it makes that big an impact on the world, and reluctantly concede the money could probably be put to better use.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/21 11:09:16
Regardless of what he's 'stating', public borrowing seems to have gone up again. Austerity has been ditched in all but name, or so I've read.
It depends on what you mean by austerity though. Yes borrowing has increased but government departments are still seeing their budgets slashed and unless they change things this week will continue to have to do so until at least 2020. That's before we take in to account inflation. They may have abandoned meeting Osborne's targets but that doesn't mean austerity has gone away (for example they still pushed through changes to the state benefits).
As we leave the EU, several of the major corporation tax dodges will be removed as viable alternatives. May's also said 'firms need to do "more to spread those benefits around the country, playing by the same rules as everyone else when it comes to tax and behaviour, and investing in Britain for the long-term". So thinking it over, I suppose it could be fine for corporation tax dropping if in turn more corporations are made to pay the full tax instead of their current pittance. The total could potentially be a net gain. I'm not hopeful (I've heard the same words from Cameron's mouth which never came to anything), but I'll wait to see results before passing judgement, any cabinet this fresh deserves a minimal benefit of the doubt."
Given that she has backtracked on putting workers on company boards already (and that's after less than 6 months after she announced it). I will take a very large dose of scepticism as to what this means. My knowledge of the tax system is poor but isn't most of the tax system a global international agreement approach rather than an EU one? We also don't know how 'out' of the EU we are going to be.
According to the news today also, May's going to pledge 'an extra £2bn a year in funding for scientific research and development by 2020. '
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38044015 That'll reassure the academics at least. I suspect (hypothesizing here) though, that the new funding will not be as broadly available as previous EU funding, and be more science focused..
Depends on what she means. An additional £6.9bn was already pledged in the 2016 budget anyway, so it may just be moving money around rather than anything new. These things also tend to be more business targeted rather than pure academia related.
Less humanities grants and phds on dolphin watching, and more towards things like the specified 'robotics and biotechnology'
Which makes me sad because history is my department, but considering most of the funded stuff I see, I don't think much of it makes that big an impact on the world, and reluctantly concede the money could probably be put to better use.
I disagree with this approach, it's funding something that is already known hoping it will pay off. They complain that new ideas aren't taken forward in this country and this is the reason why. When something 'new' is found there is no funding to support it because it has to be related to what the government thinks is important. Hence those new discoveries are taken elsewhere to bring forward. Robotics and Biotech is already heavily supported. If someone tomorrow discovers a chemical compound that could change the way we live, there is no funding to progress the idea. they want the country to be innovative but have a non-innovative way of funding what they think are good bets.
You need to fund all areas of science and humanities because in principle we don't know what might come out of them. That study on 'dolphin watching' might highlight a new form of communication or a new way to design a hearing aid that is much more efficient.
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
This is as I feared, that they will bend over backwards to keep companies in the UK. The disadvantage is that Hammond has stated he is also going to stick with austerity. The money has go to come from somewhere - so if we assume no tax rises then it's got to be the public services that are going to suffer (again!)
Regardless of what he's 'stating', public borrowing seems to have gone up again. Austerity has been ditched in all but name, or so I've read.
As we leave the EU, several of the major corporation tax dodges will be removed as viable alternatives. May's also said 'firms need to do "more to spread those benefits around the country, playing by the same rules as everyone else when it comes to tax and behaviour, and investing in Britain for the long-term". So thinking it over, I suppose it could be fine for corporation tax dropping if in turn more corporations are made to pay the full tax instead of their current pittance. The total could potentially be a net gain. I'm not hopeful (I've heard the same words from Cameron's mouth which never came to anything), but I'll wait to see results before passing judgement, any cabinet this fresh deserves a minimal benefit of the doubt.
Going by the Nissan example staying companies are expecting to pay less, not more in a post-Brexit UK.
They won't care about nominal rates, only what they actually have to pay.
Given that she has backtracked on putting workers on company boards already (and that's after less than 6 months after she announced it).
Not entirely accurate.
Her original statement was that workers would be 'represented' on company boards. She never said anything about direct appointments. The news today was: 'Asked if she had dropped plans for the direct appointment of workers on boards, the Prime Minister replied: "What I have clarified today is we have been very clear we want workers' representation on boards.
"There are a number of ways in which that can be achieved.
In other words, she said one thing, and everyone jumped to conclusions. She's now narrowed her vague statement slightly. Bit of an imaginary storm in a teacup, really.
I will take a very large dose of scepticism as to what this means. My knowledge of the tax system is poor but isn't most of the tax system a global international agreement approach rather than an EU one?
Yes and no. Hiving off profits through shell structures/loans in Ireland and Luxembourg will cease to be a viable option once we leave, which is currently the most popular corporation tax dodging model for the biggest companies, and that's only possible due to EU financial regulations. People like to imagine that the reason multinationals can dodge tax is because they're bribing the Government, but the reality is more that we're quite constrained in certain financial legislative ways whilst in the EU.
It is possible to to try and do the same thing with countries outside of the EU, but the government is much tighter on that sort of thing; partially because they have more direct legislative power to block it, partially because it's much easier to spot, and partially because it's a lot harder to organise (due to those global international agreements you mentioned). It's a bit like immigration in that regard; it's much easier to handle the stuff coming from outside the EU than in it.
The balancing act for the government is to make corporation tax rates palatable enough, whilst making alternative tax evasion costly/risky enough, that all the giants will adopt a 'sod it, let's just pay corporation tax' approach to things. You may well see it drop even lower, but if that results in a net gain, I don't see any issues with that. I expect it to take a good five to ten years to finetune, however.
Depends on what she means. An additional £6.9bn was already pledged in the 2016 budget anyway, so it may just be moving money around rather than anything new.
True, politicians do like re-announcing the same money in ten different ways. I think Brown perfected that!
You need to fund all areas of science and humanities because in principle we don't know what might come out of them. That study on 'dolphin watching' might highlight a new form of communication or a new way to design a hearing aid that is much more efficient.
There's a tumblr/twitter site somewhere (I forget the title) that publishes extracts all the most ridiculous papers that get put it. Quite the hoot, it really does show you the guff some fields put out (social sciences seems to be the worst for it). I think there has to be a certain amount of ingoing/outgoing maximisation when it comes to funding. Another technical book on german WW1 submarines, whilst very very interesting, is not going to revolutionise studies of the period or invent money making technology, however much cash you put towards funding it.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with what you're saying, there's certainly some validity to it, but I've seen too many grants that have made me go 'really?' to have faith that the current model is the best one for value for money.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/21 12:57:19
According to the news today also, May's going to pledge 'an extra £2bn a year in funding for scientific research and development by 2020. '
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38044015
A survey of more than 1,000 British businesses has found that they have delayed over £65 billion of investment since the vote to leave the EU.
The Centre for Economic and Business Research found that companies had cancelled investment worth billions since July because of the uncertainty caused by the vote.
The Times reports that 20% of firms said uncertainty over UK’s membership of the EU Single Market was one of the biggest concerns.
The falling value of the Sterling was also listed a big problem by many companies, especially those importing raw materials in foreign currencies.
A separate report also found that the falling value of the Pound and rising inflation would depress the real value of wage earnings for most people next year.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
There's a tumblr/twitter site somewhere (I forget the title) that publishes extracts all the most ridiculous papers that get put it. Quite the hoot, it really does show you the guff some fields put out (social sciences seems to be the worst for it). I think there has to be a certain amount of ingoing/outgoing maximisation when it comes to funding. Another technical book on german WW1 submarines, whilst very very interesting, is not going to revolutionise studies of the period or invent money making technology, however much cash you put towards funding it.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with what you're saying, there's certainly some validity to it, but I've seen too many grants that have made me go 'really?' to have faith that the current model is the best one for value for money.
It's the outcome of "Education, Education, Education" from Blair's years. The 'University is the most important thing you can do in your life" stance adopted back then, unfortunately, restructured education for education's sake, severely damaging the incidental academic rigor and need for practical applications that the financial disincentive forced on people. In turn and this cannot be understated, a lot of the institutions pursued the new market of low-return-of-investment candidates for the entirely valid reason that it could fund their actually valuable work through them. The current commercial college problem in America is the hyper-exaggerated end game of this I think.
And it's a shame, because people who genuinely do have the discipline to get through a university degree and the skills, acquired or otherwise, to produce an academic paper get stuck in a field where their contribution is of little value to anybody solely because of one poorly informed decision at the outset of their higher education, despite their actual abilities which could have been targetted for both their and our benefit. Now since vast quantities of University Graduates on the dole is a Really Bad Thing (TM) which is totally incompatible with any party's agenda, there's plenty of incentive to feather-bed them. An intelligent, at least somewhat self aware person - which is exactly what a university should be admitting - won't waste time on higher education if it's shown as not likely to pay off after all.
As a specific aside because your example hits a pet subject of mine, there genuinely were some technological developments in WW1 and WW2 which if revisited with new materials and production methods could have serious positive impact on the state of technology. Gerald Bull's work in ground-to-space artillery based on the Nazi shore guns for example
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/21 13:33:17
Some people find the idea that other people can be happy offensive, and will prefer causing harm to self improvement.
Her original statement was that workers would be 'represented' on company boards. She never said anything about direct appointments. The news today was: 'Asked if she had dropped plans for the direct appointment of workers on boards, the Prime Minister replied: "What I have clarified today is we have been very clear we want workers' representation on boards.
"There are a number of ways in which that can be achieved.
In other words, she said one thing, and everyone jumped to conclusions. She's now narrowed her vague statement slightly. Bit of an imaginary storm in a teacup, really.
She has also never done anything to squash the 'mis-interpretation' so either she's used it for her own ends at the time but now she has to accept the negative feedback on letting it run
She's squirming around wording in my opinion probably because of business pressure and internally from the party. So they are going to consult with businesses how to put something in place rather than those representing the workers. I can't imagine you are going to get businesses propose anything that isn't in effect a nod to the idea but something they can ultimately ignore.
The balancing act for the government is to make corporation tax rates palatable enough, whilst making alternative tax evasion costly/risky enough, that all the giants will adopt a 'sod it, let's just pay corporation tax' approach to things. You may well see it drop even lower, but if that results in a net gain, I don't see any issues with that. I expect it to take a good five to ten years to finetune, however.
Of course it still does depend on what leaving the EU looks like. If it is still an open market place in this regard then we might see no change at all.
There's a tumblr/twitter site somewhere (I forget the title) that publishes extracts all the most ridiculous papers that get put it. Quite the hoot, it really does show you the guff some fields put out (social sciences seems to be the worst for it). I think there has to be a certain amount of ingoing/outgoing maximisation when it comes to funding. Another technical book on german WW1 submarines, whilst very very interesting, is not going to revolutionise studies of the period or invent money making technology, however much cash you put towards funding it.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with what you're saying, there's certainly some validity to it, but I've seen too many grants that have made me go 'really?' to have faith that the current model is the best one for value for money.
I think the issue is at what point do we actually make that decision? It may be the details of WW1 submarines today but what might it be tomorrow and who makes this decision? There are lots of areas of science that could also be construed as superfluous (searching for planets around other stars perhaps, or the details of sedimentary rocks in the Mediterranean, what about the search for Richard III). Directly they may add minimal benefit to society when they are insitigated, but indirectly they may result in new sensors for cameras or a new way of precisely measuring materials and so on. I always get wary about making a judgement on other areas of research I'm not involved in because I don't understand all the potential implications. We don't know what fields we need to research so a broader approach (even if some seem slightly off centre) is just casting our net wider in the hope of finding that high value fish!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/21 14:07:14
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
I'm not sure whether this says something more about the blogger or the science though.
It seems to be filled with references to sex, feminism, masculinity and so on. It very much seems to be targeted at certain types of papers and theses.
Without a proper reference point it really is difficult to say whether these areas are generating more than any other field.
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
I'm not sure whether this says something more about the blogger or the science though.
It seems to be filled with references to sex, feminism, masculinity and so on. It very much seems to be targeted at certain types of papers and theses.
Without a proper reference point it really is difficult to say whether these areas are generating more than any other field.
And often they are just looking at a couple of sentences of the abstract, which is meant to give a very brief overview of the findings of the paper. So of course some of the conclusions will seem silly or obvious. What matters is the methodology.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
I'm not sure whether this says something more about the blogger or the science though.
It seems to be filled with references to sex, feminism, masculinity and so on. It very much seems to be targeted at certain types of papers and theses.
Without a proper reference point it really is difficult to say whether these areas are generating more than any other field.
Thinking deductively, most academics are only usually cognisant of their own field. Therefore one would imagine that the chap who runs the blog is an academic active in the fields of gender, sexuality, and so forth who is less than impressed by the quality of work of published within it. I'd be exceptionally surprised (and a little bit worried for his health) if he was just some random person who read all those sorts of journals for fun!
I think all fields generate a certain amount of publish or perish guff, but the more abstract the subject, I suspect the worse it's likely to be; by pure virtue of the fact that when your subject is factually based, it is harder to just mash keywords together. If I pick up a paper on the aforementioned german submarine construction, it's pretty easy to decipher the purpose of the article and whether or not it achieves it using the approrpiate source work/reasoning. It's the same for a paper detailing a new chemical element isolated, or the results of a drug trial, I should think.
But when you start wandering into the realms of theoretical/academic physics, philosophy, gender studies, and so on, nobody can really prove you right or wrong most of the time.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/21 19:34:03
It's also possible if you have access to JANET, to do searches on papers and find social-science "gobbledegook" abstracts pretty quickly, and snip laughable fragments to stick on Twitter and poke fun at.
Who are the current major players in the French and German elections scheduled for next year? I'm trying to find out who's likely to be friendly to us in any brexit negotiations (if and when they ever happen) and who's hostile.
Thinking deductively, most academics are only usually cognisant of their own field. Therefore one would imagine that the chap who runs the blog is an academic active in the fields of gender, sexuality, and so forth who is less than impressed by the quality of work of published within it. I'd be exceptionally surprised (and a little bit worried for his health) if he was just some random person who read all those sorts of journals for fun!
I wonder if anyone has asked him the question? Though to be honest, these days, nothing surprises me!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Future War Cultist wrote: Who are the current major players in the French and German elections scheduled for next year? I'm trying to find out who's likely to be friendly to us in any brexit negotiations (if and when they ever happen) and who's hostile.
Does it matter? Don't all the EU countries have to agree. Even if you have friendly German/French politicians it isn't going to help if there is another one that isn't? Though I accept they have a lot of weight that doesn't help if one country wants to make a point.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/21 22:14:46
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
Its hard to be awesome, when your playing with little plastic men. Welcome to Fantasy 40k
If you think your important, in the great scheme of things. Do the water test.
Put your hands in a bucket of warm water,
then pull them out fast. The size of the hole shows how important you are.
I think we should roll some dice, to see if we should roll some dice, To decide if all this dice rolling is good for the game.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
Because the SNP, and the Scottish people generally, are internationalists.
That, and it's probably best to watch Blyth's whole Global Trumpism lecture rather than a wee interview.
As I've said many a time, there is no point, IMO, getting away from the corrupt United Kingdom, only to walk into the corrupt United States of Europe...
Makes no sense to me
Switzerland and Norway are my preferred models.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/11/22 11:06:42
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
.. oddly enough i can't seem to find too much outrage from Farage or UKIP with regards to foreign leaders offering opinions about Uk decisions.
Must be delayed by the weather.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Because the SNP, and the Scottish people generally, are internationalists.
That, and it's probably best to watch Blyth's whole Global Trumpism lecture rather than a wee interview.
As I've said many a time, there is no point, IMO, getting away from the corrupt United Kingdom, only to walk into the corrupt United States of Europe...
Makes no sense to me
Switzerland and Norway are my preferred models.
I agree totally on this. The British people have been fethed about enough as it is.
Its hard to be awesome, when your playing with little plastic men. Welcome to Fantasy 40k
If you think your important, in the great scheme of things. Do the water test.
Put your hands in a bucket of warm water,
then pull them out fast. The size of the hole shows how important you are.
I think we should roll some dice, to see if we should roll some dice, To decide if all this dice rolling is good for the game.
Working hard and going backwards http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-38052684 Travelling to work can be grim enough at the best of times - but imagine if you got there and were told there was no work and you had to go home again without getting paid.
That is the kind of experience described by workers trying to keep afloat in a job market of casual jobs, agency work and zero-hour contracts.
Simon - not his real name - is in his mid-40s, living near Glasgow, and does not claim any benefits. He wants to rely on his own efforts and hard work.
When the government's spending plans are presented in the Autumn Statement on Wednesday, there could be help for such working families, described by Theresa May as "just getting by" or "just about managing".
Work has always been seen as the route out of poverty - but what happens if work is so unpredictable or so badly paid that it leaves people feeling like they are still going backwards?
'Difficult to talk about'
The world described by Simon seems more like financial quicksand, where people seem to get in deeper difficulty the more they try to get away.
Working in jobs such as catering and hospitality, he has no job security or guarantee of hours, and his working days can vary each week and be cut at short notice.
If he gets a full week's work, then there is money for the bills. But the hours can suddenly be cut, so that he might have only 10 or 12 hours' earnings for the week.
"It's difficult to talk about. It sounds like you're telling a sad story," he says.
But the money he makes has to pay his rent on a one-bedroom flat, and that means he might have to do without everything else.
He says that some days he might have only dry cereal to eat.
When his daughter stays, he sleeps on the sofa so that she can have the bed.
But he says that in 12 years he has never been able to take her on holiday.
'We make our own time. We want a happy home, so we accept these things," he says.
But what does this say about the changing world of work? And what does it do to the people caught up in this precarious cycle, where bills come round regularly, but pay day does not?
Work has always been more than work - it has been about dignity and status, a shared endeavour and a sense of making progress.
'Lack of worth'
But that does not quite work when, as Simon describes, he can receive a text message at 22:30 telling him not to bother coming in the next day or catch a train out to a job only to be turned back on arrival because he is no longer needed.
"You feel a lack of worth, for sure," he says.
But Simon does not blame the managers, who themselves have little control over a system designed to avoid paying for staff when work is quiet.
"I get how it happens - because they're dictated to by their businesses. The problem is that they're allowed to do it," he says.
"People have become an absolute commodity."
Food banks
Being in work and in poverty at the same time has become increasingly common, says Graham Whitham, Oxfam's senior policy adviser.
"It is unacceptable that over half of all people living in poverty in the UK are in homes where at least one person is working.
"Insecure contracts, persistently low wages and soaring housing costs mean many workers face a monthly struggle to feed their families and pay bills."
The voluntary sector is also helping to bridge this pay gap.
The food bank in Greenford Methodist Church, in west London, has set up sessions at weekends to help people who are working.
Paying off debts
Volunteer Brian Morris says it will help those who might have work one week and nothing the next.
Bernadette Abi-Karam, another helper at the food bank, says families on low incomes often end up in debt or arrears and while they are trying to "play catch up... it is often the food that suffers".
Image caption Bernadette Abi-Karam says helping in the food bank has been an "eye-opener"
The food bank tries to be a homely setting, with tea and chat trying to smooth off the sharper edges of why people are really dropping in.
Mr Morris says they see people pacing around outside, trying to overcome the embarrassment of stepping inside.
He says that as well as providing basic rations of food, the food bank can help with the huge sense of loneliness that can come with financial pressures.
And once they come inside, first-time visitors sometimes "sob their heart out".
Sleeping in cars
"A lot of people won't admit they're struggling," he says.
And the elderly are particularly resistant to admitting they need help.
Ms Abi-Karam says helping in the food bank has been "such an eye opener".
Image copyright iStock
Image caption Food banks are finding demand from people whose jobs do not pay enough
There were people who thought there was no need for a food bank in a borough such as Ealing, she says.
But helping there has taken away any idea that "they are a load of scroungers".
Many of those who need food are people with no savings or who have been stuck in debt and suddenly got into difficulty - losing their job or getting ill and being unable to work.
And there is a strong sense of parallel worlds that have become invisible to one another.
A suburban semi-detached house in Ealing can cost a million pounds.
But Mr Morris and Ms Abi-Karam talk about people who come to the food bank who spend their nights sleeping in cars.
"It's shame we have to do this - but it's the way that society has gone," says Mr Morris.
"Helping your neighbour has just disappeared.
"People's lives are so busy. They don't see what's going on under their noses."
Its hard to be awesome, when your playing with little plastic men. Welcome to Fantasy 40k
If you think your important, in the great scheme of things. Do the water test.
Put your hands in a bucket of warm water,
then pull them out fast. The size of the hole shows how important you are.
I think we should roll some dice, to see if we should roll some dice, To decide if all this dice rolling is good for the game.
Can you imagine what, say, Thatcher's response would have been if Reagan/whomever had publicly called for her to appoint a leader of another party as US ambassador ?
meanwhile :
Picture of Nazi gold eagle found at home of Thomas Mair ..
An Oxfam staffer offered to pick me up from Cardiff Central. The bus service is so depleted and irregular in the Dulais Valley in South Wales that it’s pointless trying to use it for short trips. For people in Banwen, jobs are few and far between, and the lack of public transport doesn’t help. I heard of one case in which Amazon was offering a day’s work on zero-hours contracts at one of its nearby warehouses. They only let you know on the day itself whether or not you’re needed, but the text message they send out arrives too late for you to get the first bus. Rather than risk losing the work, several locals slept in a bus shelter the night before on the off-chance they would be needed.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
