bovril Posted 18 January 2018 Share Posted 18 January 2018 Just now, Alf Bentley said: Does pidgin English? Yes. Just now, Strokes said: So they just say scruffy pigeon or smart pigeon? I don't know how they differentiate. I remember when I discovered this, freaked me out massively. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 18 January 2018 Share Posted 18 January 2018 6 minutes ago, bovril said: Yes. I don't know how they differentiate. I remember when I discovered this, freaked me out massively. Cool pigeon, shit pigeon, I’d imagine. Makes sense that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bovril Posted 18 January 2018 Share Posted 18 January 2018 2 minutes ago, Strokes said: Cool pigeon, shit pigeon, I’d imagine. Makes sense that way. Let's consult pigeonsaspets.co.uk http://www.pigeonsaspets.co.uk/2010/09/23/is-there-a-difference-between-a-dove-and-a-pigeon/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 18 January 2018 Share Posted 18 January 2018 1 minute ago, bovril said: Let's consult pigeonsaspets.co.uk http://www.pigeonsaspets.co.uk/2010/09/23/is-there-a-difference-between-a-dove-and-a-pigeon/ Why would you spread such horrible lies, you are a mean man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 Some may call this a dove, others may call it a white pigeon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 It seems that liftedfox is purposely muddying the waters. Fortunately I've found a tame American to explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 7 hours ago, Strokes said: I have to agree when it comes to safety like this, we cannot have another grenfell on anyone’s watch. Another example of outsourcing leading to poor service and potentially horrific outcomes.for the public. People talk about the labour vision as anti private sector. I.would argue that the rush to outsource and privatise is usually pushed by those that are anti public sector. You can look anywhere and find virtually unlimited examples of outsourcing failures. Falling forensic science standards 'making miscarriages of justice inevitable' https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/19/uk-police-forces-failing-to-meet-forensic-standards-safe-regulator-miscarriages-justice-outsourcing?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 12 minutes ago, toddybad said: Another example of outsourcing leading to poor service and potentially horrific outcomes.for the public. People talk about the labour vision as anti private sector. I.would argue that the rush to outsource and privatise is usually pushed by those that are anti public sector. You can look anywhere and find virtually unlimited examples of outsourcing failures. Falling forensic science standards 'making miscarriages of justice inevitable' https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/19/uk-police-forces-failing-to-meet-forensic-standards-safe-regulator-miscarriages-justice-outsourcing?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard I do agree the halfway house solution doesn’t seem to work very well, either sell it off or keep it public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 17 hours ago, lifted*fox said: the news and the media are there to keep the man down - to keep us living in fear. there is no independent 'media' outlets - every single one is somehow funded visibly or via backhanders / brown envelopes. people high up in media organisations are all in the pockets of politicians and world leaders. the sooner everyone stops watching TV news and reading newspapers the sooner everyone will be free of the fear and scaremongering they push. the internet has given us plenty of ways to source our own news, news from the people, from the ground, real news - this is what we should all be reading. **** mainstream media - it's all bullshit. Problem with that is most "real" news sites on the internet are 100%, unadulterated bollocks. They're the ones who peddle an agenda more than the broadsheets and news channels. what you should actually do is read multiple sources and fact check them using sites like snopes. Not declare something like the BBC to be biased and pick up some shit like the canary. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buce Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 37 minutes ago, The Doctor said: Problem with that is most "real" news sites on the internet are 100%, unadulterated bollocks. They're the ones who peddle an agenda more than the broadsheets and news channels. what you should actually do is read multiple sources and fact check them using sites like snopes. Not declare something like the BBC to be biased and pick up some shit like the canary. Don’t kid yourself that the beeb doesn’t have an agenda. Every single day it publishes some completely unnewsworthy article about the royals. Yesterday it was Harry and Megan visit castle, today it’s all about William having a new fvcking hairstyle. The BBC is the vanguard of the Establishment’s propaganda machine. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 2 minutes ago, Buce said: Don’t kid yourself that the beeb doesn’t have an agenda. Every single day it publishes some completely unnewsworthy article about the royals. Yesterday it was Harry and Megan visit castle, today it’s all about William having a new fvcking hairstyle. The BBC is the vanguard of the Establishment’s propaganda machine. Cue someone posting to say that the BBC promotes the views of the left-wing / liberal elite.... Then someone else posting to say that it only broadcasts bad news.... The BBC isn't perfect and could certainly do with employing people with a wider range of backgrounds/experiences, but does a pretty good, balanced job. If anything, it is TOO keen to seem balanced. Could do with a few more non-mainstream voices from different parts of the spectrum, so long as they were challenged and analysed. Good post by @The Doctor - cross-check, fact check and challenge... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 10 hours ago, toddybad said: Taxpayers face £4m bill as landlord refuses to make tower block safe https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/18/council-set-to-take-on-tower-block-that-landlord-refuses-to-make-safe?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard So the public sector yet again taking over from the failing private sector. Becoming a several times a day occurrence atm. Imo we need to agree what the state is responsible for and let them deliver it. Then absolutely let business play in the rest of the economy. I don't think that's anti-business, it's really just common sense. Have to agree also. The private sector can not own a building and take the profits from it then suddenly decide when it needs fixing that the public purse needs to pay for it and after its done continue to take the profits. if they cant handle it they should transfer it back into public ownership immediately, we can not and must not pay for it and let them continue profiteering that is not correct. The free market suggests that they own, they pay, they take the profits but not some bastardised version where they own, the state pays and they take the profits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 2 hours ago, toddybad said: Another example of outsourcing leading to poor service and potentially horrific outcomes.for the public. People talk about the labour vision as anti private sector. I.would argue that the rush to outsource and privatise is usually pushed by those that are anti public sector. You can look anywhere and find virtually unlimited examples of outsourcing failures. Falling forensic science standards 'making miscarriages of justice inevitable' https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/19/uk-police-forces-failing-to-meet-forensic-standards-safe-regulator-miscarriages-justice-outsourcing?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard What we have isn't working. The major issue is so many things are so badly run by terrible managers whether it is public or private sector. That is probably an issue we need to overcome first. You can have a successful mixture of public and private sector, many European countries achieve this better than we do the Nordics being a prime example, we are just very poor at organising generally this is the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 27 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said: Cue someone posting to say that the BBC promotes the views of the left-wing / liberal elite.... Then someone else posting to say that it only broadcasts bad news.... The BBC isn't perfect and could certainly do with employing people with a wider range of backgrounds/experiences, but does a pretty good, balanced job. If anything, it is TOO keen to seem balanced. Could do with a few more non-mainstream voices from different parts of the spectrum, so long as they were challenged and analysed. Good post by @The Doctor - cross-check, fact check and challenge... Imo both the left and right complain about bbc bias precisely because it does try to walk the central route. It is mandated to do so. Unfortunately the downside is when they go too far such as giving climate change deniers (i.e. Non scientists) as much air time as the scientific community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 11 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: What we have isn't working. The major issue is so many things are so badly run by terrible managers whether it is public or private sector. That is probably an issue we need to overcome first. You can have a successful mixture of public and private sector, many European countries achieve this better than we do the Nordics being a prime example, we are just very poor at organising generally this is the issue. In my experience the issue within the public sector isn't bad managers but incessant policy changes due to constantly changing political pressures. Tell the public service what you want and they'll deliver. Keep changing what you want and it becomes difficult. Add in procurement and management of failing outsourcing and it becomes ridiculous. Leave health, education, energy, transport, defence, prisons and emergency services to the pubic sector. Let the private sector then reign across the rest of the economy. Regulate where necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 4 minutes ago, toddybad said: In my experience the issue within the public sector isn't bad managers but incessant policy changes due to constantly changing political pressures. Tell the public service what you want and they'll deliver. Keep changing what you want and it becomes difficult. Add in procurement and management of failing outsourcing and it becomes ridiculous. Leave health, education, energy, transport, defence, prisons and emergency services to the pubic sector. Let the private sector then reign across the rest of the economy. Regulate where necessary. I think to an extent you are correct in terms that certain areas should not be used for Political point scoring. Health, Education and Emergency services are definitely some of those key areas. There should be a cross party discussion at all times on these important matters at least, parties shouldn't be able to use it for cheap point scoring. For example the NHS doesn't need more money it needs serious reform to ensure it delivers services for the modern world we live in. This needs sensible debate from all sides. The problem is if the Tories suggest reform, Labour instantly start the 'SAVE OUR NHS' nonsense, at the moment we are not tackling the real issues, we have a mixture of more money privatisation and poor decision making that is the cause of the issues. I predict that we could throw pretty much unlimited amounts at the NHS at the current time and it would not fix the problems there would still be a rising crisis, we have a rising and aging population a trend set to continue. Interesting the worst performing areas of the NHS is in Wales controlled by a Labour administration so before they start preaching perhaps they should get their own house in order. I'm yet to be convinced on unionised nationalised energy, transport and infrastructure but I perhaps need to research this in other countries more. Certainly looking at what we had in the 1970s it is certainly not something we would want to go back to, British Gas were slow with long waiting times, the local electrical boards were mostly terrible and slow to react, British Rail was absolute garbage and worldwide joke and you had to wait 3 months for a phone line from BT. My personal experience of the public sector is bad managers, I have now worked in 4 separate institutions and in all of them there are bad managers. There are also some absolutely fantastic managers and great people working there I will add but often the people at the top are dinosaurs with poor vision. I think maybe this is perhaps a national problem when you look at our political leaders! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Ulike Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 (edited) 42 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: Have to agree also. The private sector can not own a building and take the profits from it then suddenly decide when it needs fixing that the public purse needs to pay for it and after its done continue to take the profits. if they cant handle it they should transfer it back into public ownership immediately, we can not and must not pay for it and let them continue profiteering that is not correct. The free market suggests that they own, they pay, they take the profits but not some bastardised version where they own, the state pays and they take the profits. The fairly obvious solution here is that it's the Government who should be paying. The cladding complies with Building Regulations. So the freeholder is under no obligation to replace it. So if these buildings are now not safe because of the cladding - then the liability lies with the party who published and enforced the Building Regulations in the first place. ie the UK Government. Unfortunately, the Government can't own up to this because it would involve admitting responsibility for the deaths at Grenfell.. Edited 19 January 2018 by Fox Ulike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: I think to an extent you are correct in terms that certain areas should not be used for Political point scoring. Health, Education and Emergency services are definitely some of those key areas. There should be a cross party discussion at all times on these important matters at least, parties shouldn't be able to use it for cheap point scoring. For example the NHS doesn't need more money it needs serious reform to ensure it delivers services for the modern world we live in. This needs sensible debate from all sides. The problem is if the Tories suggest reform, Labour instantly start the 'SAVE OUR NHS' nonsense, at the moment we are not tackling the real issues, we have a mixture of more money privatisation and poor decision making that is the cause of the issues. I predict that we could throw pretty much unlimited amounts at the NHS at the current time and it would not fix the problems there would still be a rising crisis, we have a rising and aging population a trend set to continue. Interesting the worst performing areas of the NHS is in Wales controlled by a Labour administration so before they start preaching perhaps they should get their own house in order. I'm yet to be convinced on unionised nationalised energy, transport and infrastructure but I perhaps need to research this in other countries more. Certainly looking at what we had in the 1970s it is certainly not something we would want to go back to, British Gas were slow with long waiting times, the local electrical boards were mostly terrible and slow to react, British Rail was absolute garbage and worldwide joke and you had to wait 3 months for a phone line from BT. My personal experience of the public sector is bad managers, I have now worked in 4 separate institutions and in all of them there are bad managers. There are also some absolutely fantastic managers and great people working there I will add but often the people at the top are dinosaurs with poor vision. I think maybe this is perhaps a national problem when you look at our political leaders! Re the NHS I've provided graphs previously to show the sea change that funding it to EU AVERAGE levels had under Blair. Spending has fallen back with predictable results. Why do you think the EU average is too much? Labour's Welsh government can only spend the money given to them by Westminster. All the independent studies I've seen have shown that the NHS is being used more and in more complex ways due to an aging society. Those studies show that, with this taken into account, spending has fallen behind what is required. Why do you not believe those independent studies? Edited 19 January 2018 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogstanley Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 47 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: Have to agree also. The private sector can not own a building and take the profits from it then suddenly decide when it needs fixing that the public purse needs to pay for it and after its done continue to take the profits. if they cant handle it they should transfer it back into public ownership immediately, we can not and must not pay for it and let them continue profiteering that is not correct. The free market suggests that they own, they pay, they take the profits but not some bastardised version where they own, the state pays and they take the profits. The trouble with the towers is that the freeholder will have an existing agreement with leaseholders that states leaseolders must pay for all repairs and upgrades. As long as the freeholder has complied with all the relevant regulations then technically the cost should be borne by the leaseholders. But that's obviously unfair on the leaseholders because they're being made to pay tens of thousands of pounds each just to make the building safe. The fault really lies in the fact that the relevant regulations were not fit for purpose, and as the regulations are a function of government, the government and hence unfortunately the tax payer should foot the bill for putting it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 14 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said: The fairly obvious solution here is that it's the Government who should be paying. The cladding complies with Building Regulations. So the freeholder is under no obligation to replace it. So if these buildings are now not safe because of the cladding - then the liability lies with the party who published and enforced the Building Regulations in the first place. ie the UK Government. Unfortunately, the Government can't own up to this because it would involve admitting responsibility for the deaths at Grenfell.. Obviously if there has been incompetence with regard to the building regulations then the government should foot the bill however. Most of the guidance I have seen says these meet building regulations but not to be used above a certain level. It often seems this material was chosen by whoever to save money, another material was suggested for Grenfell and not used because it cost more. Obviously we have to wait for the details to be given on this. At the end of the day if a mistake has been made they should admit it. This isn't just the failing of the current government its years of failing and failing local authorities too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buce Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: I think to an extent you are correct in terms that certain areas should not be used for Political point scoring. Health, Education and Emergency services are definitely some of those key areas. There should be a cross party discussion at all times on these important matters at least, parties shouldn't be able to use it for cheap point scoring. For example the NHS doesn't need more money it needs serious reform to ensure it delivers services for the modern world we live in. This needs sensible debate from all sides. The problem is if the Tories suggest reform, Labour instantly start the 'SAVE OUR NHS' nonsense, at the moment we are not tackling the real issues, we have a mixture of more money privatisation and poor decision making that is the cause of the issues. I predict that we could throw pretty much unlimited amounts at the NHS at the current time and it would not fix the problems there would still be a rising crisis, we have a rising and aging population a trend set to continue. Interesting the worst performing areas of the NHS is in Wales controlled by a Labour administration so before they start preaching perhaps they should get their own house in order. I'm yet to be convinced on unionised nationalised energy, transport and infrastructure but I perhaps need to research this in other countries more. Certainly looking at what we had in the 1970s it is certainly not something we would want to go back to, British Gas were slow with long waiting times, the local electrical boards were mostly terrible and slow to react, British Rail was absolute garbage and worldwide joke and you had to wait 3 months for a phone line from BT. My personal experience of the public sector is bad managers, I have now worked in 4 separate institutions and in all of them there are bad managers. There are also some absolutely fantastic managers and great people working there I will add but often the people at the top are dinosaurs with poor vision. I think maybe this is perhaps a national problem when you look at our political leaders! Every so often you appear to be trying to adapt a more reasoned approach to your posting, but then you quickly revert to type. You just can't help yourself. Edited 19 January 2018 by Buce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Ulike Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 2 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: Obviously if there has been incompetence with regard to the building regulations then the government should foot the bill however. Most of the guidance I have seen says these meet building regulations but not to be used above a certain level. It often seems this material was chosen by whoever to save money, another material was suggested for Grenfell and not used because it cost more. Obviously we have to wait for the details to be given on this. At the end of the day if a mistake has been made they should admit it. This isn't just the failing of the current government its years of failing and failing local authorities too. Yes good point. Either way though, responsibility should be clear cut. If the landlords have not applied Building Regulations correctly then not only should they foot the bill but they are also liable to give the leaseholders compensation. If they have abided with BRs, then it's the Government/local authority who should foot up. End of. For me, there's no debate to be had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Hundreds Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/life-expectancy-uk-plumments-ons-data-hartlepool-torridge-amber-valley-barnsley-a8164171.html Yay austerity! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 1 minute ago, Bobby Hundreds said: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/life-expectancy-uk-plumments-ons-data-hartlepool-torridge-amber-valley-barnsley-a8164171.html Yay austerity! I thought we wanted all the old people to die, so we can overturn brexit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 7 minutes ago, toddybad said: Re the NHS I've provided graphs previously to show the sea change that funding it to EU AVERAGE levels had under Blair. Spending has fallen back with predictable results. Why do you think the EU average is too much? All independent studies have shown that the NHS is being used more and in more complex ways due to an aging society. Those studies show that, with this taken into account, spending has fallen behind what is required. Why do you not believe those independent studies? Well France had/is having a massive crisis this year with Health care also with all the strains of Flu. You could also argue that the EU average is ALSO not enough. What is enough? Who knows? I don't think there is a limit to what we could spend on healthcare with all the advancements in care, technology and drugs. There were still massive problems with the NHS under Blair, it wasn't perfect I remember sitting in A&E a couple of times for about a whole day, yes the targets they set and publish were met but since 1997 our population increased by nearly 10 million people a mixture of immigration and people living longer. New Hospitals were built which now simply do not have enough space to fit the numbers of people in, you have to question who did the planning and analysis that allowed a hospital to be built between 2007 and 2012 that now simply does not have enough space for the local population, no closed wards just not enough space! Surely someone must have modelled this? made predictions? My argument is Western countries in general probably need to review their healthcare needs and requirements due to massively changing demographics and changing needs of individuals. I do not personally think more money solves anything. There are inefficiencies in the NHS that are wasting billions, lets tackle this first. For instance prescriptions, free prescriptions, deals with pharmaceutical companies for branded drugs over no brands, there are many issues that can be looked at I have been there and seen them. Perhaps we should look at bringing drug development back under an NHS umbrella as it is scandalous we are paying thousands for branded cancer drugs (and others) to save lives. Social care is a major issue, there are people in hospital that shouldn't be in hospital maybe its cheaper to pay for those to be looked after elsewhere. Again little investment or planning on this was made under the last government either. My point is there are a huge range of discussions that can be had. I am not saying that more money at some point wont help but what I am saying is that more money at the current time wont help if we don't reform. We need a proper plan and at present no one is offering that. We cant just say we going to invest 8 Billion more, on what? Not one party has a proper detailed plan and they should. It needs cross party action if it is ever to be 'saved'. Of course it will never happen. It will continue to be run as it is, governments putting in endless supplies of money. In its current state no matter how much money you put in it will collapse eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts