Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Could the Tories could be heading for a worse result than 1997? – politicalbetting.com

13567

Comments

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    edited November 2022
    Chalamet is a male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but ultimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited November 2022
    WillG said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    After the BLM protests you couldn't move in my Waterstones without bumping into a book about race.

    I have heard the movie Call me by my name is good, but I find that hard to believe as it stars Timothee Chalamet, who's been terrible in every other thing I've seen him in, be in Little Women or Dune.
    What are you talking about? Chalamet is fantastic in Dune. The tent scene is chilling. Also great in The King.
    He's a charisma black hole, I practically fell asleep watching him in The King. The tent scene is literally the only part of Dune he's not boring. Just a blank canvas the rest of it, in a monotone.

    Not helped by genuinely charismatic performers (and by charismatic I don't mean they cannot be subtle) being in the film.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Ratters said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    I'd have thought a similar proportion are employed, yet governments have had no issues shafting workers.
    Mid- and high-income workers for sure.
    Tax band freeze shafts all workers.

    Pay rises way below inflation for nurses, teachers etc shafts ordinary workers.

    Pensioners all protected nicely.
    Tories = party of selfish old graspers, go to any members event and you realised how bad it is. Apparently young people don't do any work, anyone who doesn't have a house is blamed for, you know, living because in their day they didn't spend money on anything at all and existed on a diet of water and air. House prices going up are great because when they downsize it means more spending money. Social care costs should definitely fall on anyone but them and any suggestion that their money from the downsize can fund it is treated as literal theft, but at the same time the NHS is shit and having a system where people who can afford to pay extra can get priority treatment should replace it.


    The last event I went to was pretty recent too, Tory members are basically all old and selfish. They will vote for whoever gives them more regardless of how badly the rest of the country suffers. They've worked hard and nobody else does now so they deserve more money, everyone else deserves to pay for it.
    Polling on pensioner attitudes is terrifying.

    All but small minority think the young (ie the under 60s) are simply decadent ingrates.

    You have to ask where in hell do these attitudes arise from?
    You get it in a small way from the age split in "working from home" polling.

    Anyone under 60 - who, of course, lack the imagination to understand modern ways of working - thinks it's a skive, whereas everyone else realises you work just as hard on the WFH days, at your desk on calls all day long, or working on documents, just without the commute.

    The real reason is that they didn't have this flexibility in their day, and are resentful that the generations to follow do, so they try and trash it.
    I dislike WFH not because I think it is a skive - I don't care - but because I think it is obviously less efficient. See my many problems with the Inland Revenue this year, which they explicitly admit are partly down to WFH

    WFH is also really bad for cities. And it further atomises people. Hopefully we will find a fruitful middle path. Eventually
    That's because plenty of public sector workers do fuck all in the office, but they have to be *seen* to be doing something in the office, so sullenly answer a phone call, or an email, as their manager overlooks their shoulder, but can easily do fuck all at home (with no-one to supervise) and get away with it.

    It is absolutely not the case in the private sector, where in professional services people can focus on documents, research, client meetings, 1:1s and virtual workshops without being dog-tired from commuting five days a week.
    Personally, I find a hybrid model best for my productivity. Three days a week in the office and two days at home. Frankly, if your only way of measuring productivity is by watching how busy your employees are, then you are a badly managed work place. I don't care about how many hours of dedicated work my teams do. I care about how much gets done and the quality of the work.

    The real problem with WFH is that you lose the apprenticeship and skill building of younger colleagues. This happens inherently in the office, but senior people never really got rewarded for it. Think it needs to be brought into formal assessments more.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,646

    Something has blown up near St Petersburg

    https://twitter.com/TpyxaNews/status/1593950372753801218

    Probably my tip for the 3.00 at Haydock 🤦‍♀️
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,992


    That's because plenty of public sector workers do fuck all in the office, but they have to be *seen* to be doing something in the office, so sullenly answer a phone call, or an email, as their manager overlooks their shoulder, but can easily do fuck all at home (with no-one to supervise) and get away with it.

    It is absolutely not the case in the private sector, where in professional services people can focus on documents, research, client meetings, 1:1s and virtual workshops without being dog-tired from commuting five days a week.

    You really are full of anger today - bookshops that don't sell the books you want and now public sector workers who, in your crass ignorance, don't work the way you want them to.

    It's quite clear you don't have the slightest idea how the public sector operates - just because the Daily Mail tells you something doesn't make it true.

    I've worked on both sides of the fence and, if I'm honest, there are incredibly hard working people in both the private and public sector and incredibly lazy people in both.

    The old mantra "Public Bad, Private Good" sounds like something from the dark days of the 1980s.

    1984 - perhaps you'll find that in your local bookshop along with Animal Farm.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    kle4 said:

    WillG said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    After the BLM protests you couldn't move in my Waterstones without bumping into a book about race.

    I have heard the movie Call me by my name is good, but I find that hard to believe as it stars Timothee Chalamet, who's been terrible in every other thing I've seen him in, be in Little Women or Dune.
    What are you talking about? Chalamet is fantastic in Dune. The tent scene is chilling. Also great in The King.
    He's a charisma black hole, I practically fell asleep watching him in The King. The tent scene is literally the only part of Dune he's not boring. Just a blank canvas the rest of it, in a monotone.

    Not helped by genuinely charismatic performers (and by charismatic I don't mean they cannot be subtle) being in the film.
    He was dreadful in Little Women.
    Mind you, so was everybody.
    Even Saoirse Ronan, who is brilliant in everything.
  • Yes.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    kle4 said:

    WillG said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    After the BLM protests you couldn't move in my Waterstones without bumping into a book about race.

    I have heard the movie Call me by my name is good, but I find that hard to believe as it stars Timothee Chalamet, who's been terrible in every other thing I've seen him in, be in Little Women or Dune.
    What are you talking about? Chalamet is fantastic in Dune. The tent scene is chilling. Also great in The King.
    He's a charisma black hole, I practically fell asleep watching him in The King. The tent scene is literally the only part of Dune he's not boring. Just a blank canvas the rest of it, in a monotone.

    Not helped by genuinely charismatic performers (and by charismatic I don't mean they cannot be subtle) being in the film.
    That's ridiculous. It's a performance like Ryan Gosling in BladeRunner. Full of nuance and subtlety. Even without obvious displays of emotion you could tell what was running through his head due to body language and eye movements.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    Doesn't sound like my kind of bookshop, either.
    But so what ?
    It's in my hometown, and I don't want that sort of shit here.

    That's what.
    That's just intolerance.
    Live and let live.
    Also a bizarre position from someone who would ordinarily profess to supporting free enterprise.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,992

    Something has blown up near St Petersburg

    https://twitter.com/TpyxaNews/status/1593950372753801218

    Probably my tip for the 3.00 at Haydock 🤦‍♀️
    Well, it's too late for that or should that be "Plus Tard pour ca"?
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366

    Chalamet is a male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but ultimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.

    No wonder we frequently disagree. The idea that Chalamet is at all equivalent of Keira Knightly is completely insane.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    edited November 2022

    Chalamet is male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but intimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.

    Blasphemy!

    She is brilliant (and luminously beautiful) in Pride and Prejudice - from 2005

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1153077-1153077-pride_and_prejudice

    As an aside, that movie boasts some of the loveliest music ever written for screen, and rightly got an Oscar

    Dawn, for example, is like really good Chopin

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcYnaEVMNc
  • So, looks like neither Liz Truss nor Rishi Sunak got a honeymoon.

    The Tories are fucked.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,265
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    Young Adult Fiction is a cesspit of Wokeness, and not a happy place...
    It's a while since you were a young adult.
  • 29 November

    Wales 6.1
    Draw 4.2
    England 1.63

    Lay England?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    So, looks like neither Liz Truss nor Rishi Sunak got a honeymoon.

    The Tories are fucked.

    One could feel sorry for Sunak, but then I remember that he gets to be Prime Minister for two years whatever happens, and he is worth £750,000,000, so, Nah
  • kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    They're not all their recommendations, though, are they? Lucy Worsley's biography of Agatha Christie is mentioned as well. Is Richard Powers woke? I don't know.

    Ultimately, it's a bookshop. The stuff the staff are recommending isn't to your taste. Especailly the younger staff.

    That's not a cancer that needs to be defeated. It's how it's always been.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,679

    I think that what the rural home counties may need is neither a JR-Hartley-type bookshop smelling of pipesmoke, or an ultra-modern and austere one to devoted to trans issues, but a psychedelic-technicolour 1960's-style emporium, selling books on romantic, spiritual and global esoterica, and run by friendly chaps and girls who used to live on canal boats.

    Or perhaps that's just the one I would visit, of a nice quiet Saturday.

    Yes that does sound like you. Your 60s vibe is the strongest on here.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,656
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    Young Adult Fiction is a cesspit of Wokeness, and not a happy place

    All the writers and editors try to OutWoke each other, and well known authors can be cancelled for the tiniest transgressions. Brutally competitive

    The only people enjoying it all are the Sensitivity Readers

    Woke is the end of art, essentially, wherever it goes


    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/jun/15/torn-apart-the-vicious-war-over-young-adult-books
    None of this seems to have any impact whatsoever on what young adults (who, it appears, don't actually seem to be adults) are reading.

    Here are the Young Adult best seller lists from the NYTimes:

    https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/young-adult-hardcover/
    https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/young-adult-paperback-monthly/
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,005
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Ratters said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    I'd have thought a similar proportion are employed, yet governments have had no issues shafting workers.
    Mid- and high-income workers for sure.
    Tax band freeze shafts all workers.

    Pay rises way below inflation for nurses, teachers etc shafts ordinary workers.

    Pensioners all protected nicely.
    Tories = party of selfish old graspers, go to any members event and you realised how bad it is. Apparently young people don't do any work, anyone who doesn't have a house is blamed for, you know, living because in their day they didn't spend money on anything at all and existed on a diet of water and air. House prices going up are great because when they downsize it means more spending money. Social care costs should definitely fall on anyone but them and any suggestion that their money from the downsize can fund it is treated as literal theft, but at the same time the NHS is shit and having a system where people who can afford to pay extra can get priority treatment should replace it.


    The last event I went to was pretty recent too, Tory members are basically all old and selfish. They will vote for whoever gives them more regardless of how badly the rest of the country suffers. They've worked hard and nobody else does now so they deserve more money, everyone else deserves to pay for it.
    Polling on pensioner attitudes is terrifying.

    All but small minority think the young (ie the under 60s) are simply decadent ingrates.

    You have to ask where in hell do these attitudes arise from?
    You get it in a small way from the age split in "working from home" polling.

    Anyone under 60 - who, of course, lack the imagination to understand modern ways of working - thinks it's a skive, whereas everyone else realises you work just as hard on the WFH days, at your desk on calls all day long, or working on documents, just without the commute.

    The real reason is that they didn't have this flexibility in their day, and are resentful that the generations to follow do, so they try and trash it.
    I dislike WFH not because I think it is a skive - I don't care - but because I think it is obviously less efficient. See my many problems with the Inland Revenue this year, which they explicitly admit are partly down to WFH

    WFH is also really bad for cities. And it further atomises people. Hopefully we will find a fruitful middle path. Eventually
    Sorry total bollocks, I have been working a new job I joined wfh. I am more efficient and get more done because I don't get people just like you tapping me on the shoulder so they can talk irrelevant bollocks to me about what they watched, saw on the web, latest conspiracy theory they have bought into.

    Company culture is more important and lets face it most offices before wfh spent about half their time on irrelevant socialising. Guess what they are still inefficient and their staff wfh just have more opportunities to goof off so take it. Offices where they had a culture of get things done not so much.

    When I had to visit my council offices on occasion pre covid were just as bad. Take a number then watch the staff. Spend ten minutes with a customer then spend 20 minutes gassing to other staff members before calling the next number. HMRC was also just as bad pre covid to the point of trying to phone them often resulted in being on hold for hours.

    Working from home is not the problem, staff goofing off is the problem and always has been
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    Young Adult Fiction is a cesspit of Wokeness, and not a happy place

    All the writers and editors try to OutWoke each other, and well known authors can be cancelled for the tiniest transgressions. Brutally competitive

    The only people enjoying it all are the Sensitivity Readers

    Woke is the end of art, essentially, wherever it goes


    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/jun/15/torn-apart-the-vicious-war-over-young-adult-books
    None of this seems to have any impact whatsoever on what young adults (who, it appears, don't actually seem to be adults) are reading.

    Here are the Young Adult best seller lists from the NYTimes:

    https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/young-adult-hardcover/
    https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/young-adult-paperback-monthly/
    Some weird definitions of Young Adult there

    The Book Thief? Really?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    In case you aren't depressed enough already

    "The Amazon forest is approaching a tipping point. Some regions are starting to collapse.

    Scientists have warned for years that deforestation was pushing the rainforest toward catastrophe, when it would lose its ability to sustain its ecology. In Rio Brancho, that future is now."

    https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1593944681607471104?s=20&t=5t0xwqxL19houHY1t31x8w
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    The idea that this is poor acting is ridiculous:

    https://youtu.be/6LkT9KH8py8

    The way he moves from rebellious insecure teen, to shock, to pain and inferiority, to embracing the pain and realizing his power, is incredible. He was perfect to play the loner introverted, yet incredibly powerful, Paul.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    OMNIGEDDON


    "Scientists predict if between 20 and 25 percent of the Amazon forest is lost, a cascade of climatic forces will kill much of what remains.

    The world now stands at that precipice. Around 18% of the forest is gone, and the collapse is already underway."

    https://twitter.com/terrence_mccoy/status/1593626273389187072?s=20&t=Oz-xLQ98nd20SlBdQdIEDw
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,646
    stodge said:

    Something has blown up near St Petersburg

    https://twitter.com/TpyxaNews/status/1593950372753801218

    Probably my tip for the 3.00 at Haydock 🤦‍♀️
    Well, it's too late for that or should that be "Plus Tard pour ca"?
    I love it when you talk Irish
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,395

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    Doesn't sound like my kind of bookshop, either.
    But so what ?
    It's in my hometown, and I don't want that sort of shit here.

    That's what.
    That's just intolerance.
    Live and let live.
    Also a bizarre position from someone who would ordinarily profess to supporting free enterprise.
    And freedom. Like, for example, the freedom not to have your bookshop emptied onto the street outside and someone giving those chaps a tinkle.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaLJ10v4xUA

  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,937
    edited November 2022
    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    But this is a false, prejudiced narrative.

    Just last year State Pensions went up by 2.5%, compared to an increase in average earnings of 8.8%. The triple lock was suspended.

    Whilst this year I think State Pension is increasing by inflation at 10.1% (?), whilst average earnings are increasing by 5.1% (annual figure in Q2).

    So this year's pensions vs average earnings, allegedly a major offence, does not even balance out last year's difference.

    The state pension increase will be applied across the board, and those pensioners on higher tax rates will be taxed on the extra income at their marginal rate, which will be up to 60%.

    I'm not wasting time on the "elderly use most NHS resources" stuff, because they don't unless you start your definition of 'elderly' at an absurdly young age.

    Given that poverty amongst pensioners is higher than in the general population (the last numbers I saw were 13% vs 10%), increasing state pension faster than inflation is not unreasonable - as long as richer pensioner get higher tax rates.

    Personally I'd withdraw the winter heating allowance and other benefits, and compensate for it by setting state pension at a more reasonable level, rather than relying on the incredibly slow progress under the Triple Lock. I'm quite inclined to the Dutch model of a % of minimum wage level.

    Capital taxes are another game altogether, of course. Nor will I go into the millions of pensioners who *are* economically active.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,656
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    Young Adult Fiction is a cesspit of Wokeness, and not a happy place

    All the writers and editors try to OutWoke each other, and well known authors can be cancelled for the tiniest transgressions. Brutally competitive

    The only people enjoying it all are the Sensitivity Readers

    Woke is the end of art, essentially, wherever it goes


    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/jun/15/torn-apart-the-vicious-war-over-young-adult-books
    None of this seems to have any impact whatsoever on what young adults (who, it appears, don't actually seem to be adults) are reading.

    Here are the Young Adult best seller lists from the NYTimes:

    https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/young-adult-hardcover/
    https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/young-adult-paperback-monthly/
    Some weird definitions of Young Adult there

    The Book Thief? Really?
    My daughter (14) read it. So it doesn't seem completely ridiculous.

    I'd note that she didn't think it was the funnest book ever, but she liked it more than Twilight. (She's a massive Leigh Bardugo fan - Six of Crows is her favourite ever)
  • novanova Posts: 696
    edited November 2022
    DJ41 said:

    1997 had the Tories sinking under multiple waves of corruption allegations, But because Britain is Britain it wasn't called corruption. It was called "sleaze" instead. And never forget that the Sun backed Blair.

    There's little or no talk of corruption now, and there don't seem to be any indications that the Scum will back Starmer.

    What have we got, then? Polls show that many in the population think the Tory administration in the middle of its term (if in this context one can think of it as a single administration) consists of a bunch of lying tossers. Big deal.

    If that was "lying corrupt tossers" rather than lying tossers, the idea that the Tories were headed for 1997-style electoral defeat would have more weight.

    Those who went from Labour to UKIP to the Conservatives are kinda loose cannony. I agree with that. Perhaps they may realise that their lives haven't improved after Brexit. But Tommy Robinson isn't going to follow in the footsteps of Pauline Hanson and scoop up an appreciable amount of voteshare. The party that manages to tip the deck of the ship so that the cannon rolls in its direction is likely to be the Tory party, ably assisted by the Sun.

    Why is it that Tories wee themselves at the tiniest spot of bother? It's ironic given that that's exactly what they accuse other people of being like, people who didn't play so much rugby at school. Tories have no character or backbone.

    Is it a sign of the times that the covid VIP lane has created so little anger?

    At arguably the most difficult time the country has faced in the last 80 years, the Tories introduced a system where you could profiteer more easily if you were friends of ministers.

    I know life has been odd the last few years, but it feels like that should be one of the biggest political scandals of all time.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,039
    There was a physical Amazon bookstore near me. If it were it still open and I was feeling mischievous as I walked by, I might wander in and ask them if they have "When Harry Became Sally", or one of the classic Heinlein novels that annoy the left, like "Starship Troopers".

    And, if I were feeling downright ornery, I might ask them to order Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage", or one of Thomas Sowell's books on race.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    nova said:

    DJ41 said:

    1997 had the Tories sinking under multiple waves of corruption allegations, But because Britain is Britain it wasn't called corruption. It was called "sleaze" instead. And never forget that the Sun backed Blair.

    There's little or no talk of corruption now, and there don't seem to be any indications that the Scum will back Starmer.

    What have we got, then? Polls show that many in the population think the Tory administration in the middle of its term (if in this context one can think of it as a single administration) consists of a bunch of lying tossers. Big deal.

    If that was "lying corrupt tossers" rather than lying tossers, the idea that the Tories were headed for 1997-style electoral defeat would have more weight.

    Those who went from Labour to UKIP to the Conservatives are kinda loose cannony. I agree with that. Perhaps they may realise that their lives haven't improved after Brexit. But Tommy Robinson isn't going to follow in the footsteps of Pauline Hanson and scoop up an appreciable amount of voteshare. The party that manages to tip the deck of the ship so that the cannon rolls in its direction is likely to be the Tory party, ably assisted by the Sun.

    Why is it that Tories wee themselves at the tiniest spot of bother? It's ironic given that that's exactly what they accuse other people of being like, people who didn't play so much rugby at school. Tories have no character or backbone.

    Is it a sign of the times that the covid VIP lane has created so little anger?

    At arguably the most difficult time the country has faced in the last 80 years, the Tories introduced a system where you could profiteer more easily if you were friends of ministers.

    I know life has been odd the last few years, but it feels like that should be one of the biggest political scandals of all time.
    The Johnson government made the Major-era Tories look like choirboys.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,992
    The post-election negotiations in Denmark are continuing.

    You'll recall Mette Frederiksen's Social Democrats did well and the "Red" block of centre-left and left parties won a majority 90 seats in the new Folketing leaving the centre-right and right "Blue" block with 73 seats and the unaligned Moderates with 16.

    On the Blue side, the centre-right Venstre Party had a disastrous election losing nearly half their previous vote seto end up with just 23 seats (a loss of 20) but they are still the largest of the fragmented Blue parties.

    Today, they've been holding a Party Meeting in Herning in the centre of Jutland to assess where they go next and in particular whether to accept Frederiksen's invitation to join a more centrist Government.

    The truth is Frederiksen wants to break the two blocs and from her side wants to stop being reliant on some of the more extreme left-wing groups and is reaching out to the more centrist elements in the Blue bloc (who in turn would like to stop being reliant on some of the more right wing parties such as the Denmark Democrats).

    It's also quite possible the Moderates would be attracted to a Social Democrat-Venstre Coalition - the three parties would have 89 seats which while not technically a majority would be an effective majority in the Folketing.

    The mood in today's Venstre meeting seems to be the older party members are supportive of a dialogue with Frederiksen but the younger ones less so - the harshest criticism came from the Chairman of Young Venstre. The Venstre leader went as far as to claim the Blue Block was finished as a political entity.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    Are these actually the Endtimes?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    There was a physical Amazon bookstore near me. If it were it still open and I was feeling mischievous as I walked by, I might wander in and ask them if they have "When Harry Became Sally", or one of the classic Heinlein novels that annoy the left, like "Starship Troopers".

    And, if I were feeling downright ornery, I might ask them to order Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage", or one of Thomas Sowell's books on race.

    The Bell Curve. Demand a First Edition
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,395

    There was a physical Amazon bookstore near me. If it were it still open and I was feeling mischievous as I walked by, I might wander in and ask them if they have "When Harry Became Sally", or one of the classic Heinlein novels that annoy the left, like "Starship Troopers".

    And, if I were feeling downright ornery, I might ask them to order Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage", or one of Thomas Sowell's books on race.

    Have you seen the film of Starship Troopers? All the black uniforms one could want.

    In any case, just have a look at some of the stuff Amazon sell. Woke, they aren't.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Ratters said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    I'd have thought a similar proportion are employed, yet governments have had no issues shafting workers.
    Mid- and high-income workers for sure.
    Tax band freeze shafts all workers.

    Pay rises way below inflation for nurses, teachers etc shafts ordinary workers.

    Pensioners all protected nicely.
    Tories = party of selfish old graspers, go to any members event and you realised how bad it is. Apparently young people don't do any work, anyone who doesn't have a house is blamed for, you know, living because in their day they didn't spend money on anything at all and existed on a diet of water and air. House prices going up are great because when they downsize it means more spending money. Social care costs should definitely fall on anyone but them and any suggestion that their money from the downsize can fund it is treated as literal theft, but at the same time the NHS is shit and having a system where people who can afford to pay extra can get priority treatment should replace it.


    The last event I went to was pretty recent too, Tory members are basically all old and selfish. They will vote for whoever gives them more regardless of how badly the rest of the country suffers. They've worked hard and nobody else does now so they deserve more money, everyone else deserves to pay for it.
    Don't they have kids or grandkids? Don't they have kids who will tell them, Dad, it's shit, I'm still renting at the age of 40?
    Tried to tell my Dad, earlier - just doesn't get it. He's ok and his view is that he had it much harder in his day, and has earned it, and the young don't really work hard enough; that's just how life is.

    I love him, but I don't really talk to him much about it on this subject. My mum is a little bit better.
    Totally understand this, had literally the same conversation with mine, the winner for me was when I said he bought a 4 bedroom house in a nice London suburb on a 3x single income multiple as an accounts payable clerk, I bought a two bedroom flat in a less nice part of London on a 5x multiple as an investment analyst for my first place. At that point he actually understood what the issue young people are faced with is. Today an investment banker salary gets less property than an accounts clerk did in the mid 90s. He's seen how hard I work and my sister as well so he can't give us the "young people don't work as hard as we did" bullshit either.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    Leon said:

    Chalamet is male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but intimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.

    Blasphemy!

    She is brilliant (and luminously beautiful) in Pride and Prejudice - from 2005

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1153077-1153077-pride_and_prejudice

    As an aside, that movie boasts some of the loveliest music ever written for screen, and rightly got an Oscar

    Dawn, for example, is like really good Chopin

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcYnaEVMNc
    That film was crap.

    To see that stuff done properly, try Jane Eyre (Fukunaga), Wuthering Heights (Arnold) or Bright Star (Campion).
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,005

    There was a physical Amazon bookstore near me. If it were it still open and I was feeling mischievous as I walked by, I might wander in and ask them if they have "When Harry Became Sally", or one of the classic Heinlein novels that annoy the left, like "Starship Troopers".

    And, if I were feeling downright ornery, I might ask them to order Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage", or one of Thomas Sowell's books on race.

    Why would it bother them I got a copy of 120 days of Sodom by desade from amazon, the prince from machiavelli and the book of lies from crowley from amazon with no problem. None of them would be classed as woke or even left wing.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,005
    Carnyx said:

    There was a physical Amazon bookstore near me. If it were it still open and I was feeling mischievous as I walked by, I might wander in and ask them if they have "When Harry Became Sally", or one of the classic Heinlein novels that annoy the left, like "Starship Troopers".

    And, if I were feeling downright ornery, I might ask them to order Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage", or one of Thomas Sowell's books on race.

    Have you seen the film of Starship Troopers? All the black uniforms one could want.

    In any case, just have a look at some of the stuff Amazon sell. Woke, they aren't.
    The film sort of missed the point of the book to be honest
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Leon said:

    Chalamet is male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but intimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.

    Blasphemy!

    She is brilliant (and luminously beautiful) in Pride and Prejudice - from 2005

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1153077-1153077-pride_and_prejudice

    As an aside, that movie boasts some of the loveliest music ever written for screen, and rightly got an Oscar

    Dawn, for example, is like really good Chopin

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcYnaEVMNc
    That film was crap.

    To see that stuff done properly, try Jane Eyre (Fukunaga), Wuthering Heights (Arnold) or Bright Star (Campion).
    What a magnificently predictable set of recommendations from a middlebrow lefty who wants to appear cultured
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,395
    Pagan2 said:

    Carnyx said:

    There was a physical Amazon bookstore near me. If it were it still open and I was feeling mischievous as I walked by, I might wander in and ask them if they have "When Harry Became Sally", or one of the classic Heinlein novels that annoy the left, like "Starship Troopers".

    And, if I were feeling downright ornery, I might ask them to order Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage", or one of Thomas Sowell's books on race.

    Have you seen the film of Starship Troopers? All the black uniforms one could want.

    In any case, just have a look at some of the stuff Amazon sell. Woke, they aren't.
    The film sort of missed the point of the book to be honest
    Rather deliberately ...
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,679

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    Doesn't sound like my kind of bookshop, either.
    But so what ?
    It's in my hometown, and I don't want that sort of shit here.

    That's what.
    You might be sending yourself up slightly but if not this seems odd. It's as if you see this ultra prog bookshop as equivalent to (and as offensive as) say me stumbling across a far right outlet in Hampstead selling stuff like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Because that would indeed get me very pissed off like you seem to be. But I'd have thought a closer equivalent (for me) would be a bookshop specialising in works by the likes of Jordan Peterson and Michelle Dewsberry. Which I'd find disappointing and would not frequent but wouldn't particularly get my goat. Although I might pretend it did for the purposes of a post on here, if in that sort of mood.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006
    edited November 2022

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    Casino is going to open up a shop next door selling pickelhaubes and signed copies of the new Anne Widdecombe romance.

    We’ll see who’s laughing then.
    Dickish as @Dura_Ace comment earlier.
    I accept that your views on "woke" are deeply held but I doubt 1% of the population feel as strongly about it as you do.

    IIRC not so long ago you were apoplectic about an advertisement or something at Waterloo station, an advert I'm sure 99% of us walked past without giving it a second thought. I honestly could not believe anyone could get that worked up about it.

    No offence, but you give the impression of of being someone who is always on the lookout for something to be offended by.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Chalamet is male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but intimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.

    Blasphemy!

    She is brilliant (and luminously beautiful) in Pride and Prejudice - from 2005

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1153077-1153077-pride_and_prejudice

    As an aside, that movie boasts some of the loveliest music ever written for screen, and rightly got an Oscar

    Dawn, for example, is like really good Chopin

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcYnaEVMNc
    That film was crap.

    To see that stuff done properly, try Jane Eyre (Fukunaga), Wuthering Heights (Arnold) or Bright Star (Campion).
    What a magnificently predictable set of recommendations from a middlebrow lefty who wants to appear cultured
    You write occasional rant-pieces for the Spectator. You’re the epitome of middle-brow.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,772

    So, looks like neither Liz Truss nor Rishi Sunak got a honeymoon.

    The Tories are fucked.

    Mrs Dickson must have been a bit disappointed if you did no fucking on your honeymoon.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    Doesn't sound like my kind of bookshop, either.
    But so what ?
    It's in my hometown, and I don't want that sort of shit here.

    That's what.
    You might be sending yourself up slightly but if not this seems odd. It's as if you see this ultra prog bookshop as equivalent to (and as offensive as) say me stumbling across a far right outlet in Hampstead selling stuff like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Because that would indeed get me very pissed off like you seem to be. But I'd have thought a closer equivalent (for me) would be a bookshop specialising in works by the likes of Jordan Peterson and Michelle Dewsberry. Which I'd find disappointing and would not frequent but wouldn't particularly get my goat. Although I might pretend it did for the purposes of a post on here, if in that sort of mood.
    He edited the recommendations to make them sound “woker”.

    I assume it’s self-pastiche, but to what end it’s not clear.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,265

    Leon said:

    Chalamet is male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but intimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.

    Blasphemy!

    She is brilliant (and luminously beautiful) in Pride and Prejudice - from 2005

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1153077-1153077-pride_and_prejudice

    As an aside, that movie boasts some of the loveliest music ever written for screen, and rightly got an Oscar

    Dawn, for example, is like really good Chopin

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcYnaEVMNc
    That film was crap.

    To see that stuff done properly, try Jane Eyre (Fukunaga), Wuthering Heights (Arnold) or Bright Star (Campion).
    This is the Jane Eyee that really ought to have been made.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Johnnypapa64/status/1593487085960413189
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,260
    edited November 2022

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Chalamet is male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but intimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.

    Blasphemy!

    She is brilliant (and luminously beautiful) in Pride and Prejudice - from 2005

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1153077-1153077-pride_and_prejudice

    As an aside, that movie boasts some of the loveliest music ever written for screen, and rightly got an Oscar

    Dawn, for example, is like really good Chopin

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcYnaEVMNc
    That film was crap.

    To see that stuff done properly, try Jane Eyre (Fukunaga), Wuthering Heights (Arnold) or Bright Star (Campion).
    What a magnificently predictable set of recommendations from a middlebrow lefty who wants to appear cultured
    You write occasional rant-pieces for the Spectator. You’re the epitome of middle-brow.
    Leon has flashes of real inspiration from time to time, I would say, despite occasionally also getting into a few political tangles. To me the epitome of middlebrow are general knowledge quizzes on Radio 4.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,265
    Pagan2 said:

    Carnyx said:

    There was a physical Amazon bookstore near me. If it were it still open and I was feeling mischievous as I walked by, I might wander in and ask them if they have "When Harry Became Sally", or one of the classic Heinlein novels that annoy the left, like "Starship Troopers".

    And, if I were feeling downright ornery, I might ask them to order Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage", or one of Thomas Sowell's books on race.

    Have you seen the film of Starship Troopers? All the black uniforms one could want.

    In any case, just have a look at some of the stuff Amazon sell. Woke, they aren't.
    The film sort of missed the point of the book to be honest
    No, it hit it right between the eyes and killed it stone dead.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Chalamet is male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but intimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.

    Blasphemy!

    She is brilliant (and luminously beautiful) in Pride and Prejudice - from 2005

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1153077-1153077-pride_and_prejudice

    As an aside, that movie boasts some of the loveliest music ever written for screen, and rightly got an Oscar

    Dawn, for example, is like really good Chopin

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcYnaEVMNc
    That film was crap.

    To see that stuff done properly, try Jane Eyre (Fukunaga), Wuthering Heights (Arnold) or Bright Star (Campion).
    What a magnificently predictable set of recommendations from a middlebrow lefty who wants to appear cultured
    You write occasional rant-pieces for the Spectator. You’re the epitome of middle-brow.
    Leon has flashes an inspiration. To me the epitome of middlebrow are general knowledge quizzes on Radio 4.
    Leon is right-wing middlebrow, befitting an erstwhile thriller-writer.

    Those quizzes are left-wing middlebrow.
  • kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    This does all sound a bit predictable, even if the last book does sound a bit more open-ended and with some potential. As mentioned earlier, I personally look to small independent bookshops for the obscure, the esoteric, or the unpredictable. You can find some quite extraordinary stuff in some of these tiny shops, even if many have become larger, more streamlined, and more organised now.
    They probably didn't even read all of those books.

    90%+ of this is about being seen to be promoting the "right" books to their peer group.

    That's why I hate Woke so much. It lobotomises people in the search of social proof. And I can't respect people who do it.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,005

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Chalamet is male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but intimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.

    Blasphemy!

    She is brilliant (and luminously beautiful) in Pride and Prejudice - from 2005

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1153077-1153077-pride_and_prejudice

    As an aside, that movie boasts some of the loveliest music ever written for screen, and rightly got an Oscar

    Dawn, for example, is like really good Chopin

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcYnaEVMNc
    That film was crap.

    To see that stuff done properly, try Jane Eyre (Fukunaga), Wuthering Heights (Arnold) or Bright Star (Campion).
    What a magnificently predictable set of recommendations from a middlebrow lefty who wants to appear cultured
    You write occasional rant-pieces for the Spectator. You’re the epitome of middle-brow.
    dont you mean unibrow?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Chalamet is male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but intimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.

    Blasphemy!

    She is brilliant (and luminously beautiful) in Pride and Prejudice - from 2005

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1153077-1153077-pride_and_prejudice

    As an aside, that movie boasts some of the loveliest music ever written for screen, and rightly got an Oscar

    Dawn, for example, is like really good Chopin

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcYnaEVMNc
    That film was crap.

    To see that stuff done properly, try Jane Eyre (Fukunaga), Wuthering Heights (Arnold) or Bright Star (Campion).
    What a magnificently predictable set of recommendations from a middlebrow lefty who wants to appear cultured
    You write occasional rant-pieces for the Spectator. You’re the epitome of middle-brow.
    dont you mean unibrow?
    I’ve never met him.
    Does he resemble Liam Gallagher or Frida Kahlo?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,005
    Nigelb said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Carnyx said:

    There was a physical Amazon bookstore near me. If it were it still open and I was feeling mischievous as I walked by, I might wander in and ask them if they have "When Harry Became Sally", or one of the classic Heinlein novels that annoy the left, like "Starship Troopers".

    And, if I were feeling downright ornery, I might ask them to order Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage", or one of Thomas Sowell's books on race.

    Have you seen the film of Starship Troopers? All the black uniforms one could want.

    In any case, just have a look at some of the stuff Amazon sell. Woke, they aren't.
    The film sort of missed the point of the book to be honest
    No, it hit it right between the eyes and killed it stone dead.
    Then you didnt understand the book
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,039
    Pagan2 - I suspect you are right about those books, but Amazon refuses to sell you "Harry" and refused to allow the publisher to advertise "Irreversible Damage". They took these actions, from what I can tell, in part to keep many of their younger employees happy.

    (As one would expect, their reluctance to sell Shrier's book appears to have helped boost sales of the book. And when J. K Rowling was attacked, I bought "Troubled Blood".)
  • ohnotnow said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Ratters said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    I'd have thought a similar proportion are employed, yet governments have had no issues shafting workers.
    Mid- and high-income workers for sure.
    Tax band freeze shafts all workers.

    Pay rises way below inflation for nurses, teachers etc shafts ordinary workers.

    Pensioners all protected nicely.
    Tories = party of selfish old graspers, go to any members event and you realised how bad it is. Apparently young people don't do any work, anyone who doesn't have a house is blamed for, you know, living because in their day they didn't spend money on anything at all and existed on a diet of water and air. House prices going up are great because when they downsize it means more spending money. Social care costs should definitely fall on anyone but them and any suggestion that their money from the downsize can fund it is treated as literal theft, but at the same time the NHS is shit and having a system where people who can afford to pay extra can get priority treatment should replace it.


    The last event I went to was pretty recent too, Tory members are basically all old and selfish. They will vote for whoever gives them more regardless of how badly the rest of the country suffers. They've worked hard and nobody else does now so they deserve more money, everyone else deserves to pay for it.
    Polling on pensioner attitudes is terrifying.

    All but small minority think the young (ie the under 60s) are simply decadent ingrates.

    You have to ask where in hell do these attitudes arise from?
    You get it in a small way from the age split in "working from home" polling.

    Anyone under 60 - who, of course, lack the imagination to understand modern ways of working - thinks it's a skive, whereas everyone else realises you work just as hard on the WFH days, at your desk on calls all day long, or working on documents, just without the commute.

    The real reason is that they didn't have this flexibility in their day, and are resentful that the generations to follow do, so they try and trash it.
    I dislike WFH not because I think it is a skive - I don't care - but because I think it is obviously less efficient. See my many problems with the Inland Revenue this year, which they explicitly admit are partly down to WFH

    WFH is also really bad for cities. And it further atomises people. Hopefully we will find a fruitful middle path. Eventually
    That's because plenty of public sector workers do fuck all in the office, but they have to be *seen* to be doing something in the office, so sullenly answer a phone call, or an email, as their manager overlooks their shoulder, but can easily do fuck all at home (with no-one to supervise) and get away with it.

    It is absolutely not the case in the private sector, where in professional services people can focus on documents, research, client meetings, 1:1s and virtual workshops without being dog-tired from commuting five days a week.
    I've worked in plenty of private sector jobs where there are whole floors of buildings 50% full of people doing almost sweet f.a. Wandering around with some paper to photocopy was about the busiest they got.
    I'd say that's pretty rare in my line of work, to be honest - most people do dodge performance issues though (personally,I don't, and have had conversations with two people this week accordingly) but I also support high achievers and stretched staff accordingly with their workload and careers.

    We do have a problem. And it's about man management.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,656

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    This does all sound a bit predictable, even if the last book does sound a bit more open-ended and with some potential. As mentioned earlier, I personally look to small independent bookshops for the obscure, the esoteric, or the unpredictable. You can find some quite extraordinary stuff in some of these tiny shops, even if many have become larger, more streamlined, and more organised now.
    They probably didn't even read all of those books.

    90%+ of this is about being seen to be promoting the "right" books to their peer group.

    That's why I hate Woke so much. It lobotomises people in the search of social proof. And I can't respect people who do it.
    Have you hung around with any actual teenagers?

    They read books they want to read. That's why Stephanie Meyer (who is bloody awful) is second on the best sellers' list.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,679
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Chalamet is male Keira Knightly.
    Great to look at, but intimately insipid.

    Future generations will be confused as to why he had such a “moment”.

    Blasphemy!

    She is brilliant (and luminously beautiful) in Pride and Prejudice - from 2005

    https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1153077-1153077-pride_and_prejudice

    As an aside, that movie boasts some of the loveliest music ever written for screen, and rightly got an Oscar

    Dawn, for example, is like really good Chopin

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcYnaEVMNc
    That film was crap.

    To see that stuff done properly, try Jane Eyre (Fukunaga), Wuthering Heights (Arnold) or Bright Star (Campion).
    What a magnificently predictable set of recommendations from a middlebrow lefty who wants to appear cultured
    Middlebrow is clearly an insult of choice but you're misusing it.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,005
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    This does all sound a bit predictable, even if the last book does sound a bit more open-ended and with some potential. As mentioned earlier, I personally look to small independent bookshops for the obscure, the esoteric, or the unpredictable. You can find some quite extraordinary stuff in some of these tiny shops, even if many have become larger, more streamlined, and more organised now.
    They probably didn't even read all of those books.

    90%+ of this is about being seen to be promoting the "right" books to their peer group.

    That's why I hate Woke so much. It lobotomises people in the search of social proof. And I can't respect people who do it.
    Have you hung around with any actual teenagers?

    They read books they want to read. That's why Stephanie Meyer (who is bloody awful) is second on the best sellers' list.
    And so do most people, teenagers are no worse than others for that. My view is better they read what they like because it becomes a habit and as they mature they will slowly widen their reading list
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited November 2022
    WillG said:

    kle4 said:

    WillG said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    After the BLM protests you couldn't move in my Waterstones without bumping into a book about race.

    I have heard the movie Call me by my name is good, but I find that hard to believe as it stars Timothee Chalamet, who's been terrible in every other thing I've seen him in, be in Little Women or Dune.
    What are you talking about? Chalamet is fantastic in Dune. The tent scene is chilling. Also great in The King.
    He's a charisma black hole, I practically fell asleep watching him in The King. The tent scene is literally the only part of Dune he's not boring. Just a blank canvas the rest of it, in a monotone.

    Not helped by genuinely charismatic performers (and by charismatic I don't mean they cannot be subtle) being in the film.
    That's ridiculous. It's a performance like Ryan Gosling in BladeRunner. Full of nuance and subtlety. Even without obvious displays of emotion you could tell what was running through his head due to body language and eye movements.
    It's not ridiculous, it's opinion. That he's been the same in each of the things I've seen him in makes me trust my opinion, but both our opinions are valid.

    For example, I liked Gosling's performance in Bladerunner (First Man not so much, even though its been pointed out Armstrong was like a robot in some ways).

    So it's not that I dislike 'subtle' performances - which is the standard thing people go to, as you have just done, when unbelieving someone else did not like a performance that was less than Brian Blessed level of intensity, to assume people just don't get such performances rather than disliking a specific performance. Its so the contrary opinion can be dismissed as not understanding things, rather than the truth - that views can reasonable be differ and neither is more right than the other.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,111
    MattW said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    But this is a false, prejudiced narrative.

    Just last year State Pensions went up by 2.5%, compared to an increase in average earnings of 8.8%. The triple lock was suspended.

    Whilst this year I think State Pension is increasing by inflation at 10.1% (?), whilst average earnings are increasing by 5.1% (annual figure in Q2).

    So this year's pensions vs average earnings, allegedly a major offence, does not even balance out last year's difference.

    The state pension increase will be applied across the board, and those pensioners on higher tax rates will be taxed on the extra income at their marginal rate, which will be up to 60%.

    I'm not wasting time on the "elderly use most NHS resources" stuff, because they don't unless you start your definition of 'elderly' at an absurdly young age.

    Given that poverty amongst pensioners is higher than in the general population (the last numbers I saw were 13% vs 10%), increasing state pension faster than inflation is not unreasonable - as long as richer pensioner get higher tax rates.

    Personally I'd withdraw the winter heating allowance and other benefits, and compensate for it by setting state pension at a more reasonable level, rather than relying on the incredibly slow progress under the Triple Lock. I'm quite inclined to the Dutch model of a % of minimum wage level.

    Capital taxes are another game altogether, of course. Nor will I go into the millions of pensioners who *are* economically active.
    You're just cherry picking dates. Earnings rose lots last year because they fell the year before. Over the period from Covid as a whole pensions have gone up by more than inflation, while wages have not.

    If pensioners are in poverty then we should have more means tested benefits for the poorest, like we do for all working age benefits (I don't get any child support or free childcare, all means tested). Maintaining pensions at or above inflation for all while working people have real term pay cuts and increased taxes is a surefire way to have a managed decline of our economy.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,806
    Good grief, what is the world coming to? I find myself agreeing with @Leon.

    Joe Wright's 2005 Pride & Prejudice is excellent and Knightly is a perfect Elizabeth Bennett.
  • stodge said:


    That's because plenty of public sector workers do fuck all in the office, but they have to be *seen* to be doing something in the office, so sullenly answer a phone call, or an email, as their manager overlooks their shoulder, but can easily do fuck all at home (with no-one to supervise) and get away with it.

    It is absolutely not the case in the private sector, where in professional services people can focus on documents, research, client meetings, 1:1s and virtual workshops without being dog-tired from commuting five days a week.

    You really are full of anger today - bookshops that don't sell the books you want and now public sector workers who, in your crass ignorance, don't work the way you want them to.

    It's quite clear you don't have the slightest idea how the public sector operates - just because the Daily Mail tells you something doesn't make it true.

    I've worked on both sides of the fence and, if I'm honest, there are incredibly hard working people in both the private and public sector and incredibly lazy people in both.

    The old mantra "Public Bad, Private Good" sounds like something from the dark days of the 1980s.

    1984 - perhaps you'll find that in your local bookshop along with Animal Farm.
    You're an autistic bore who posts tedious pompous diatribes that no-one reads, so forgive me if I don't give a shit what you think.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,806

    stodge said:


    That's because plenty of public sector workers do fuck all in the office, but they have to be *seen* to be doing something in the office, so sullenly answer a phone call, or an email, as their manager overlooks their shoulder, but can easily do fuck all at home (with no-one to supervise) and get away with it.

    It is absolutely not the case in the private sector, where in professional services people can focus on documents, research, client meetings, 1:1s and virtual workshops without being dog-tired from commuting five days a week.

    You really are full of anger today - bookshops that don't sell the books you want and now public sector workers who, in your crass ignorance, don't work the way you want them to.

    It's quite clear you don't have the slightest idea how the public sector operates - just because the Daily Mail tells you something doesn't make it true.

    I've worked on both sides of the fence and, if I'm honest, there are incredibly hard working people in both the private and public sector and incredibly lazy people in both.

    The old mantra "Public Bad, Private Good" sounds like something from the dark days of the 1980s.

    1984 - perhaps you'll find that in your local bookshop along with Animal Farm.
    You're an autistic bore who posts tedious pompous diatribes that no-one reads, so forgive me if I don't give a shit what you think.
    If no one reads them, how do you know they are pompous diatribes?
  • Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    Doesn't sound like my kind of bookshop, either.
    But so what ?
    It's in my hometown, and I don't want that sort of shit here.

    That's what.
    That's just intolerance.
    Live and let live.
    Also a bizarre position from someone who would ordinarily profess to supporting free enterprise.
    Free enterprise, where people don't buy that sort of shit so it goes out of business.

    Don't expect me not to campaign against it.

    They're not mutually exclusive.
  • kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    They're not all their recommendations, though, are they? Lucy Worsley's biography of Agatha Christie is mentioned as well. Is Richard Powers woke? I don't know.

    Ultimately, it's a bookshop. The stuff the staff are recommending isn't to your taste. Especailly the younger staff.

    That's not a cancer that needs to be defeated. It's how it's always been.
    No, that's not all but that's, like, 60% of them.

    Very telling.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    This does all sound a bit predictable, even if the last book does sound a bit more open-ended and with some potential. As mentioned earlier, I personally look to small independent bookshops for the obscure, the esoteric, or the unpredictable. You can find some quite extraordinary stuff in some of these tiny shops, even if many have become larger, more streamlined, and more organised now.
    They probably didn't even read all of those books.

    90%+ of this is about being seen to be promoting the "right" books to their peer group.

    That's why I hate Woke so much. It lobotomises people in the search of social proof. And I can't respect people who do it.
    Have you hung around with any actual teenagers?

    They read books they want to read. That's why Stephanie Meyer (who is bloody awful) is second on the best sellers' list.
    That's true, but it is also the case that people buy books they think they are supposed to like or which are important. Hence the standard gag of shelf books that people own but have probably not read like A brief history of time, Ulysses, or Dreams from my Father.

    With the big marketing push on books about race and gender and the like, I wouldn't be surprised if they are both popular to read, but also popular to simply own.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    Young Adult Fiction is a cesspit of Wokeness, and not a happy place

    All the writers and editors try to OutWoke each other, and well known authors can be cancelled for the tiniest transgressions. Brutally competitive

    The only people enjoying it all are the Sensitivity Readers

    Woke is the end of art, essentially, wherever it goes


    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/jun/15/torn-apart-the-vicious-war-over-young-adult-books
    None of this seems to have any impact whatsoever on what young adults (who, it appears, don't actually seem to be adults) are reading.

    Here are the Young Adult best seller lists from the NYTimes:

    https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/young-adult-hardcover/
    https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/young-adult-paperback-monthly/
    I think that's the most interesting thing. No-one really enjoys reading this stuff, even if they do buy it - which increasingly they don't.

    That's why such business strategies are likely to deliver their own comeuppance.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591

    stodge said:


    That's because plenty of public sector workers do fuck all in the office, but they have to be *seen* to be doing something in the office, so sullenly answer a phone call, or an email, as their manager overlooks their shoulder, but can easily do fuck all at home (with no-one to supervise) and get away with it.

    It is absolutely not the case in the private sector, where in professional services people can focus on documents, research, client meetings, 1:1s and virtual workshops without being dog-tired from commuting five days a week.

    You really are full of anger today - bookshops that don't sell the books you want and now public sector workers who, in your crass ignorance, don't work the way you want them to.

    It's quite clear you don't have the slightest idea how the public sector operates - just because the Daily Mail tells you something doesn't make it true.

    I've worked on both sides of the fence and, if I'm honest, there are incredibly hard working people in both the private and public sector and incredibly lazy people in both.

    The old mantra "Public Bad, Private Good" sounds like something from the dark days of the 1980s.

    1984 - perhaps you'll find that in your local bookshop along with Animal Farm.
    You're an autistic bore who posts tedious pompous diatribes that no-one reads, so forgive me if I don't give a shit what you think.
    Is the 'autistic' part necessary? Is it based on some admission from stodge or being used as an insult?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,005
    Ratters said:

    MattW said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    But this is a false, prejudiced narrative.

    Just last year State Pensions went up by 2.5%, compared to an increase in average earnings of 8.8%. The triple lock was suspended.

    Whilst this year I think State Pension is increasing by inflation at 10.1% (?), whilst average earnings are increasing by 5.1% (annual figure in Q2).

    So this year's pensions vs average earnings, allegedly a major offence, does not even balance out last year's difference.

    The state pension increase will be applied across the board, and those pensioners on higher tax rates will be taxed on the extra income at their marginal rate, which will be up to 60%.

    I'm not wasting time on the "elderly use most NHS resources" stuff, because they don't unless you start your definition of 'elderly' at an absurdly young age.

    Given that poverty amongst pensioners is higher than in the general population (the last numbers I saw were 13% vs 10%), increasing state pension faster than inflation is not unreasonable - as long as richer pensioner get higher tax rates.

    Personally I'd withdraw the winter heating allowance and other benefits, and compensate for it by setting state pension at a more reasonable level, rather than relying on the incredibly slow progress under the Triple Lock. I'm quite inclined to the Dutch model of a % of minimum wage level.

    Capital taxes are another game altogether, of course. Nor will I go into the millions of pensioners who *are* economically active.
    You're just cherry picking dates. Earnings rose lots last year because they fell the year before. Over the period from Covid as a whole pensions have gone up by more than inflation, while wages have not.

    If pensioners are in poverty then we should have more means tested benefits for the poorest, like we do for all working age benefits (I don't get any child support or free childcare, all means tested). Maintaining pensions at or above inflation for all while working people have real term pay cuts and increased taxes is a surefire way to have a managed decline of our economy.
    The only increase is on state pensions, many pensioners will still have less money due to inflation because most private pensions are not index linked. Yes the state pension bit will go up but the rest wont.

    As an example and I simplified the numbers for calcualtion

    9000 state pension + 6000 dc pension = 15000

    after uprating by 10%

    9900 state pension + 6000 dc pension = 15900


    total increase = (15900/15000) * 100 = 6% increase

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318

    Good grief, what is the world coming to? I find myself agreeing with @Leon.

    Joe Wright's 2005 Pride & Prejudice is excellent and Knightly is a perfect Elizabeth Bennett.

    I sense a new, quite toxic, divide in the culture wars.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited November 2022
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    This does all sound a bit predictable, even if the last book does sound a bit more open-ended and with some potential. As mentioned earlier, I personally look to small independent bookshops for the obscure, the esoteric, or the unpredictable. You can find some quite extraordinary stuff in some of these tiny shops, even if many have become larger, more streamlined, and more organised now.
    They probably didn't even read all of those books.

    90%+ of this is about being seen to be promoting the "right" books to their peer group.

    That's why I hate Woke so much. It lobotomises people in the search of social proof. And I can't respect people who do it.
    Have you hung around with any actual teenagers?

    They read books they want to read. That's why Stephanie Meyer (who is bloody awful) is second on the best sellers' list.
    Also, and why Dan Brown is one of the most successful authors of all time, and Dan Brown imitators can be very successful novelists.

    As for hanging around teenagers, I wouldn't recommend it even when I was a teenager.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,772

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    They're not all their recommendations, though, are they? Lucy Worsley's biography of Agatha Christie is mentioned as well. Is Richard Powers woke? I don't know.

    Ultimately, it's a bookshop. The stuff the staff are recommending isn't to your taste. Especailly the younger staff.

    That's not a cancer that needs to be defeated. It's how it's always been.
    No, that's not all but that's, like, 60% of them.

    Very telling.
    There is nothing whatsoever more woke than using 'like' randomly in the middle of a sentence.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,806
    Labour lead falls in the latest poll from PeoplePolling from 21% to... oh, 26%.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1593952017449467905?s=20&t=syK3aMQoYJoeKryQQgPvcA

    Budget bounce!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,772

    Good grief, what is the world coming to? I find myself agreeing with @Leon.

    Joe Wright's 2005 Pride & Prejudice is excellent and Knightly is a perfect Elizabeth Bennett.

    I sense a new, quite toxic, divide in the culture wars.
    Between those who realise Jane Austen's work is shit and those who have yet to read it preoperly?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,888

    Good grief, what is the world coming to? I find myself agreeing with @Leon.

    Joe Wright's 2005 Pride & Prejudice is excellent and Knightly is a perfect Elizabeth Bennett.

    Just wondering how sales of Pride and Prejudice (book form) are going in Woke Bookstore?

    BTW can anyone remind me if Satanic Verses is Woke or Unwoke at the moment?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    A good bookshop just needs to hedge it’s bets. I took this in the kid’s section of some independent, but the series seems ubiquitous in the US.


  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited November 2022
    algarkirk said:

    Good grief, what is the world coming to? I find myself agreeing with @Leon.

    Joe Wright's 2005 Pride & Prejudice is excellent and Knightly is a perfect Elizabeth Bennett.

    Just wondering how sales of Pride and Prejudice (book form) are going in Woke Bookstore?

    BTW can anyone remind me if Satanic Verses is Woke or Unwoke at the moment?
    It's bloody awful either way.

    But I think it classifies as unwoke, being deliberately provocative *gasp*
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,265
    kle4 said:

    WillG said:

    kle4 said:

    WillG said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    After the BLM protests you couldn't move in my Waterstones without bumping into a book about race.

    I have heard the movie Call me by my name is good, but I find that hard to believe as it stars Timothee Chalamet, who's been terrible in every other thing I've seen him in, be in Little Women or Dune.
    What are you talking about? Chalamet is fantastic in Dune. The tent scene is chilling. Also great in The King.
    He's a charisma black hole, I practically fell asleep watching him in The King. The tent scene is literally the only part of Dune he's not boring. Just a blank canvas the rest of it, in a monotone.

    Not helped by genuinely charismatic performers (and by charismatic I don't mean they cannot be subtle) being in the film.
    That's ridiculous. It's a performance like Ryan Gosling in BladeRunner. Full of nuance and subtlety. Even without obvious displays of emotion you could tell what was running through his head due to body language and eye movements.
    It's not ridiculous, it's opinion. That he's been the same in each of the things I've seen him in makes me trust my opinion, but both our opinions are valid.

    For example, I liked Gosling's performance in Bladerunner (First Man not so much, even though its been pointed out Armstrong was like a robot in some ways)...
    Not to mention his fantastic performance in Detective Pikachu.
  • OllyT said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    Casino is going to open up a shop next door selling pickelhaubes and signed copies of the new Anne Widdecombe romance.

    We’ll see who’s laughing then.
    Dickish as @Dura_Ace comment earlier.
    I accept that your views on "woke" are deeply held but I doubt 1% of the population feel as strongly about it as you do.

    IIRC not so long ago you were apoplectic about an advertisement or something at Waterloo station, an advert I'm sure 99% of us walked past without giving it a second thought. I honestly could not believe anyone could get that worked up about it.

    No offence, but you give the impression of of being someone who is always on the lookout for something to be offended by.
    Nah, that just reflects how limited your peer group is.

    I'd say between 30-40% of the population would feel the same, lots of people confide in me once they realise I'm on their side in private, and the bulk of the rest (40-45%) go along with it because they don't really think about it.

    I'd say this stuff only really appeals to about 15-20% of the population (max) but they're the ones that set the agenda and call the shots.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,005
    kle4 said:

    algarkirk said:

    Good grief, what is the world coming to? I find myself agreeing with @Leon.

    Joe Wright's 2005 Pride & Prejudice is excellent and Knightly is a perfect Elizabeth Bennett.

    Just wondering how sales of Pride and Prejudice (book form) are going in Woke Bookstore?

    BTW can anyone remind me if Satanic Verses is Woke or Unwoke at the moment?
    It's bloody awful either way.

    But I think it classifies as unwoke, being deliberately provocative *gasp*
    all his books are, I read grimus once I never picked up another book he wrote
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    algarkirk said:

    Good grief, what is the world coming to? I find myself agreeing with @Leon.

    Joe Wright's 2005 Pride & Prejudice is excellent and Knightly is a perfect Elizabeth Bennett.

    Just wondering how sales of Pride and Prejudice (book form) are going in Woke Bookstore?

    BTW can anyone remind me if Satanic Verses is Woke or Unwoke at the moment?
    In my various decades on earth, I’ve noticed that Jane Austen’s reputation has only increased.

    I confess it’s been a while since I picked one up.
  • kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    Doesn't sound like my kind of bookshop, either.
    But so what ?
    It's in my hometown, and I don't want that sort of shit here.

    That's what.
    You might be sending yourself up slightly but if not this seems odd. It's as if you see this ultra prog bookshop as equivalent to (and as offensive as) say me stumbling across a far right outlet in Hampstead selling stuff like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Because that would indeed get me very pissed off like you seem to be. But I'd have thought a closer equivalent (for me) would be a bookshop specialising in works by the likes of Jordan Peterson and Michelle Dewsberry. Which I'd find disappointing and would not frequent but wouldn't particularly get my goat. Although I might pretend it did for the purposes of a post on here, if in that sort of mood.
    He edited the recommendations to make them sound “woker”.

    I assume it’s self-pastiche, but to what end it’s not clear.
    I didn't. They are word for word.

    There were 3-4 about kids books and one about a new book on Agatha Christie, but this was the bulk.

    There's no way for you to argue your way out of the truth of this, much as you want to.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,779

    Labour lead falls in the latest poll from PeoplePolling from 21% to... oh, 26%.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1593952017449467905?s=20&t=syK3aMQoYJoeKryQQgPvcA

    Budget bounce!

    Bouncing like a rubber ball descending a staircase.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,806
    edited November 2022
    Pagan2 said:

    Ratters said:

    MattW said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    But this is a false, prejudiced narrative.

    Just last year State Pensions went up by 2.5%, compared to an increase in average earnings of 8.8%. The triple lock was suspended.

    Whilst this year I think State Pension is increasing by inflation at 10.1% (?), whilst average earnings are increasing by 5.1% (annual figure in Q2).

    So this year's pensions vs average earnings, allegedly a major offence, does not even balance out last year's difference.

    The state pension increase will be applied across the board, and those pensioners on higher tax rates will be taxed on the extra income at their marginal rate, which will be up to 60%.

    I'm not wasting time on the "elderly use most NHS resources" stuff, because they don't unless you start your definition of 'elderly' at an absurdly young age.

    Given that poverty amongst pensioners is higher than in the general population (the last numbers I saw were 13% vs 10%), increasing state pension faster than inflation is not unreasonable - as long as richer pensioner get higher tax rates.

    Personally I'd withdraw the winter heating allowance and other benefits, and compensate for it by setting state pension at a more reasonable level, rather than relying on the incredibly slow progress under the Triple Lock. I'm quite inclined to the Dutch model of a % of minimum wage level.

    Capital taxes are another game altogether, of course. Nor will I go into the millions of pensioners who *are* economically active.
    You're just cherry picking dates. Earnings rose lots last year because they fell the year before. Over the period from Covid as a whole pensions have gone up by more than inflation, while wages have not.

    If pensioners are in poverty then we should have more means tested benefits for the poorest, like we do for all working age benefits (I don't get any child support or free childcare, all means tested). Maintaining pensions at or above inflation for all while working people have real term pay cuts and increased taxes is a surefire way to have a managed decline of our economy.
    The only increase is on state pensions, many pensioners will still have less money due to inflation because most private pensions are not index linked. Yes the state pension bit will go up but the rest wont.

    As an example and I simplified the numbers for calcualtion

    9000 state pension + 6000 dc pension = 15000

    after uprating by 10%

    9900 state pension + 6000 dc pension = 15900


    total increase = (15900/15000) * 100 = 6% increase

    ...most private pensions are not index linked...

    Do you have a source for that? I would have guessed the vast majority were index-linked, albeit with a 5% cap.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,937
    edited November 2022
    Ratters said:

    MattW said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    But this is a false, prejudiced narrative.

    Just last year State Pensions went up by 2.5%, compared to an increase in average earnings of 8.8%. The triple lock was suspended.

    Whilst this year I think State Pension is increasing by inflation at 10.1% (?), whilst average earnings are increasing by 5.1% (annual figure in Q2).

    So this year's pensions vs average earnings, allegedly a major offence, does not even balance out last year's difference.

    The state pension increase will be applied across the board, and those pensioners on higher tax rates will be taxed on the extra income at their marginal rate, which will be up to 60%.

    I'm not wasting time on the "elderly use most NHS resources" stuff, because they don't unless you start your definition of 'elderly' at an absurdly young age.

    Given that poverty amongst pensioners is higher than in the general population (the last numbers I saw were 13% vs 10%), increasing state pension faster than inflation is not unreasonable - as long as richer pensioner get higher tax rates.

    Personally I'd withdraw the winter heating allowance and other benefits, and compensate for it by setting state pension at a more reasonable level, rather than relying on the incredibly slow progress under the Triple Lock. I'm quite inclined to the Dutch model of a % of minimum wage level.

    Capital taxes are another game altogether, of course. Nor will I go into the millions of pensioners who *are* economically active.
    You're just cherry picking dates. Earnings rose lots last year because they fell the year before. Over the period from Covid as a whole pensions have gone up by more than inflation, while wages have not.

    If pensioners are in poverty then we should have more means tested benefits for the poorest, like we do for all working age benefits (I don't get any child support or free childcare, all means tested). Maintaining pensions at or above inflation for all while working people have real term pay cuts and increased taxes is a surefire way to have a managed decline of our economy.
    Perhaps you could supply some data to support that, as I did for my argument.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591

    algarkirk said:

    Good grief, what is the world coming to? I find myself agreeing with @Leon.

    Joe Wright's 2005 Pride & Prejudice is excellent and Knightly is a perfect Elizabeth Bennett.

    Just wondering how sales of Pride and Prejudice (book form) are going in Woke Bookstore?

    BTW can anyone remind me if Satanic Verses is Woke or Unwoke at the moment?
    In my various decades on earth, I’ve noticed that Jane Austen’s reputation has only increased.

    I confess it’s been a while since I picked one up.
    I liked Lady Susan.
  • A good bookshop just needs to hedge it’s bets. I took this in the kid’s section of some independent, but the series seems ubiquitous in the US.


    What's that? Nasty Republicans in comics?

    I don't always get the US.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,806

    OllyT said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    Casino is going to open up a shop next door selling pickelhaubes and signed copies of the new Anne Widdecombe romance.

    We’ll see who’s laughing then.
    Dickish as @Dura_Ace comment earlier.
    I accept that your views on "woke" are deeply held but I doubt 1% of the population feel as strongly about it as you do.

    IIRC not so long ago you were apoplectic about an advertisement or something at Waterloo station, an advert I'm sure 99% of us walked past without giving it a second thought. I honestly could not believe anyone could get that worked up about it.

    No offence, but you give the impression of of being someone who is always on the lookout for something to be offended by.
    Nah, that just reflects how limited your peer group is.

    I'd say between 30-40% of the population would feel the same, lots of people confide in me once they realise I'm on their side in private, and the bulk of the rest (40-45%) go along with it because they don't really think about it.

    I'd say this stuff only really appeals to about 15-20% of the population (max) but they're the ones that set the agenda and call the shots.
    Why does 'woke' never appear very high on the list of issues voters are most concerned about?
  • kle4 said:

    stodge said:


    That's because plenty of public sector workers do fuck all in the office, but they have to be *seen* to be doing something in the office, so sullenly answer a phone call, or an email, as their manager overlooks their shoulder, but can easily do fuck all at home (with no-one to supervise) and get away with it.

    It is absolutely not the case in the private sector, where in professional services people can focus on documents, research, client meetings, 1:1s and virtual workshops without being dog-tired from commuting five days a week.

    You really are full of anger today - bookshops that don't sell the books you want and now public sector workers who, in your crass ignorance, don't work the way you want them to.

    It's quite clear you don't have the slightest idea how the public sector operates - just because the Daily Mail tells you something doesn't make it true.

    I've worked on both sides of the fence and, if I'm honest, there are incredibly hard working people in both the private and public sector and incredibly lazy people in both.

    The old mantra "Public Bad, Private Good" sounds like something from the dark days of the 1980s.

    1984 - perhaps you'll find that in your local bookshop along with Animal Farm.
    You're an autistic bore who posts tedious pompous diatribes that no-one reads, so forgive me if I don't give a shit what you think.
    Is the 'autistic' part necessary? Is it based on some admission from stodge or being used as an insult?
    Because he is, and demonstrates it through his emotionally incontinent posts on here.

    He regularly throws partisan jibes and personal insults, so he has no grounds for complaint.
  • rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    EPG said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    To be fair, in a country with 70% home ownership, it's hard to work out how to democratically shaft such a large majority. There are no signs Starmer will.
    Starmer and labour demanded the retention of the triple lock in the HOC the week before the Autumn statement

    The triple lock was introduced by Cameron and Clegg and is supported by all parties including the SNP, evidenced by Blackford demanding Sunak confirmed it at the PMQs before the Autumn statement

    There is no point Labour supporters objecting to the triple lock when their leader is 100% committed to it
    As far as I can tell all Labour will do is change the guard and put up tax and the Wokery even more.
    It's in the Labour draft manifesto:

    A new, independent Woke bookshop in every town and village throughout the land.
    :)
    They will remove all the (limited) brakes the Conservatives have currently applied.

    In the longer term it provides a route back for them as there will eventually be a backlash.
    I guess I'm curious as to why you were so worked up about this 'woke' bookshop in your town. I thought Tories were all in favour of small businesses being set up. It may or may not fail. But you actively want it to fail, which is odd for a Tory.

    Meanwhile, on the Woke scale Starmer is pretty much in the middle, I'd have thought, and I don't see the next Labour government being captured by the extreme wokeites for one minute.
    I've lived here for my whole life. It's my hometown. I was excited about this new bookshop when I saw it, and then I went in - and I'm crushingly disappointed.

    You don't expect to see a bit of Islington in rural Hampshire, so I can't say I wish them well, but if it isn't my cup of tea why should I go in there and support them?

    I'm not trying to ban them or make them illegal. But it doesn't mean I'm rooting for them.
    There’s actually only one Waterstones in Islington. It’s a bit barren on the bookshop front, and actually not especially woke.
    How many approved non-Woke bookshops are there in Islington? Just checking. (I don't mean the kind of bookshop that is neutral on this front, like specialist transport shops like the one that used to be in St Martin's Lane in London. I'm assuming here trhat the trains bit cancels out the petrolheads bit, obvs.)
    OK.

    If they want to start a culture war in my home town I will do my best to fucking finish it.

    These people need to be defeated. Woke is a cancer.
    That seems not wildly different from saying that in rural Hampshire, these folk should get back in the closet.
    How is opening a bookshop ‘starting a culture war’ ?
    It's not a bookshop, it's a wokeshop.
    It seems to be getting woker the more you dwell on it, to the point I'm surprised they didn't ambush you on the way in to indoctrinate you.
    Here are their "what are we reading?" recommendations from their website:

    "Ash": CALL ME BY MY NAME by Andre Aciman (Romance/ Lit-fic / LGBTQ) - moving story of a growing, passionate, obsessive love affair.

    "Lee": NATIVES- RACE AND CLASS in the RUINS of EMPIRE (socio-political) by Akala. A fascinating insight into race and class in modern Britain from poet and hip-hop artist Akala. A great mix of the personal and the political.

    "Ella": THE HATE YOU GIVE (YA urban fiction) by Angie Thomas - pacy, moving account of a black boy shot dead by the police, and the fallout for the community, his family and friends

    "Lou": OUR MISSING HEARTS by Celeste Ng - It's a story about the power - and limitations - of art to create change in the world, the lessons and legacies we pass onto our children, and how any of us can survive a broken world with our hearts intact. (this one is basically an anti-nationalist/Trump book)

    It's a Wokeshop.
    This does all sound a bit predictable, even if the last book does sound a bit more open-ended and with some potential. As mentioned earlier, I personally look to small independent bookshops for the obscure, the esoteric, or the unpredictable. You can find some quite extraordinary stuff in some of these tiny shops, even if many have become larger, more streamlined, and more organised now.
    They probably didn't even read all of those books.

    90%+ of this is about being seen to be promoting the "right" books to their peer group.

    That's why I hate Woke so much. It lobotomises people in the search of social proof. And I can't respect people who do it.
    Have you hung around with any actual teenagers?

    They read books they want to read. That's why Stephanie Meyer (who is bloody awful) is second on the best sellers' list.
    Yes.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,992
    edited November 2022

    stodge said:


    That's because plenty of public sector workers do fuck all in the office, but they have to be *seen* to be doing something in the office, so sullenly answer a phone call, or an email, as their manager overlooks their shoulder, but can easily do fuck all at home (with no-one to supervise) and get away with it.

    It is absolutely not the case in the private sector, where in professional services people can focus on documents, research, client meetings, 1:1s and virtual workshops without being dog-tired from commuting five days a week.

    You really are full of anger today - bookshops that don't sell the books you want and now public sector workers who, in your crass ignorance, don't work the way you want them to.

    It's quite clear you don't have the slightest idea how the public sector operates - just because the Daily Mail tells you something doesn't make it true.

    I've worked on both sides of the fence and, if I'm honest, there are incredibly hard working people in both the private and public sector and incredibly lazy people in both.

    The old mantra "Public Bad, Private Good" sounds like something from the dark days of the 1980s.

    1984 - perhaps you'll find that in your local bookshop along with Animal Farm.
    You're an autistic bore who posts tedious pompous diatribes that no-one reads, so forgive me if I don't give a shit what you think.
    Thanks for the kind words and the insults.

    I really hope you find a way of channelling your anger positively - life's too short to be angry at bookshops or anonymous people on the Internet.

    It doesn't alter the fact you're wrong about most of this.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,302

    A good bookshop just needs to hedge it’s bets. I took this in the kid’s section of some independent, but the series seems ubiquitous in the US.


    Is that your attire in the bottom of the frame?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,005

    Pagan2 said:

    Ratters said:

    MattW said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    But this is a false, prejudiced narrative.

    Just last year State Pensions went up by 2.5%, compared to an increase in average earnings of 8.8%. The triple lock was suspended.

    Whilst this year I think State Pension is increasing by inflation at 10.1% (?), whilst average earnings are increasing by 5.1% (annual figure in Q2).

    So this year's pensions vs average earnings, allegedly a major offence, does not even balance out last year's difference.

    The state pension increase will be applied across the board, and those pensioners on higher tax rates will be taxed on the extra income at their marginal rate, which will be up to 60%.

    I'm not wasting time on the "elderly use most NHS resources" stuff, because they don't unless you start your definition of 'elderly' at an absurdly young age.

    Given that poverty amongst pensioners is higher than in the general population (the last numbers I saw were 13% vs 10%), increasing state pension faster than inflation is not unreasonable - as long as richer pensioner get higher tax rates.

    Personally I'd withdraw the winter heating allowance and other benefits, and compensate for it by setting state pension at a more reasonable level, rather than relying on the incredibly slow progress under the Triple Lock. I'm quite inclined to the Dutch model of a % of minimum wage level.

    Capital taxes are another game altogether, of course. Nor will I go into the millions of pensioners who *are* economically active.
    You're just cherry picking dates. Earnings rose lots last year because they fell the year before. Over the period from Covid as a whole pensions have gone up by more than inflation, while wages have not.

    If pensioners are in poverty then we should have more means tested benefits for the poorest, like we do for all working age benefits (I don't get any child support or free childcare, all means tested). Maintaining pensions at or above inflation for all while working people have real term pay cuts and increased taxes is a surefire way to have a managed decline of our economy.
    The only increase is on state pensions, many pensioners will still have less money due to inflation because most private pensions are not index linked. Yes the state pension bit will go up but the rest wont.

    As an example and I simplified the numbers for calcualtion

    9000 state pension + 6000 dc pension = 15000

    after uprating by 10%

    9900 state pension + 6000 dc pension = 15900


    total increase = (15900/15000) * 100 = 6% increase

    ...most private pensions are not index linked...

    Do you have a source for that? I would have guessed the vast majority were index-linked, albeit with a 5% cap.
    direct benefit ones yes, direct contribution not so much, when you buy an annuity you have a choice between an amount and a much smaller amount but index linked. Most I believe take the higher amount and you could argue yes its not forward thinking.

  • stodge said:

    stodge said:


    That's because plenty of public sector workers do fuck all in the office, but they have to be *seen* to be doing something in the office, so sullenly answer a phone call, or an email, as their manager overlooks their shoulder, but can easily do fuck all at home (with no-one to supervise) and get away with it.

    It is absolutely not the case in the private sector, where in professional services people can focus on documents, research, client meetings, 1:1s and virtual workshops without being dog-tired from commuting five days a week.

    You really are full of anger today - bookshops that don't sell the books you want and now public sector workers who, in your crass ignorance, don't work the way you want them to.

    It's quite clear you don't have the slightest idea how the public sector operates - just because the Daily Mail tells you something doesn't make it true.

    I've worked on both sides of the fence and, if I'm honest, there are incredibly hard working people in both the private and public sector and incredibly lazy people in both.

    The old mantra "Public Bad, Private Good" sounds like something from the dark days of the 1980s.

    1984 - perhaps you'll find that in your local bookshop along with Animal Farm.
    You're an autistic bore who posts tedious pompous diatribes that no-one reads, so forgive me if I don't give a shit what you think.
    Thanks for the kind words and the insults.

    I really hope you find a way of channelling your anger positively - life's too short to be angry at bookshops or anonymous people on the Internet.
    Bear it in mind next time you think about passing judgement on my character or accusing me of crass ignorance.

    Bloody cheek.

    And have a think on that pomposity as well. Your posts are full of it, and far too long.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,395
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Ratters said:

    MattW said:

    Ratters said:

    The trouble with being the party of pensioners and unproductive wealth (e.g. housing) is that those are both highly unproductive parts of the economy.

    During the Tories time in power they have:

    - Cut spending on most things other than pensions and healthcare (of course mostly for elderly people) to the bone.
    - Retained subsidies (e.g. on fuel next year, winter fuel allowance etc) for retirees
    - Maintained pensions in real terms while workers get a pay cut
    - Increased taxes significantly on working people

    All of this results in a drag on economic growth and further falls in living standards for those in work. All while having no grand strategy to encourage investment and growth.

    Pensioners may vote but you can't win an election with them alone. The Tories deserve to be tossed out of power for at least a decade.

    But this is a false, prejudiced narrative.

    Just last year State Pensions went up by 2.5%, compared to an increase in average earnings of 8.8%. The triple lock was suspended.

    Whilst this year I think State Pension is increasing by inflation at 10.1% (?), whilst average earnings are increasing by 5.1% (annual figure in Q2).

    So this year's pensions vs average earnings, allegedly a major offence, does not even balance out last year's difference.

    The state pension increase will be applied across the board, and those pensioners on higher tax rates will be taxed on the extra income at their marginal rate, which will be up to 60%.

    I'm not wasting time on the "elderly use most NHS resources" stuff, because they don't unless you start your definition of 'elderly' at an absurdly young age.

    Given that poverty amongst pensioners is higher than in the general population (the last numbers I saw were 13% vs 10%), increasing state pension faster than inflation is not unreasonable - as long as richer pensioner get higher tax rates.

    Personally I'd withdraw the winter heating allowance and other benefits, and compensate for it by setting state pension at a more reasonable level, rather than relying on the incredibly slow progress under the Triple Lock. I'm quite inclined to the Dutch model of a % of minimum wage level.

    Capital taxes are another game altogether, of course. Nor will I go into the millions of pensioners who *are* economically active.
    You're just cherry picking dates. Earnings rose lots last year because they fell the year before. Over the period from Covid as a whole pensions have gone up by more than inflation, while wages have not.

    If pensioners are in poverty then we should have more means tested benefits for the poorest, like we do for all working age benefits (I don't get any child support or free childcare, all means tested). Maintaining pensions at or above inflation for all while working people have real term pay cuts and increased taxes is a surefire way to have a managed decline of our economy.
    The only increase is on state pensions, many pensioners will still have less money due to inflation because most private pensions are not index linked. Yes the state pension bit will go up but the rest wont.

    As an example and I simplified the numbers for calcualtion

    9000 state pension + 6000 dc pension = 15000

    after uprating by 10%

    9900 state pension + 6000 dc pension = 15900


    total increase = (15900/15000) * 100 = 6% increase

    ...most private pensions are not index linked...

    Do you have a source for that? I would have guessed the vast majority were index-linked, albeit with a 5% cap.
    direct benefit ones yes, direct contribution not so much, when you buy an annuity you have a choice between an amount and a much smaller amount but index linked. Most I believe take the higher amount and you could argue yes its not forward thinking.

    Mm, interesting, thanks.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,265
    ydoethur said:

    Good grief, what is the world coming to? I find myself agreeing with @Leon.

    Joe Wright's 2005 Pride & Prejudice is excellent and Knightly is a perfect Elizabeth Bennett.

    I sense a new, quite toxic, divide in the culture wars.
    Between those who realise Jane Austen's work is shit and those who have yet to read it preoperly?
    That is a truth perhaps not universally recognised.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,806
    edited November 2022
    ydoethur said:

    Good grief, what is the world coming to? I find myself agreeing with @Leon.

    Joe Wright's 2005 Pride & Prejudice is excellent and Knightly is a perfect Elizabeth Bennett.

    I sense a new, quite toxic, divide in the culture wars.
    Between those who realise Jane Austen's work is shit and those who have yet to read it preoperly?
    I do not believe her work is shit (far from it) so I have clearly never read it properly.

    Any suggestions as to how I might improve my obviously imperfect 'start at the beginning, read to the end, enjoy as I go' technique?
This discussion has been closed.