Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

A personal note on the NHS – politicalbetting.com

24

Comments

  • Options
    solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,688

    Give us another $10 million.....

    Prince Harry exclusive: ‘There’s enough for another book – I cut memoir in half to spare my family’

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/01/13/prince-harry-book-two-spare-revelations-royal-family/

    Spare 2: This Time It's Even More Personal

    Spare 2: Frozen Todger

    ??

    I await my royalties.
  • Options
    Wouldn't dream of taking a position in the Great Scotch Debate, but came across this from the talent-lite Walter Scott (in the fictional setting of 1707):

    'I ken, when we had a king, and a chancellor, and parliament - men o' our ain, we could aye peeble them wi' stones when they werena gude bairns - But naebody's nails can reach the length o' Lunnon.'

    which is word for word Brexitism, pretty much.
  • Options

    Give us another $10 million.....

    Prince Harry exclusive: ‘There’s enough for another book – I cut memoir in half to spare my family’

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/01/13/prince-harry-book-two-spare-revelations-royal-family/

    Golly, Bryony's a big lass an' a bonnie lass.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,165
    Andy_JS said:

    Oriental is used in the UK without giving offence.

    But I noticed that in the United States the word "handicapped" is still used whereas it's regarded as a bit out of date in the UK.

    When I visited my then girlfriend, now wife, in New Haven in the 90s I was shocked/delighted to find the state ran a “Connecticut Department of Mental Retardation”
  • Options

    20 years ago I remember getting told never ever to use the term Oriental in a friends house in the US as it was so offensive (they audibly gasped when I did), and they were died in the wool stereotypical Republican family....after which we went shooting guns obvs.

    In the US, Asian is of course the term used to describe that demographic, and often "Indian" to describe all South Asians (which seems more than a tad offensive).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriental_Mart
  • Options
    DriverDriver Posts: 4,522

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    The idea that 'Oriental' is offensive in the USA is complete and utter bullshit.

    Point Google Maps at Seattle (for example) and type the O-word into the search field. Lo and behold we have Orient Express, Oriental Market, Oriental Grocery, Oriental Massage and dozens of others. Same in NYC. No doubt all run by racist rednecks with a deep hatred for people of East Asian origin.
    You make a good point -initially. These are historical artifacts for the most part. Exceptions proving the rule.

    Their existence does NOT make the O-word acceptable in ordinary polite OR professional discourse in US.
    All over the USA there are tens of thousands of independent businesses run by people with East Asian connections who cheerfully adopt the word 'oriental' as their self-identity. The idea that it is offensive comes from Europeans like you. Leon has fallen for your bullshit because he's basically a nice guy if a little credulous at times. How much evidence can you ignore before you admit you are wrong?
    True of most "offensive" things in the US. Exhibit 1: "Latinx".
  • Options
    BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,567
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    How about farang in Thailand.

    Versions of “farang” can be found all over the Middle East and Orient. It is a fascinating word because ultimately it comes from “Franks” - the French. Born in the Crusades, I think, when Frankish soldiers plundered the Levant

    Even weirder is Kaffir. Used offensively of blacks by white South Africans, but also used offensively of non believers by Muslims

    i find the language of racial slurs truly intriguing. Read an entire book on it once. Get me!
    It is strange how some names become considered offensive whilst others are not, particularly when they are only shortenings of the full name rather than something completely different. I was surprised to hear that 'Japs' is now considered an offensive word. I wonder at what point 'Brits' or 'Aussies' will be deemed offensive as terms?
    As @TimS rightly says, there are a few countries it is impossible to offend, with racial slurs. English, French, Americans

    Why? Because they are seen as triumphant nations, England has not been conquered for a thousand years, the world speaks English, America is the strongest nation on earth, France has immense soft power (and had a huge empire)

    If you insult them you are punching UP, and that is OK. With almost everyone else you are punching down

    i would add Germany and Russia to the list of uninsultable nations - because they are seen as powerful and dominant

    We should wear it as a badge of pride. Call us Poms, we don’t care, our language rules
    Could have sworn he said Britain rather than England.
    Quite difficult to argue that Scotland has not been conquered for a thousand years when your entire political identity is bound up with the concept that we, the conquering English, are colonising you right this minute

    But if you suddenly want to be British and share this noble history, be my guest
    C'mon. It's the Scotch who have been doing the conquering. Not the Engish.

    How else do you explain the Barnett Consequentials, and the swish of pound notes heading north over Hadrian's Wall?
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 12,278

    Give us another $10 million.....

    Prince Harry exclusive: ‘There’s enough for another book – I cut memoir in half to spare my family’

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/01/13/prince-harry-book-two-spare-revelations-royal-family/

    Golly, Bryony's a big lass an' a bonnie lass.
    I've always thought so.
  • Options
    solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,688
    Totally random but I just read in a BBC website story that Rishi Sunak is "the man who famously loves Coca-Cola".

    Is "famously" the right word here, or am I just not up-to-date on Sunak's beverages of choice?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,610
    Driver said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    The idea that 'Oriental' is offensive in the USA is complete and utter bullshit.

    Point Google Maps at Seattle (for example) and type the O-word into the search field. Lo and behold we have Orient Express, Oriental Market, Oriental Grocery, Oriental Massage and dozens of others. Same in NYC. No doubt all run by racist rednecks with a deep hatred for people of East Asian origin.
    You make a good point -initially. These are historical artifacts for the most part. Exceptions proving the rule.

    Their existence does NOT make the O-word acceptable in ordinary polite OR professional discourse in US.
    All over the USA there are tens of thousands of independent businesses run by people with East Asian connections who cheerfully adopt the word 'oriental' as their self-identity. The idea that it is offensive comes from Europeans like you. Leon has fallen for your bullshit because he's basically a nice guy if a little credulous at times. How much evidence can you ignore before you admit you are wrong?
    True of most "offensive" things in the US. Exhibit 1: "Latinx".
    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-tsuchiyama-oriental-insult-20160601-snap-story.html

    It is now politically incorrect to use the word “Oriental,” and the admonition has the force of law: President Obama recently signed a bill prohibiting use of the term in all federal documents. Rep. Grace Meng, the New York congresswoman who sponsored the legislation, exulted that “at long last this insulting and outdated term will be gone for good.”

    As an Oriental, I am bemused. Apparently Asians are supposed to feel demeaned if someone refers to us as Orientals. But good luck finding a single Asian American who has ever had the word spat at them in anger. Most Asian Americans have had racist epithets hurled at them at one time or another: Chink, slant eye, gook, Nip, zipperhead. But Oriental isn’t in the canon.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,574
    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    Interesting on Kraut though. Generally seen as mildly offensive despite Germany being a rich country (significantly richer than us). Likewise the Italian and Spanish versions. Unlike frog, yank and rosbif (or Pom or limey) all of which are fine.

    Reinforces my view that there are 3* unoffendable nations: those it is perfectly fine for anyone to joke about, actively dislike or
    indeed hate: Britain, France and the USA.

    *arguably 4 including Australia but that’s not a proper country.
    I would be offended at anyone calling me Bristish, big time.
    How do you feel about ‘jock’?
    Hello, OKC (and Malky!). Worth noting that Jock is diminutive for John - so it depends on the context.
    Evening Carnyx, hope all well with you, been dreich weather recently over this side.

    OKC hope you are getting back to rude health
    Yes, thanks - just been busy with other stuff. We're a bit drier over here though, thankfully, the reservoirs were full long ago. Hope you are well too, and thoroughly second your wishes re OKC.
    Thanks both. It’s going to be a long job. Currently I’ve got as far as walking round the bungalow using a Zimmer frame. Sadly the rehab includes a urinary catheter and I haven’t got clear of that yet.
  • Options
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    How about farang in Thailand.

    Versions of “farang” can be found all over the Middle East and Orient. It is a fascinating word because ultimately it comes from “Franks” - the French. Born in the Crusades, I think, when Frankish soldiers plundered the Levant

    Even weirder is Kaffir. Used offensively of blacks by white South Africans, but also used offensively of non believers by Muslims

    i find the language of racial slurs truly intriguing. Read an entire book on it once. Get me!
    It is strange how some names become considered offensive whilst others are not, particularly when they are only shortenings of the full name rather than something completely different. I was surprised to hear that 'Japs' is now considered an offensive word. I wonder at what point 'Brits' or 'Aussies' will be deemed offensive as terms?
    As @TimS rightly says, there are a few countries it is impossible to offend, with racial slurs. English, French, Americans

    Why? Because they are seen as triumphant nations, England has not been conquered for a thousand years, the world speaks English, America is the strongest nation on earth, France has immense soft power (and had a huge empire)

    If you insult them you are punching UP, and that is OK. With almost everyone else you are punching down

    i would add Germany and Russia to the list of uninsultable nations - because they are seen as powerful and dominant

    We should wear it as a badge of pride. Call us Poms, we don’t care, our language rules
    Could have sworn he said Britain rather than England.
    Quite difficult to argue that Scotland has not been conquered for a thousand years when your entire political identity is bound up with the concept that we, the conquering English, are colonising you right this minute

    But if you suddenly want to be British and share this noble history, be my guest
    No desire to share whatsoever, you can keep all the credit as the nation that chose Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak. I just like helping you guys out with your eternal confusion between England and Britain.

    With your new found somewhat befuddled national confidence, I look forward to never again having to hear some Anglo bleating about a 'racist' Glaswegian calling them an English c*nt.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,638
    My understanding is that American Indian is preferred to Native American, and that being identified by one’s people (ie Comanche, Sioux, Cherokee) is preferred to either. The same way we would expect to be called English, French, Dutch etc. rather than “Europeans”.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 12,278

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    Interesting on Kraut though. Generally seen as mildly offensive despite Germany being a rich country (significantly richer than us). Likewise the Italian and Spanish versions. Unlike frog, yank and rosbif (or Pom or limey) all of which are fine.

    Reinforces my view that there are 3* unoffendable nations: those it is perfectly fine for anyone to joke about, actively dislike or
    indeed hate: Britain, France and the USA.

    *arguably 4 including Australia but that’s not a proper country.
    In USA there are very few folks of German American heritage who take offense at the K-word.

    Am myself part of the unoffended on this score, use it myself.

    In much the same spirit my Irish side is totally unoffended by Mick or even Potato Head.

    Because number of German Americans and Irish Americans who perceive themselves as victims of discrimination in today's USA is approximately zilch.

    Think that the Italian Americans are on similar trajectory, maybe about a generation (whatever THAT is!) or so behind, because most of their forebearers arrived in US at least that much later.

    Addendum - Re: Italian Americans, note widespread apathy re: to renaming "Columbus Day" to "Native American Day" or suchlike.

    Half a century ago, backlash would have been strong. Now, not so much.
    The main German derogatory word for an Englishman/woman is Inselaffe, which literally means "island ape". I found it mildly amusing when I first came across it (in writing). When I mentioned it to my German wife though, she went bright red and told me not to use the word in public. Apparently, Germans consider the word offensive on our behalf!
    Ha ha - I quite like that! The campaign to reclaim it starts here. Ich bin ein Inselaffe!
  • Options
    BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,567
    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 26,658

    Penddu2 said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    I find 'Taffy' offensive. Because it is never used in a positive sense - almost always as a term of derision.
    How do you feel about poms, for the English?
    There is a very offensive 20 century English rhyme which does not suggest endearment;

    " Taffy was a Welshman Taffy was a thief,
    Taffy came to my house and stole a leg of beef"

    More offensive I think you will agree, than "Prisoner of His Majesty".
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,089

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    All of the best music came from the 70s and 80s. The good guys will therefore be dying.
  • Options

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    Interesting on Kraut though. Generally seen as mildly offensive despite Germany being a rich country (significantly richer than us). Likewise the Italian and Spanish versions. Unlike frog, yank and rosbif (or Pom or limey) all of which are fine.

    Reinforces my view that there are 3* unoffendable nations: those it is perfectly fine for anyone to joke about, actively dislike or
    indeed hate: Britain, France and the USA.

    *arguably 4 including Australia but that’s not a proper country.
    In USA there are very few folks of German American heritage who take offense at the K-word.

    Am myself part of the unoffended on this score, use it myself.

    In much the same spirit my Irish side is totally unoffended by Mick or even Potato Head.

    Because number of German Americans and Irish Americans who perceive themselves as victims of discrimination in today's USA is approximately zilch.

    Think that the Italian Americans are on similar trajectory, maybe about a generation (whatever THAT is!) or so behind, because most of their forebearers arrived in US at least that much later.

    Addendum - Re: Italian Americans, note widespread apathy re: to renaming "Columbus Day" to "Native American Day" or suchlike.

    Half a century ago, backlash would have been strong. Now, not so much.
    The main German derogatory word for an Englishman/woman is Inselaffe, which literally means "island ape". I found it mildly amusing when I first came across it (in writing). When I mentioned it to my German wife though, she went bright red and told me not to use the word in public. Apparently, Germans consider the word offensive on our behalf!
    Some chicken, some neck is one reply. Dachau camp guard is another. If I were German I'd be awfully sensitive on my own behalf, about comedy suggestions of racial inferiority.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 12,278

    Penddu2 said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    I find 'Taffy' offensive. Because it is never used in a positive sense - almost always as a term of derision.
    How do you feel about poms, for the English?
    Pom never bothered me, nor Limey. Mick I find offensive. Not sure about Taffy. It's rarely heard these days but I don't recall it being used derisively, and quite possibly the opposite when applied to some of the great post-war Welsh boxers.
    Taff can be used anywhere from derisorily to admiringly. Averages out at roughly neutral - like 'Tyke' for Yorkshireman or 'Manc' for Mancunian. If it is an insult, it's not a particularly good one ('Ha ha - the name of the river that runs through your capital city is called Taff - therefore I'm going to call you that' - feeble).
    'Mick', yes, rarely used positively, but again not much of an insult ('Ha ha - lots of people from your country are called 'Michael'). Both fall into the category of at worst very mild insults.
  • Options

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    So, fragile after all.

    I was making this point earlier today: lots of late 50s-60s minor rock blokes carking it all of a sudden.
  • Options
    Omnium said:

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    All of the best music came from the 70s and 80s. The good guys will therefore be dying.
    There was a good article on this in lockdown i think, when there wasn’t much news (or at least we all got bored of the end of the world stuff).

    Basically, the reason is just that there are a lot more famous people around who are approaching the age where they fall off their perches, as omnium says. As a proportion of all famous people there’s nothing unusual going on.

    On topic, great news Mike.
  • Options

    Totally random but I just read in a BBC website story that Rishi Sunak is "the man who famously loves Coca-Cola".

    Is "famously" the right word here, or am I just not up-to-date on Sunak's beverages of choice?

    He actually said he loves coke, but not in the same way as Johnson

  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 12,278

    Totally random but I just read in a BBC website story that Rishi Sunak is "the man who famously loves Coca-Cola".

    Is "famously" the right word here, or am I just not up-to-date on Sunak's beverages of choice?

    It also makes it sound as if Rishi is the only man who loves Coca Cola. It's hardly a quirk. I understand Coca-Cola is quite a popular drink.
    If he was 'the man who famously loves dandelion and burdock' or 'the man who famously loves tizer' it might be more noteworthy.
  • Options

    Driver said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    The idea that 'Oriental' is offensive in the USA is complete and utter bullshit.

    Point Google Maps at Seattle (for example) and type the O-word into the search field. Lo and behold we have Orient Express, Oriental Market, Oriental Grocery, Oriental Massage and dozens of others. Same in NYC. No doubt all run by racist rednecks with a deep hatred for people of East Asian origin.
    You make a good point -initially. These are historical artifacts for the most part. Exceptions proving the rule.

    Their existence does NOT make the O-word acceptable in ordinary polite OR professional discourse in US.
    All over the USA there are tens of thousands of independent businesses run by people with East Asian connections who cheerfully adopt the word 'oriental' as their self-identity. The idea that it is offensive comes from Europeans like you. Leon has fallen for your bullshit because he's basically a nice guy if a little credulous at times. How much evidence can you ignore before you admit you are wrong?
    True of most "offensive" things in the US. Exhibit 1: "Latinx".
    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-tsuchiyama-oriental-insult-20160601-snap-story.html

    It is now politically incorrect to use the word “Oriental,” and the admonition has the force of law: President Obama recently signed a bill prohibiting use of the term in all federal documents. Rep. Grace Meng, the New York congresswoman who sponsored the legislation, exulted that “at long last this insulting and outdated term will be gone for good.”

    As an Oriental, I am bemused. Apparently Asians are supposed to feel demeaned if someone refers to us as Orientals. But good luck finding a single Asian American who has ever had the word spat at them in anger. Most Asian Americans have had racist epithets hurled at them at one time or another: Chink, slant eye, gook, Nip, zipperhead. But Oriental isn’t in the canon.
    So which do you think was more representative of general Asian American opinion on the topic: the Congresswoman commenting on newly-enacted law; or newspaper columnist commenting on same?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,610

    Omnium said:

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    All of the best music came from the 70s and 80s. The good guys will therefore be dying.
    There was a good article on this in lockdown i think, when there wasn’t much news (or at least we all got bored of the end of the world stuff).

    Basically, the reason is just that there are a lot more famous people around who are approaching the age where they fall off their perches, as omnium says. As a proportion of all famous people there’s nothing unusual going on.

    On topic, great news Mike.
    As a corollary of Warhol's dictum, in the future everyone's death will be breaking news for 15 seconds.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,574

    Totally random but I just read in a BBC website story that Rishi Sunak is "the man who famously loves Coca-Cola".

    Is "famously" the right word here, or am I just not up-to-date on Sunak's beverages of choice?

    He actually said he loves coke, but not in the same way as Johnson

    So does Trump, which is quite alarming!
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 12,394

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    You ain’t seen nothing yet !
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 16,883
    It's happening. The Challenger 2's will be going to Ukraine.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/13/ukraine-confident-uk-will-send-challenger-2-tanks-to-help-war-effort

    Any interest in a meaningless, but friendly prediction competition?

    1. Date of first photo of Challenger 2 in Ukraine?
    2. Date of first substantiated Russian tank kill by a Challenger 2 in Ukraine?
    3. Date of first substantiated loss of a Challenger 2 in Ukraine?
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 50,693

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    How about farang in Thailand.

    Versions of “farang” can be found all over the Middle East and Orient. It is a fascinating word because ultimately it comes from “Franks” - the French. Born in the Crusades, I think, when Frankish soldiers plundered the Levant

    Even weirder is Kaffir. Used offensively of blacks by white South Africans, but also used offensively of non believers by Muslims

    i find the language of racial slurs truly intriguing. Read an entire book on it once. Get me!
    It is strange how some names become considered offensive whilst others are not, particularly when they are only shortenings of the full name rather than something completely different. I was surprised to hear that 'Japs' is now considered an offensive word. I wonder at what point 'Brits' or 'Aussies' will be deemed offensive as terms?
    As @TimS rightly says, there are a few countries it is impossible to offend, with racial slurs. English, French, Americans

    Why? Because they are seen as triumphant nations, England has not been conquered for a thousand years, the world speaks English, America is the strongest nation on earth, France has immense soft power (and had a huge empire)

    If you insult them you are punching UP, and that is OK. With almost everyone else you are punching down

    i would add Germany and Russia to the list of uninsultable nations - because they are seen as powerful and dominant

    We should wear it as a badge of pride. Call us Poms, we don’t care, our language rules
    Could have sworn he said Britain rather than England.
    Quite difficult to argue that Scotland has not been conquered for a thousand years when your entire political identity is bound up with the concept that we, the conquering English, are colonising you right this minute

    But if you suddenly want to be British and share this noble history, be my guest
    No desire to share whatsoever, you can keep all the credit as the nation that chose Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak. I just like helping you guys out with your eternal confusion between England and Britain.

    With your new found somewhat befuddled national confidence, I look forward to never again having to hear some Anglo bleating about a 'racist' Glaswegian calling them an English c*nt.
    Well, which is it? Are you one of the conquerors: the British, alongside the English? Or are you conquered and Scottish? It’s one of the other, as you keep telling us
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 16,883
    Cookie said:

    Totally random but I just read in a BBC website story that Rishi Sunak is "the man who famously loves Coca-Cola".

    Is "famously" the right word here, or am I just not up-to-date on Sunak's beverages of choice?

    It also makes it sound as if Rishi is the only man who loves Coca Cola. It's hardly a quirk. I understand Coca-Cola is quite a popular drink.
    If he was 'the man who famously loves dandelion and burdock' or 'the man who famously loves tizer' it might be more noteworthy.
    Or, "the man who famously drinks ginger beer from the navels of nubile young women," would garner a bit of attention.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,638

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    Interesting on Kraut though. Generally seen as mildly offensive despite Germany being a rich country (significantly richer than us). Likewise the Italian and Spanish versions. Unlike frog, yank and rosbif (or Pom or limey) all of which are fine.

    Reinforces my view that there are 3* unoffendable nations: those it is perfectly fine for anyone to joke about, actively dislike or
    indeed hate: Britain, France and the USA.

    *arguably 4 including Australia but that’s not a proper country.
    In USA there are very few folks of German American heritage who take offense at the K-word.

    Am myself part of the unoffended on this score, use it myself.

    In much the same spirit my Irish side is totally unoffended by Mick or even Potato Head.

    Because number of German Americans and Irish Americans who perceive themselves as victims of discrimination in today's USA is approximately zilch.

    Think that the Italian Americans are on similar trajectory, maybe about a generation (whatever THAT is!) or so behind, because most of their forebearers arrived in US at least that much later.

    Addendum - Re: Italian Americans, note widespread apathy re: to renaming "Columbus Day" to "Native American Day" or suchlike.

    Half a century ago, backlash would have been strong. Now, not so much.
    The main German derogatory word for an Englishman/woman is Inselaffe, which literally means "island ape". I found it mildly amusing when I first came across it (in writing). When I mentioned it to my German wife though, she went
    bright red and told me not to use the word in public. Apparently, Germans consider the word
    offensive on our behalf!
    Some chicken, some neck is one reply. Dachau
    camp guard is another. If I were German I'd be awfully sensitive on my own behalf, about comedy suggestions of racial inferiority.
    The best put-down I ever heard of was from a friend who was in a queue at Euston and witnessed this exchange.

    A Glaswegian woman was dealing with her fractious son, and finally hit him. The German behind her in the queue tapped her on the shoulder, and said “In Germany, we do not strike our children.”

    The response:

    “And in Glasgow, we don’t gas our Jews.”

    He ran away.
  • Options
    solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,688

    Cookie said:

    Totally random but I just read in a BBC website story that Rishi Sunak is "the man who famously loves Coca-Cola".

    Is "famously" the right word here, or am I just not up-to-date on Sunak's beverages of choice?

    It also makes it sound as if Rishi is the only man who loves Coca Cola. It's hardly a quirk. I understand Coca-Cola is quite a popular drink.
    If he was 'the man who famously loves dandelion and burdock' or 'the man who famously loves tizer' it might be more noteworthy.
    Or, "the man who famously drinks ginger beer from the navels of nubile young women," would garner a bit of attention.
    The only way to drink it, really.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,610

    Driver said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    The idea that 'Oriental' is offensive in the USA is complete and utter bullshit.

    Point Google Maps at Seattle (for example) and type the O-word into the search field. Lo and behold we have Orient Express, Oriental Market, Oriental Grocery, Oriental Massage and dozens of others. Same in NYC. No doubt all run by racist rednecks with a deep hatred for people of East Asian origin.
    You make a good point -initially. These are historical artifacts for the most part. Exceptions proving the rule.

    Their existence does NOT make the O-word acceptable in ordinary polite OR professional discourse in US.
    All over the USA there are tens of thousands of independent businesses run by people with East Asian connections who cheerfully adopt the word 'oriental' as their self-identity. The idea that it is offensive comes from Europeans like you. Leon has fallen for your bullshit because he's basically a nice guy if a little credulous at times. How much evidence can you ignore before you admit you are wrong?
    True of most "offensive" things in the US. Exhibit 1: "Latinx".
    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-tsuchiyama-oriental-insult-20160601-snap-story.html

    It is now politically incorrect to use the word “Oriental,” and the admonition has the force of law: President Obama recently signed a bill prohibiting use of the term in all federal documents. Rep. Grace Meng, the New York congresswoman who sponsored the legislation, exulted that “at long last this insulting and outdated term will be gone for good.”

    As an Oriental, I am bemused. Apparently Asians are supposed to feel demeaned if someone refers to us as Orientals. But good luck finding a single Asian American who has ever had the word spat at them in anger. Most Asian Americans have had racist epithets hurled at them at one time or another: Chink, slant eye, gook, Nip, zipperhead. But Oriental isn’t in the canon.
    So which do you think was more representative of general Asian American opinion on the topic: the Congresswoman commenting on newly-enacted law; or newspaper columnist commenting on same?
    She's not a columnist but a doctor of Oriental medicine. What do you think about the issue she raises?

    In my field, the word “Oriental” appears in the title of 17 of the 58 accredited graduate-level schools, 21 of the 33 state associations and eight of the 24 national associations. Though the new federal legislation does not require us to act, it has increased pressure to toe the politically correct line.

    Are we really going to waste time, energy and millions of dollars to rebrand our entire discipline — rename our schools and boards, redesign corporate identities, websites and publications and send out thousands of revised diplomas — all to wipe away an insult that doesn’t exist?
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 12,278

    Omnium said:

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    All of the best music came from the 70s and 80s. The good guys will therefore be dying.
    There was a good article on this in lockdown i think, when there wasn’t much news (or at least we all got bored of the end of the world stuff).

    Basically, the reason is just that there are a lot more famous people around who are approaching the age where they fall off their perches, as omnium says. As a proportion of all famous people there’s nothing unusual going on.

    On topic, great news Mike.
    And welcome Derek!
  • Options

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    How about farang in Thailand.

    Versions of “farang” can be found all over the Middle East and Orient. It is a fascinating word because ultimately it comes from “Franks” - the French. Born in the Crusades, I think, when Frankish soldiers plundered the Levant

    Even weirder is Kaffir. Used offensively of blacks by white South Africans, but also used offensively of non believers by Muslims

    i find the language of racial slurs truly intriguing. Read an entire book on it once. Get me!
    It is strange how some names become considered offensive whilst others are not, particularly when they are only shortenings of the full name rather than something completely different. I was surprised to hear that 'Japs' is now considered an offensive word. I wonder at what point 'Brits' or 'Aussies' will be deemed offensive as terms?
    As @TimS rightly says, there are a few countries it is impossible to offend, with racial slurs. English, French, Americans

    Why? Because they are seen as triumphant nations, England has not been conquered for a thousand years, the world speaks English, America is the strongest nation on earth, France has immense soft power (and had a huge empire)

    If you insult them you are punching UP, and that is OK. With almost everyone else you are punching down

    i would add Germany and Russia to the list of uninsultable nations - because they are seen as powerful and dominant

    We should wear it as a badge of pride. Call us Poms, we don’t care, our language rules
    Could have sworn he said Britain rather than England.
    Quite difficult to argue that Scotland has not been conquered for a thousand years when your entire political identity is bound up with the concept that we, the conquering English, are colonising you right this minute

    But if you suddenly want to be British and share this noble history, be my guest
    No desire to share whatsoever, you can keep all the credit as the nation that chose Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak. I just like helping you guys out with your eternal confusion between England and Britain.

    With your new found somewhat befuddled national confidence, I look forward to never again having to hear some Anglo bleating about a 'racist' Glaswegian calling them an English c*nt.
    And you, as the nation that chose England.

    Literary quiz:

    The author of the line, "Such a parcel of rogues in a nation" was what nationality?

    The rogues were what nationality?

    The nation was which one?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 46,031

    It's happening. The Challenger 2's will be going to Ukraine.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/13/ukraine-confident-uk-will-send-challenger-2-tanks-to-help-war-effort

    Any interest in a meaningless, but friendly prediction competition?

    1. Date of first photo of Challenger 2 in Ukraine?
    2. Date of first substantiated Russian tank kill by a Challenger 2 in Ukraine?
    3. Date of first substantiated loss of a Challenger 2 in Ukraine?

    The Russians have already claimed to have destroyed 4 Bradleys. Which haven’t been sent yet.

    So Ukraine has -4 Bradleys in total.
  • Options
    Cookie said:

    Taz said:

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    You ain’t seen nothing yet !
    In Central Manchester, there is a minor road in the Northern Quarter called Back Turner Street. Every time I see it I am sore tempted to graffito a 'man' and an 'overdrive' into the gaps.
    Presumably for those whose orientation did not lead them to Gropec**t Lane.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 50,693
    Cookie said:

    Omnium said:

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    All of the best music came from the 70s and 80s. The good guys will therefore be dying.
    There was a good article on this in lockdown i think, when there wasn’t much news (or at least we all got bored of the end of the world stuff).

    Basically, the reason is just that there are a lot more famous people around who are approaching the age where they fall off their perches, as omnium says. As a proportion of all famous people there’s nothing unusual going on.

    On topic, great news Mike.
    And welcome Derek!
    Thanks
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 12,394
    Cookie said:

    Taz said:

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    You ain’t seen nothing yet !
    In Central Manchester, there is a minor road in the Northern Quarter called Back Turner Street. Every time I see it I am sore tempted to graffito a 'man' and an 'overdrive' into the gaps.
    You’ve got the perfect reason to do it now.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 46,031
    Sean_F said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    Interesting on Kraut though. Generally seen as mildly offensive despite Germany being a rich country (significantly richer than us). Likewise the Italian and Spanish versions. Unlike frog, yank and rosbif (or Pom or limey) all of which are fine.

    Reinforces my view that there are 3* unoffendable nations: those it is perfectly fine for anyone to joke about, actively dislike or
    indeed hate: Britain, France and the USA.

    *arguably 4 including Australia but that’s not a proper country.
    In USA there are very few folks of German American heritage who take offense at the K-word.

    Am myself part of the unoffended on this score, use it myself.

    In much the same spirit my Irish side is totally unoffended by Mick or even Potato Head.

    Because number of German Americans and Irish Americans who perceive themselves as victims of discrimination in today's USA is approximately zilch.

    Think that the Italian Americans are on similar trajectory, maybe about a generation (whatever THAT is!) or so behind, because most of their forebearers arrived in US at least that much later.

    Addendum - Re: Italian Americans, note widespread apathy re: to renaming "Columbus Day" to "Native American Day" or suchlike.

    Half a century ago, backlash would have been strong. Now, not so much.
    The main German derogatory word for an Englishman/woman is Inselaffe, which literally means "island ape". I found it mildly amusing when I first came across it (in writing). When I mentioned it to my German wife though, she went
    bright red and told me not to use the word in public. Apparently, Germans consider the word
    offensive on our behalf!
    Some chicken, some neck is one reply. Dachau
    camp guard is another. If I were German I'd be awfully sensitive on my own behalf, about comedy suggestions of racial inferiority.
    The best put-down I ever heard of was from a friend who was in a queue at Euston and witnessed this exchange.

    A Glaswegian woman was dealing with her fractious son, and finally hit him. The German behind her in the queue tapped her on the shoulder, and said “In Germany, we do not strike our children.”

    The response:

    “And in Glasgow, we don’t gas our Jews.”

    He ran away.
    Back when Mitterrand was French President, a French couple got arrested in Edinburgh, and their child taken into care by social services because they smacked him in public.

    IIRC Mitterrand make some pretty hardcore threats and the couple and their child got sent back to France.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 12,278

    Cookie said:

    Totally random but I just read in a BBC website story that Rishi Sunak is "the man who famously loves Coca-Cola".

    Is "famously" the right word here, or am I just not up-to-date on Sunak's beverages of choice?

    It also makes it sound as if Rishi is the only man who loves Coca Cola. It's hardly a quirk. I understand Coca-Cola is quite a popular drink.
    If he was 'the man who famously loves dandelion and burdock' or 'the man who famously loves tizer' it might be more noteworthy.
    Or, "the man who famously drinks ginger beer from the navels of nubile young women," would garner a bit of attention.
    I wish this were true. It would be fun to have an otherwise fastidious, neat, small PM who unashamedly had this quirk and this quirk alone.
  • Options

    Driver said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    The idea that 'Oriental' is offensive in the USA is complete and utter bullshit.

    Point Google Maps at Seattle (for example) and type the O-word into the search field. Lo and behold we have Orient Express, Oriental Market, Oriental Grocery, Oriental Massage and dozens of others. Same in NYC. No doubt all run by racist rednecks with a deep hatred for people of East Asian origin.
    You make a good point -initially. These are historical artifacts for the most part. Exceptions proving the rule.

    Their existence does NOT make the O-word acceptable in ordinary polite OR professional discourse in US.
    All over the USA there are tens of thousands of independent businesses run by people with East Asian connections who cheerfully adopt the word 'oriental' as their self-identity. The idea that it is offensive comes from Europeans like you. Leon has fallen for your bullshit because he's basically a nice guy if a little credulous at times. How much evidence can you ignore before you admit you are wrong?
    True of most "offensive" things in the US. Exhibit 1: "Latinx".
    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-tsuchiyama-oriental-insult-20160601-snap-story.html

    It is now politically incorrect to use the word “Oriental,” and the admonition has the force of law: President Obama recently signed a bill prohibiting use of the term in all federal documents. Rep. Grace Meng, the New York congresswoman who sponsored the legislation, exulted that “at long last this insulting and outdated term will be gone for good.”

    As an Oriental, I am bemused. Apparently Asians are supposed to feel demeaned if someone refers to us as Orientals. But good luck finding a single Asian American who has ever had the word spat at them in anger. Most Asian Americans have had racist epithets hurled at them at one time or another: Chink, slant eye, gook, Nip, zipperhead. But Oriental isn’t in the canon.
    So which do you think was more representative of general Asian American opinion on the topic: the Congresswoman commenting on newly-enacted law; or newspaper columnist commenting on same?
    She's not a columnist but a doctor of Oriental medicine. What do you think about the issue she raises?

    In my field, the word “Oriental” appears in the title of 17 of the 58 accredited graduate-level schools, 21 of the 33 state associations and eight of the 24 national associations. Though the new federal legislation does not require us to act, it has increased pressure to toe the politically correct line.

    Are we really going to waste time, energy and millions of dollars to rebrand our entire discipline — rename our schools and boards, redesign corporate identities, websites and publications and send out thousands of revised diplomas — all to wipe away an insult that doesn’t exist?
    Not gonna answer YOUR question until you answer mine?

    You talk about the columnist (a person who wrote a published newspaper columnist) but ignore the Congresswoman. Who is an Asian American representing a congressional district with Asian American plurality.

    Unless you think she's out-of-step with her own constituency on this? If so, you'll need a bit more "evidence" than you've offered.
  • Options
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    How about farang in Thailand.

    Versions of “farang” can be found all over the Middle East and Orient. It is a fascinating word because ultimately it comes from “Franks” - the French. Born in the Crusades, I think, when Frankish soldiers plundered the Levant

    Even weirder is Kaffir. Used offensively of blacks by white South Africans, but also used offensively of non believers by Muslims

    i find the language of racial slurs truly intriguing. Read an entire book on it once. Get me!
    It is strange how some names become considered offensive whilst others are not, particularly when they are only shortenings of the full name rather than something completely different. I was surprised to hear that 'Japs' is now considered an offensive word. I wonder at what point 'Brits' or 'Aussies' will be deemed offensive as terms?
    As @TimS rightly says, there are a few countries it is impossible to offend, with racial slurs. English, French, Americans

    Why? Because they are seen as triumphant nations, England has not been conquered for a thousand years, the world speaks English, America is the strongest nation on earth, France has immense soft power (and had a huge empire)

    If you insult them you are punching UP, and that is OK. With almost everyone else you are punching down

    i would add Germany and Russia to the list of uninsultable nations - because they are seen as powerful and dominant

    We should wear it as a badge of pride. Call us Poms, we don’t care, our language rules
    Could have sworn he said Britain rather than England.
    Quite difficult to argue that Scotland has not been conquered for a thousand years when your entire political identity is bound up with the concept that we, the conquering English, are colonising you right this minute

    But if you suddenly want to be British and share this noble history, be my guest
    No desire to share whatsoever, you can keep all the credit as the nation that chose Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak. I just like helping you guys out with your eternal confusion between England and Britain.

    With your new found somewhat befuddled national confidence, I look forward to never again having to hear some Anglo bleating about a 'racist' Glaswegian calling them an English c*nt.
    Well, which is it? Are you one of the conquerors: the British, alongside the English? Or are you conquered and Scottish? It’s one of the other, as you keep telling us
    Is this one of your 'if I'm a racist so is Stuart, DECIDE!!!' dilemmas?

    That ended well.
  • Options

    Give us another $10 million.....

    Prince Harry exclusive: ‘There’s enough for another book – I cut memoir in half to spare my family’

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/01/13/prince-harry-book-two-spare-revelations-royal-family/

    Spare 2: This Time It's Even More Personal

    Spare 2: Frozen Todger

    ??

    I await my royalties.
    Followed by Spare with a Vengeance....
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,753
    On topic: the NHS continues to do quite a lot well, but will inevitably continue to deteriorate over time. Demands upon it will continue to grow and the people with the money to pay to keep healthcare going (largely the same people making most of those demands) feel that they shouldn't be asked to cough up the necessary funds.

    Certainly if the ambulance service continues to be as dire as it presently is then you'd think there would be an opening in the market for a private provider to step into the breach for those willing and able to fork out for the insurance, starting in London and gradually spreading out from there - a bit like how Hanoverian property owners used to pay subscriptions for a private fire service. That's how healthcare privatisation will roll: it'll end up being rather like dentistry provision already is now. The Government won't sell the NHS off; rather, better off people will increasingly opt out, as is already happening with much elective surgery; NHS consultants will spend more time seeing private patients and less dealing with NHS lists; NHS hospitals with good reputations will start opening private wards for wealthy queue-jumpers simply to raise more money; and state provision will eventually end up as a badly resourced safety net for poor people and those who are uninsurable due to existing complex conditions.

    In short, if people who can afford to pay more tax refuse to do so, they'll eventually end up paying for private health cover instead and the NHS will get hollowed out. It's not the Tories who will destroy the NHS. The Tories, collectively, never have aimed to do that (even if some of their more libertarian-minded fringe may have wanted to.) Heresy against the state religion would be far too unpopular at the ballot box. It's their tight-fisted voters who'll kill it in the end.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 12,278
    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Omnium said:

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    All of the best music came from the 70s and 80s. The good guys will therefore be dying.
    There was a good article on this in lockdown i think, when there wasn’t much news (or at least we all got bored of the end of the world stuff).

    Basically, the reason is just that there are a lot more famous people around who are approaching the age where they fall off their perches, as omnium says. As a proportion of all famous people there’s nothing unusual going on.

    On topic, great news Mike.
    And welcome Derek!
    Thanks
    It was just you? Oh.
    I was half thinking of waxing lyrical about what a good example of a first post this was to any Russian trolls who happen to be reading. Start out with something friendly and conversational and uncontroversial and, ideally, British.
    But clearly I would have been wasting my time.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    Interesting on Kraut though. Generally seen as mildly offensive despite Germany being a rich country (significantly richer than us). Likewise the Italian and Spanish versions. Unlike frog, yank and rosbif (or Pom or limey) all of which are fine.

    Reinforces my view that there are 3* unoffendable nations: those it is perfectly fine for anyone to joke about, actively dislike or
    indeed hate: Britain, France and the USA.

    *arguably 4 including Australia but that’s not a proper country.
    In USA there are very few folks of German American heritage who take offense at the K-word.

    Am myself part of the unoffended on this score, use it myself.

    In much the same spirit my Irish side is totally unoffended by Mick or even Potato Head.

    Because number of German Americans and Irish Americans who perceive themselves as victims of discrimination in today's USA is approximately zilch.

    Think that the Italian Americans are on similar trajectory, maybe about a generation (whatever THAT is!) or so behind, because most of their forebearers arrived in US at least that much later.

    Addendum - Re: Italian Americans, note widespread apathy re: to renaming "Columbus Day" to "Native American Day" or suchlike.

    Half a century ago, backlash would have been strong. Now, not so much.
    The main German derogatory word for an Englishman/woman is Inselaffe, which literally means "island ape". I found it mildly amusing when I first came across it (in writing). When I mentioned it to my German wife though, she went
    bright red and told me not to use the word in public. Apparently, Germans consider the word
    offensive on our behalf!
    Some chicken, some neck is one reply. Dachau
    camp guard is another. If I were German I'd be awfully sensitive on my own behalf, about comedy suggestions of racial inferiority.
    The best put-down I ever heard of was from a friend who was in a queue at Euston and witnessed this exchange.

    A Glaswegian woman was dealing with her fractious son, and finally hit him. The German behind her in the queue tapped her on the shoulder, and said “In Germany, we do not strike our children.”

    The response:

    “And in Glasgow, we don’t gas our Jews.”

    He ran away.
    Sounds like it definitely happened.
    You wouldn't think someone would bother making up such a crap story.
  • Options

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    How about farang in Thailand.

    Versions of “farang” can be found all over the Middle East and Orient. It is a fascinating word because ultimately it comes from “Franks” - the French. Born in the Crusades, I think, when Frankish soldiers plundered the Levant

    Even weirder is Kaffir. Used offensively of blacks by white South Africans, but also used offensively of non believers by Muslims

    i find the language of racial slurs truly intriguing. Read an entire book on it once. Get me!
    It is strange how some names become considered offensive whilst others are not, particularly when they are only shortenings of the full name rather than something completely different. I was surprised to hear that 'Japs' is now considered an offensive word. I wonder at what point 'Brits' or 'Aussies' will be deemed offensive as terms?
    As @TimS rightly says, there are a few countries it is impossible to offend, with racial slurs. English, French, Americans

    Why? Because they are seen as triumphant nations, England has not been conquered for a thousand years, the world speaks English, America is the strongest nation on earth, France has immense soft power (and had a huge empire)

    If you insult them you are punching UP, and that is OK. With almost everyone else you are punching down

    i would add Germany and Russia to the list of uninsultable nations - because they are seen as powerful and dominant

    We should wear it as a badge of pride. Call us Poms, we don’t care, our language rules
    Could have sworn he said Britain rather than England.
    Quite difficult to argue that Scotland has not been conquered for a thousand years when your entire political identity is bound up with the concept that we, the conquering English, are colonising you right this minute

    But if you suddenly want to be British and share this noble history, be my guest
    No desire to share whatsoever, you can keep all the credit as the nation that chose Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak. I just like helping you guys out with your eternal confusion between England and Britain.

    With your new found somewhat befuddled national confidence, I look forward to never again having to hear some Anglo bleating about a 'racist' Glaswegian calling them an English c*nt.
    And you, as the nation that chose England.

    Literary quiz:

    The author of the line, "Such a parcel of rogues in a nation" was what nationality?

    The rogues were what nationality?

    The nation was which one?
    Burns was famously torn about the Union, largely revolving around what you had to do to get on in them days (and avoid being arrested for sedition).
    The rogues he wrote of were certainly Scottish. Or Scotch if you prefer.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,106
    DougSeal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Oriental is used in the UK without giving offence.

    But I noticed that in the United States the word "handicapped" is still used whereas it's regarded as a bit out of date in the UK.

    When I visited my then girlfriend, now wife, in New Haven in the 90s I was shocked/delighted to find the state ran a “Connecticut Department of Mental Retardation”
    I believe several PB posters’s IPs originate from there.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 50,693
    Sean_F said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    Interesting on Kraut though. Generally seen as mildly offensive despite Germany being a rich country (significantly richer than us). Likewise the Italian and Spanish versions. Unlike frog, yank and rosbif (or Pom or limey) all of which are fine.

    Reinforces my view that there are 3* unoffendable nations: those it is perfectly fine for anyone to joke about, actively dislike or
    indeed hate: Britain, France and the USA.

    *arguably 4 including Australia but that’s not a proper country.
    In USA there are very few folks of German American heritage who take offense at the K-word.

    Am myself part of the unoffended on this score, use it myself.

    In much the same spirit my Irish side is totally unoffended by Mick or even Potato Head.

    Because number of German Americans and Irish Americans who perceive themselves as victims of discrimination in today's USA is approximately zilch.

    Think that the Italian Americans are on similar trajectory, maybe about a generation (whatever THAT is!) or so behind, because most of their forebearers arrived in US at least that much later.

    Addendum - Re: Italian Americans, note widespread apathy re: to renaming "Columbus Day" to "Native American Day" or suchlike.

    Half a century ago, backlash would have been strong. Now, not so much.
    The main German derogatory word for an Englishman/woman is Inselaffe, which literally means "island ape". I found it mildly amusing when I first came across it (in writing). When I mentioned it to my German wife though, she went
    bright red and told me not to use the word in public. Apparently, Germans consider the word
    offensive on our behalf!
    Some chicken, some neck is one reply. Dachau
    camp guard is another. If I were German I'd be awfully sensitive on my own behalf, about comedy suggestions of racial inferiority.
    The best put-down I ever heard of was from a friend who was in a queue at Euston and witnessed this exchange.

    A Glaswegian woman was dealing with her fractious son, and finally hit him. The German behind her in the queue tapped her on the shoulder, and said “In Germany, we do not strike our children.”

    The response:

    “And in Glasgow, we don’t gas our Jews.”

    He ran away.
    Brutal
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 50,693
    Sean_F said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    Interesting on Kraut though. Generally seen as mildly offensive despite Germany being a rich country (significantly richer than us). Likewise the Italian and Spanish versions. Unlike frog, yank and rosbif (or Pom or limey) all of which are fine.

    Reinforces my view that there are 3* unoffendable nations: those it is perfectly fine for anyone to joke about, actively dislike or
    indeed hate: Britain, France and the USA.

    *arguably 4 including Australia but that’s not a proper country.
    In USA there are very few folks of German American heritage who take offense at the K-word.

    Am myself part of the unoffended on this score, use it myself.

    In much the same spirit my Irish side is totally unoffended by Mick or even Potato Head.

    Because number of German Americans and Irish Americans who perceive themselves as victims of discrimination in today's USA is approximately zilch.

    Think that the Italian Americans are on similar trajectory, maybe about a generation (whatever THAT is!) or so behind, because most of their forebearers arrived in US at least that much later.

    Addendum - Re: Italian Americans, note widespread apathy re: to renaming "Columbus Day" to "Native American Day" or suchlike.

    Half a century ago, backlash would have been strong. Now, not so much.
    The main German derogatory word for an Englishman/woman is Inselaffe, which literally means "island ape". I found it mildly amusing when I first came across it (in writing). When I mentioned it to my German wife though, she went
    bright red and told me not to use the word in public. Apparently, Germans consider the word
    offensive on our behalf!
    Some chicken, some neck is one reply. Dachau
    camp guard is another. If I were German I'd be awfully sensitive on my own behalf, about comedy suggestions of racial inferiority.
    The best put-down I ever heard of was from a friend who was in a queue at Euston and witnessed this exchange.

    A Glaswegian woman was dealing with her fractious son, and finally hit him. The German behind her in the queue tapped her on the shoulder, and said “In Germany, we do not strike our children.”

    The response:

    “And in Glasgow, we don’t gas our Jews.”

    He ran away.
    Brutal
    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Omnium said:

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    All of the best music came from the 70s and 80s. The good guys will therefore be dying.
    There was a good article on this in lockdown i think, when there wasn’t much news (or at least we all got bored of the end of the world stuff).

    Basically, the reason is just that there are a lot more famous people around who are approaching the age where they fall off their perches, as omnium says. As a proportion of all famous people there’s nothing unusual going on.

    On topic, great news Mike.
    And welcome Derek!
    Thanks
    It was just you? Oh.
    I was half thinking of waxing lyrical about what a good example of a first post this was to any Russian trolls who happen to be reading. Start out with something friendly and conversational and uncontroversial and, ideally, British.
    But clearly I would have been wasting my time.
    Not I
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 11,062

    kjh said:

    @MikeSmithson Good luck.

    If you don't mind me asking are you willing to say what is wrong with you. Just wondering if it is the same issue my wife is suffering from.

    Spinal sinosis
    Thanks @MikeSmithson . Same as my wife. Good news re op. My wife had to find out herself by paying for an MRI but once she got it they took it seriously. One injection so far that failed. Next appointment in Jan. Hope they react as quickly as yours. Very best of luck. Will be thinking of you and hope to hear a positive result.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 12,278
    pigeon said:

    On topic: the NHS continues to do quite a lot well, but will inevitably continue to deteriorate over time. Demands upon it will continue to grow and the people with the money to pay to keep healthcare going (largely the same people making most of those demands) feel that they shouldn't be asked to cough up the necessary funds.

    Certainly if the ambulance service continues to be as dire as it presently is then you'd think there would be an opening in the market for a private provider to step into the breach for those willing and able to fork out for the insurance, starting in London and gradually spreading out from there - a bit like how Hanoverian property owners used to pay subscriptions for a private fire service. That's how healthcare privatisation will roll: it'll end up being rather like dentistry provision already is now. The Government won't sell the NHS off; rather, better off people will increasingly opt out, as is already happening with much elective surgery; NHS consultants will spend more time seeing private patients and less dealing with NHS lists; NHS hospitals with good reputations will start opening private wards for wealthy queue-jumpers simply to raise more money; and state provision will eventually end up as a badly resourced safety net for poor people and those who are uninsurable due to existing complex conditions.

    In short, if people who can afford to pay more tax refuse to do so, they'll eventually end up paying for private health cover instead and the NHS will get hollowed out. It's not the Tories who will destroy the NHS. The Tories, collectively, never have aimed to do that (even if some of their more libertarian-minded fringe may have wanted to.) Heresy against the state religion would be far too unpopular at the ballot box. It's their tight-fisted voters who'll kill it in the end.

    But I don't think unwillingness to fund the NHS is the problem. My understanding is that NHS spending has increased in real terms over the past 12 years. The NHS isn't in the state it is 'cos of voters votinh in parties whuch are starving it of funds.
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,450
    Just catching up. Hope all goes well @MikeSmithson! Is the NHS really on its knees or are the media trying to cause trouble in order to justify their existence?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,610

    Driver said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    The idea that 'Oriental' is offensive in the USA is complete and utter bullshit.

    Point Google Maps at Seattle (for example) and type the O-word into the search field. Lo and behold we have Orient Express, Oriental Market, Oriental Grocery, Oriental Massage and dozens of others. Same in NYC. No doubt all run by racist rednecks with a deep hatred for people of East Asian origin.
    You make a good point -initially. These are historical artifacts for the most part. Exceptions proving the rule.

    Their existence does NOT make the O-word acceptable in ordinary polite OR professional discourse in US.
    All over the USA there are tens of thousands of independent businesses run by people with East Asian connections who cheerfully adopt the word 'oriental' as their self-identity. The idea that it is offensive comes from Europeans like you. Leon has fallen for your bullshit because he's basically a nice guy if a little credulous at times. How much evidence can you ignore before you admit you are wrong?
    True of most "offensive" things in the US. Exhibit 1: "Latinx".
    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-tsuchiyama-oriental-insult-20160601-snap-story.html

    It is now politically incorrect to use the word “Oriental,” and the admonition has the force of law: President Obama recently signed a bill prohibiting use of the term in all federal documents. Rep. Grace Meng, the New York congresswoman who sponsored the legislation, exulted that “at long last this insulting and outdated term will be gone for good.”

    As an Oriental, I am bemused. Apparently Asians are supposed to feel demeaned if someone refers to us as Orientals. But good luck finding a single Asian American who has ever had the word spat at them in anger. Most Asian Americans have had racist epithets hurled at them at one time or another: Chink, slant eye, gook, Nip, zipperhead. But Oriental isn’t in the canon.
    So which do you think was more representative of general Asian American opinion on the topic: the Congresswoman commenting on newly-enacted law; or newspaper columnist commenting on same?
    She's not a columnist but a doctor of Oriental medicine. What do you think about the issue she raises?

    In my field, the word “Oriental” appears in the title of 17 of the 58 accredited graduate-level schools, 21 of the 33 state associations and eight of the 24 national associations. Though the new federal legislation does not require us to act, it has increased pressure to toe the politically correct line.

    Are we really going to waste time, energy and millions of dollars to rebrand our entire discipline — rename our schools and boards, redesign corporate identities, websites and publications and send out thousands of revised diplomas — all to wipe away an insult that doesn’t exist?
    Not gonna answer YOUR question until you answer mine?

    You talk about the columnist (a person who wrote a published newspaper columnist) but ignore the Congresswoman. Who is an Asian American representing a congressional district with Asian American plurality.

    Unless you think she's out-of-step with her own constituency on this? If so, you'll need a bit more "evidence" than you've offered.
    I don't think you can take New Yorkers of any ethnicity as representative of Americans as a whole.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,109

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    The salutary reminder generally arises when you read their age.
  • Options

    Just catching up. Hope all goes well @MikeSmithson! Is the NHS really on its knees or are the media trying to cause trouble in order to justify their existence?

    Not hard to tell. Have a heart attack, call an ambulance. Let us know how you get on.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 12,278

    Just catching up. Hope all goes well @MikeSmithson! Is the NHS really on its knees or are the media trying to cause trouble in order to justify their existence?

    Not hard to tell. Have a heart attack, call an ambulance. Let us know how you get on.
    The NHS still does many things very well.
    A friend of mine recently found lumps in her breasts. She's 47, her sister died a few years ago during treatment for cancer. She phoned to see a doctor in the morning; all the right tests were done the same day. The NHS is at its best when it has an issue like cancer: it knows exactly what needs to be done, and is pretty good at doing it.
    Happily it turned out the lumps were benign.
  • Options
    Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,631
    Mike - I am glad to hear that you have the operation scheduled, that the premliminaries went well -- almost always a good sign, and I hope, of course, that all goes well during the operation, and the recovery.
  • Options
    Cookie said:

    Just catching up. Hope all goes well @MikeSmithson! Is the NHS really on its knees or are the media trying to cause trouble in order to justify their existence?

    Not hard to tell. Have a heart attack, call an ambulance. Let us know how you get on.
    The NHS still does many things very well.
    A friend of mine recently found lumps in her breasts. She's 47, her sister died a few years ago during treatment for cancer. She phoned to see a doctor in the morning; all the right tests were done the same day. The NHS is at its best when it has an issue like cancer: it knows exactly what needs to be done, and is pretty good at doing it.
    Happily it turned out the lumps were benign.
    Never mind the anecdotes, feel the data

    https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/cancer-waiting-time-targets

    Scroll down to the first graph.

    This is very seriously ungood.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 11,062
    @Leon I notice when you lose an argument you stop engaging on the facts and resort to childish insults. I notice you have done this with @IanB2 and @kinabalu in the past. Having read the last few posts on the last thread I note you have now done this with me and have avoided the point that you were proved wrong and resorted to childish behaviour. That is not a good look.

    I'm not letting you off that lightly. So I ask again when Trump says the F35 can not be seen when it is right next to you what is your interpretation of that then? Seems pretty straight forward to everyone else except you. If it is right next to you radar stealth does not come into play does it. I mean it is right in front of your eyes, yet he thinks you can't see it.

    May I suggest you didn't view those videos properly and have just made an arse of yourself and are now too embarrassed to man up so instead you make childish insults to avoid the issue. The ones you made about kinabulu's sexuality for instance were very unpleasant.

    When you do this you embarrass yourself.
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,753
    Cookie said:

    pigeon said:

    On topic: the NHS continues to do quite a lot well, but will inevitably continue to deteriorate over time. Demands upon it will continue to grow and the people with the money to pay to keep healthcare going (largely the same people making most of those demands) feel that they shouldn't be asked to cough up the necessary funds.

    Certainly if the ambulance service continues to be as dire as it presently is then you'd think there would be an opening in the market for a private provider to step into the breach for those willing and able to fork out for the insurance, starting in London and gradually spreading out from there - a bit like how Hanoverian property owners used to pay subscriptions for a private fire service. That's how healthcare privatisation will roll: it'll end up being rather like dentistry provision already is now. The Government won't sell the NHS off; rather, better off people will increasingly opt out, as is already happening with much elective surgery; NHS consultants will spend more time seeing private patients and less dealing with NHS lists; NHS hospitals with good reputations will start opening private wards for wealthy queue-jumpers simply to raise more money; and state provision will eventually end up as a badly resourced safety net for poor people and those who are uninsurable due to existing complex conditions.

    In short, if people who can afford to pay more tax refuse to do so, they'll eventually end up paying for private health cover instead and the NHS will get hollowed out. It's not the Tories who will destroy the NHS. The Tories, collectively, never have aimed to do that (even if some of their more libertarian-minded fringe may have wanted to.) Heresy against the state religion would be far too unpopular at the ballot box. It's their tight-fisted voters who'll kill it in the end.

    But I don't think unwillingness to fund the NHS is the problem. My understanding is that NHS spending has increased in real terms over the past 12 years. The NHS isn't in the state it is 'cos of voters voting in parties which are starving it of funds.
    And yet it's clapped out, isn't it? Admittedly, some of this issue isn't to do with unwillingness to cough up for the NHS - it's also due to unwillingness to cough up for elderly care - but the general point stands. Growing demand for services is outstripping their resources, because the great mass of people who are always milked for more taxes to pay for everything - low and middle income earners - have nothing more to give, and the great mass of people who simultaneously make the most demands of the state and are least willing to fund it - largely better off pensioners with expensive houses (along with their heirs) - constitute a huge, powerful and very noisy voter bloc that politicians are too afraid to take on. And so, the healthcare system continues to circle the plughole, along with just about everything else in this country.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 65,301
    Cookie said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    FPT - The idea that "oriental" is offensive IS an American thing. Most definitely.

    And, no, you can NOT talk about "Oriental cuisine" in USA without a) giving serious offense to Asian people in your audience; and/or b) turning off most of the rest for being needlessly clueless (to US reality) and offensive (ditto).

    Believe widespread antipathy to the O-word among Asian Americans, esp. those of Chinese and Japanese heritage, stems from US history of racial/ethnic discrimination, which in part featured heavy usage of "oriental" in US legal terminology.

    As to discrimination, one of the most egregious I've ever heard of, was case of the veteran of the Union Army, a Chinese orphan rescued at sea and adopted by a New England ship, who'd fought at the Battle of Gettysburg among others.

    After the war he went West, to Nebraska as a homesteader. He was a respected member of the community, honored for his service.

    Until the day he went to vote (as he'd done in several previous elections) but was challenged - on the grounds that as a Chinese, he was ineligible to be a citizen under federal law, the Chinese Exclusion Act. He never voted again.

    BTW (and FYI) the first Asian American governor of any US state outside Hawaii, Gary Locke of Washington, was the grandson of a Chinese "houseboy" at the Governor's mansion in Olympia. Who under the terms of the Exclusion Act could NOT bring his wife into the USA with him. So every few years he'd return to China to visit his family. Which is why Gary's dad was also born in China. During WW2 he served in US Army, and after the war that - plus changes in US law - finally enabled him to bring HIS family to Seattle.

    Reckon that Asian American adverse reaction to "oriental" is NOT as illogical as it may appear from a continent away.

    SOAS must have difficulties if it’s looking for American students then.
    @SeaShantyIrish2 is right tho. “Oriental” is as offensive in America as, say, Paki is in the UK. Just one notch down from the N word

    And on the same note, I’ve had a couple of Americans say Paki thinking it is a mildly comic term, like Kraut or Taffy
    Interesting on Kraut though. Generally seen as mildly offensive despite Germany being a rich country (significantly richer than us). Likewise the Italian and Spanish versions. Unlike frog, yank and rosbif (or Pom or limey) all of which are fine.

    Reinforces my view that there are 3* unoffendable nations: those it is perfectly fine for anyone to joke about, actively dislike or
    indeed hate: Britain, France and the USA.

    *arguably 4 including Australia but that’s not a proper country.
    In USA there are very few folks of German American heritage who take offense at the K-word.

    Am myself part of the unoffended on this score, use it myself.

    In much the same spirit my Irish side is totally unoffended by Mick or even Potato Head.

    Because number of German Americans and Irish Americans who perceive themselves as victims of discrimination in today's USA is approximately zilch.

    Think that the Italian Americans are on similar trajectory, maybe about a generation (whatever THAT is!) or so behind, because most of their forebearers arrived in US at least that much later.

    Addendum - Re: Italian Americans, note widespread apathy re: to renaming "Columbus Day" to "Native American Day" or suchlike.

    Half a century ago, backlash would have been strong. Now, not so much.
    The main German derogatory word for an Englishman/woman is Inselaffe, which literally means "island ape". I found it mildly amusing when I first came across it (in writing). When I mentioned it to my German wife though, she went bright red and told me not to use the word in public. Apparently, Germans consider the word offensive on our behalf!
    Ha ha - I quite like that! The campaign to reclaim it starts here. Ich bin ein Inselaffe!
    Beats Incelaffe, I guess.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 13,246
    pigeon said:

    On topic: the NHS continues to do quite a lot well, but will inevitably continue to deteriorate over time. Demands upon it will continue to grow and the people with the money to pay to keep healthcare going (largely the same people making most of those demands) feel that they shouldn't be asked to cough up the necessary funds.

    Certainly if the ambulance service continues to be as dire as it presently is then you'd think there would be an opening in the market for a private provider to step into the breach for those willing and able to fork out for the insurance, starting in London and gradually spreading out from there - a bit like how Hanoverian property owners used to pay subscriptions for a private fire service. That's how healthcare privatisation will roll: it'll end up being rather like dentistry provision already is now. The Government won't sell the NHS off; rather, better off people will increasingly opt out, as is already happening with much elective surgery; NHS consultants will spend more time seeing private patients and less dealing with NHS lists; NHS hospitals with good reputations will start opening private wards for wealthy queue-jumpers simply to raise more money; and state provision will eventually end up as a badly resourced safety net for poor people and those who are uninsurable due to existing complex conditions.

    In short, if people who can afford to pay more tax refuse to do so, they'll eventually end up paying for private health cover instead and the NHS will get hollowed out. It's not the Tories who will destroy the NHS. The Tories, collectively, never have aimed to do that (even if some of their more libertarian-minded fringe may have wanted to.) Heresy against the state religion would be far too unpopular at the ballot box. It's their tight-fisted voters who'll kill it in the end.

    That's a brutal analysis and you could in theory apply the same to policing. Wealthier areas can pay for security - poorer areas have to make do with whatever law enforcement facilities are left.

    Arguing Conservative voters (who, based on their demographic, would be the ones most likely to need a functioning and reliable health service) is a particularly ironic comment.

    The issues of the NHS don't sit in isolation - they are a reflection of wider societal and cultural issues around how families and older people relate (no pun intended). The biggest problem is how those (especially elderly) people who ought to be out of hospital can be provided with the home care they need to free up hospital bed space for those in genuine need. We need to overhaul domiciliary care and give it the priority it needs.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 12,278

    Cookie said:

    Just catching up. Hope all goes well @MikeSmithson! Is the NHS really on its knees or are the media trying to cause trouble in order to justify their existence?

    Not hard to tell. Have a heart attack, call an ambulance. Let us know how you get on.
    The NHS still does many things very well.
    A friend of mine recently found lumps in her breasts. She's 47, her sister died a few years ago during treatment for cancer. She phoned to see a doctor in the morning; all the right tests were done the same day. The NHS is at its best when it has an issue like cancer: it knows exactly what needs to be done, and is pretty good at doing it.
    Happily it turned out the lumps were benign.
    Never mind the anecdotes, feel the data

    https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/cancer-waiting-time-targets

    Scroll down to the first graph.

    This is very seriously ungood.
    Oh yes, the NHS is in a bad way. My points are only that it's not entirely useless, and that it's due down to lack of funds.
  • Options
    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Just catching up. Hope all goes well @MikeSmithson! Is the NHS really on its knees or are the media trying to cause trouble in order to justify their existence?

    Not hard to tell. Have a heart attack, call an ambulance. Let us know how you get on.
    The NHS still does many things very well.
    A friend of mine recently found lumps in her breasts. She's 47, her sister died a few years ago during treatment for cancer. She phoned to see a doctor in the morning; all the right tests were done the same day. The NHS is at its best when it has an issue like cancer: it knows exactly what needs to be done, and is pretty good at doing it.
    Happily it turned out the lumps were benign.
    Never mind the anecdotes, feel the data

    https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/cancer-waiting-time-targets

    Scroll down to the first graph.

    This is very seriously ungood.
    Oh yes, the NHS is in a bad way. My points are only that it's not entirely useless, and that it's due down to lack of funds.
    But you say: " The NHS is at its best when it has an issue like cancer: it knows exactly what needs to be done, and is pretty good at doing it." Well, it's a bloody health service. It's hard to see that as a point in its favour as opposed to an entry-level qualification. And knowing what needs to be done and doing it are not enough: you need to do it immediately, because you wouldn't believe how short the timescale can be, stage 1 to stage 4.
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,367
    IanB2 said:

    Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of famous, semi-famous and not-at-all famous rock musicians falling off their perches recently? Perhaps it's that time of year.

    Latest one here: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/jan/13/bachman-turner-overdrive-drummer-robbie-bachman-dies-aged-69

    Always a salutary reminder seeing the haircuts of yesteryear.

    The salutary reminder generally arises when you read their age.
    I'm in there. We don't ask for whom the bell tolls…

  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,714
    edited January 2023
    stodge said:

    pigeon said:

    On topic: the NHS continues to do quite a lot well, but will inevitably continue to deteriorate over time. Demands upon it will continue to grow and the people with the money to pay to keep healthcare going (largely the same people making most of those demands) feel that they shouldn't be asked to cough up the necessary funds.

    Certainly if the ambulance service continues to be as dire as it presently is then you'd think there would be an opening in the market for a private provider to step into the breach for those willing and able to fork out for the insurance, starting in London and gradually spreading out from there - a bit like how Hanoverian property owners used to pay subscriptions for a private fire service. That's how healthcare privatisation will roll: it'll end up being rather like dentistry provision already is now. The Government won't sell the NHS off; rather, better off people will increasingly opt out, as is already happening with much elective surgery; NHS consultants will spend more time seeing private patients and less dealing with NHS lists; NHS hospitals with good reputations will start opening private wards for wealthy queue-jumpers simply to raise more money; and state provision will eventually end up as a badly resourced safety net for poor people and those who are uninsurable due to existing complex conditions.

    In short, if people who can afford to pay more tax refuse to do so, they'll eventually end up paying for private health cover instead and the NHS will get hollowed out. It's not the Tories who will destroy the NHS. The Tories, collectively, never have aimed to do that (even if some of their more libertarian-minded fringe may have wanted to.) Heresy against the state religion would be far too unpopular at the ballot box. It's their tight-fisted voters who'll kill it in the end.

    That's a brutal analysis and you could in theory apply the same to policing. Wealthier areas can pay for security - poorer areas have to make do with whatever law enforcement facilities are left.

    Arguing Conservative voters (who, based on their demographic, would be the ones most likely to need a functioning and reliable health service) is a particularly ironic comment.

    The issues of the NHS don't sit in isolation - they are a reflection of wider societal and cultural issues around how families and older people relate (no pun intended). The biggest problem is how those (especially elderly) people who ought to be out of hospital can be provided with the home care they need to free up hospital bed space for those in genuine need. We need to overhaul domiciliary care and give it the priority it needs.
    Although it is probably unrealistic these days it would also help if we could persuade more people that they bear a responsibility for the care of their elderly relatives rather than palming them off on the state or private companies. Obviously there are many elderly who have no family and many more who, because of medical conditions and particularly dementia, cannot be cared for by families. But there are also plenty who are simply dumped on the state or into private care homes.

    My sister and I already have plans for looking after our mother, both for trying to help her stay independent and in her own home for as long as possible (my father built it for them so she wants to stay there to the end of her days) and also for taking her into our homes once she can no longer look after herself.

    I don't think we place enough emphasis on how much damage societal change and the fragmentation of families has done to our health and care system.
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,753
    stodge said:

    pigeon said:

    On topic: the NHS continues to do quite a lot well, but will inevitably continue to deteriorate over time. Demands upon it will continue to grow and the people with the money to pay to keep healthcare going (largely the same people making most of those demands) feel that they shouldn't be asked to cough up the necessary funds.

    Certainly if the ambulance service continues to be as dire as it presently is then you'd think there would be an opening in the market for a private provider to step into the breach for those willing and able to fork out for the insurance, starting in London and gradually spreading out from there - a bit like how Hanoverian property owners used to pay subscriptions for a private fire service. That's how healthcare privatisation will roll: it'll end up being rather like dentistry provision already is now. The Government won't sell the NHS off; rather, better off people will increasingly opt out, as is already happening with much elective surgery; NHS consultants will spend more time seeing private patients and less dealing with NHS lists; NHS hospitals with good reputations will start opening private wards for wealthy queue-jumpers simply to raise more money; and state provision will eventually end up as a badly resourced safety net for poor people and those who are uninsurable due to existing complex conditions.

    In short, if people who can afford to pay more tax refuse to do so, they'll eventually end up paying for private health cover instead and the NHS will get hollowed out. It's not the Tories who will destroy the NHS. The Tories, collectively, never have aimed to do that (even if some of their more libertarian-minded fringe may have wanted to.) Heresy against the state religion would be far too unpopular at the ballot box. It's their tight-fisted voters who'll kill it in the end.

    That's a brutal analysis and you could in theory apply the same to policing. Wealthier areas can pay for security - poorer areas have to make do with whatever law enforcement facilities are left.

    Arguing Conservative voters (who, based on their demographic, would be the ones most likely to need a functioning and reliable health service) is a particularly ironic comment.

    The issues of the NHS don't sit in isolation - they are a reflection of wider societal and cultural issues around how families and older people relate (no pun intended). The biggest problem is how those (especially elderly) people who ought to be out of hospital can be provided with the home care they need to free up hospital bed space for those in genuine need. We need to overhaul domiciliary care and give it the priority it needs.
    We're not going to find money for better elderly care without extracting the cash from the better-off elderly. Who else has it? Earned incomes are collapsing, so the money will have to come from assets, and the main store of asset wealth in the UK is property. Theresa May worked this out years ago, and much good it did her - because the ducks and their families will fucking strop if you tell them, for arguments' sake, that they have to part with a quarter of the value of their estates (in land value and/or inheritance taxes) to collectively fund a functional health and care system that will keep them as well and living independently for as long as possible, and look after them efficiently and kindly if they become too doddery to take care of themselves.

    Again, the people who have the means to pay for shit don't want to. And so they won't, until the decision is forced upon them - i.e. when the state is wholly incapable of doing the job and they have to pay to go private.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 119,077
    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html
  • Options
    Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,631
    edited January 2023
    Three tidbits on possibly offensive names:

    In Seattle, where SSI2 lives, there is a neighborhood officially called the "Chinatown-International District".
    https://www.seattlechinatownid.com/

    (I think the mix is because businesses wanted to keep the first part, a traditional name, for commercial reasons, and the second part came when the city was trying to be more inclusive and, these days, more accurate.)

    Second, when I was living in Illinois in 1964, I was surprised by the two team names in a high school basketball championship game: A team from a small town in down state was called the "Cobden Appleknockers". And a team from a medium-sized city, Pekin, had a name that I am nearly certain has been changed by now: Since Pekin is so close to the old name we used then for Beijing, they called themselves the "Chinks".

    Third, Jimmy Breslin's "The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight" has almost every word now excluded from polite company, because, I suppose that's the way the actual Mafia talked, back then.

    (Two unrelated delails about the Breslin book: It has a fair amount of political content, although it is mostly about a young gangster ineptly trying to take out an older boss. It is modeled on actual events, and, though the book and the movie portray the young gangster as both brutal and inept, he was rather pleased with the attention.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gang_That_Couldn't_Shoot_Straight )

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,638
    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 119,077
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,556
    edited January 2023

    stodge said:

    pigeon said:

    On topic: the NHS continues to do quite a lot well, but will inevitably continue to deteriorate over time. Demands upon it will continue to grow and the people with the money to pay to keep healthcare going (largely the same people making most of those demands) feel that they shouldn't be asked to cough up the necessary funds.

    Certainly if the ambulance service continues to be as dire as it presently is then you'd think there would be an opening in the market for a private provider to step into the breach for those willing and able to fork out for the insurance, starting in London and gradually spreading out from there - a bit like how Hanoverian property owners used to pay subscriptions for a private fire service. That's how healthcare privatisation will roll: it'll end up being rather like dentistry provision already is now. The Government won't sell the NHS off; rather, better off people will increasingly opt out, as is already happening with much elective surgery; NHS consultants will spend more time seeing private patients and less dealing with NHS lists; NHS hospitals with good reputations will start opening private wards for wealthy queue-jumpers simply to raise more money; and state provision will eventually end up as a badly resourced safety net for poor people and those who are uninsurable due to existing complex conditions.

    In short, if people who can afford to pay more tax refuse to do so, they'll eventually end up paying for private health cover instead and the NHS will get hollowed out. It's not the Tories who will destroy the NHS. The Tories, collectively, never have aimed to do that (even if some of their more libertarian-minded fringe may have wanted to.) Heresy against the state religion would be far too unpopular at the ballot box. It's their tight-fisted voters who'll kill it in the end.

    That's a brutal analysis and you could in theory apply the same to policing. Wealthier areas can pay for security - poorer areas have to make do with whatever law enforcement facilities are left.

    Arguing Conservative voters (who, based on their demographic, would be the ones most likely to need a functioning and reliable health service) is a particularly ironic comment.

    The issues of the NHS don't sit in isolation - they are a reflection of wider societal and cultural issues around how families and older people relate (no pun intended). The biggest problem is how those (especially elderly) people who ought to be out of hospital can be provided with the home care they need to free up hospital bed space for those in genuine need. We need to overhaul domiciliary care and give it the priority it needs.
    Although it is probably unrealistic these days it would also help if we could persuade more people that they bear a responsibility for the care of their elderly relatives rather than palming them off on the state or private companies. Obviously there are many elderly who have no family and many more who, because of medical conditions and particularly dementia, cannot be cared for by families. But there are also plenty who are simply dumped on the state or into private care homes.

    My sister and I already have plans for looking after our mother, both for trying to help her stay independent and in her own home for as long as possible (my father built it for them so she wants to stay there to the end of her days) and also for taking her into our homes once she can no longer look after herself.

    I don't think we place enough emphasis on how much damage societal change and the fragmentation of families has done to our health and care system.
    Hmm. I'm reminded of one then contemporary observation on Norman Tebbit's insouciant insistence on getting on your bike as a response to the huge changes to manufacturing industry in the Thatcher administration. It struck me at the time as being rather penetrating: it was that people were being asked to break up their familial (and friendship) support structures - both ways, too, up and down the generations - to suit the convenience of a government [edit] which was in thrall to its capitalist backers.*

    Obviously that could't be applied to coal mining - but the NCB had moved miners wholesale to the new pits, at least from the West to the East of Scotland.

    *The deletions which Keith Joseph made to his edition of Wealth of Nations were *very* revealing, I thought at the time.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,556
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    So? You can't be a royalist and pick and choose. Make up your mind. Either go republican or shut up.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 119,077
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    So? You can't be a royalist and pick and choose. Make up your mind. Either go republican or shut up.
    Harry and Meghan can remain in the line of succession but their decision to abandon their royal duties and trash the rest of the royal family so they should therefore formally be stripped of their HRHs
  • Options
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    So? You can't be a royalist and pick and choose. Make up your mind. Either go republican or shut up.
    Erm that is rubbish. That is like saying you can't be a fan of Parliamentary democracy and pick and choose between parties or politicians. You can support the institution and dislike some of of the individuals within it.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    Your creepy god cult was not actually founded on the concept of popularity at all costs. Do you realise how the likes of Jesus son of Joseph, John the Baptist and saints Peter and Paul met their end?

    Course you don't.

    It's like your defence of Johnson whose downfall resulted from bearing false witness, contra the commandments, on behalf of a gay groper, contra Paul to the Romans. You don't even make it as a bigot.

    Pretty sure Romans 1 rules out pegging btw.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 119,077

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    Your creepy god cult was not actually founded on the concept of popularity at all costs. Do you realise how the likes of Jesus son of Joseph, John the Baptist and saints Peter and Paul met their end?

    Course you don't.

    It's like your defence of Johnson whose downfall resulted from bearing false witness, contra the commandments, on behalf of a gay groper, contra Paul to the Romans. You don't even make it as a bigot.

    Pretty sure Romans 1 rules out pegging btw.
    I never mentioned popularity at all costs but Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message and they and their successors spread Christianity from a small group of followers in the Middle East to the more than 2 billion Christians there are in the world today.

    Harry however has chosen to trash the King, trash the Prince of Wales and cease to be a working royal and he must face the consequences.

  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,556

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    So? You can't be a royalist and pick and choose. Make up your mind. Either go republican or shut up.
    Erm that is rubbish. That is like saying you can't be a fan of Parliamentary democracy and pick and choose between parties or politicians. You can support the institution and dislike some of of the individuals within it.
    Strongly disagree. Royalism is based on the cult of blood and divine privilege through inheritance. The moment one starts picking and choosing as to who should inherit - and, equally importantly - who *deserves* to inherit - then one has abandoned what fragments of logic and consistency remain of the royalist case.

    HYUFD shreds his own divine right doctrine every time he makes personal or sexual remarks about the royal family.
  • Options

    Give us another $10 million.....

    Prince Harry exclusive: ‘There’s enough for another book – I cut memoir in half to spare my family’

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/01/13/prince-harry-book-two-spare-revelations-royal-family/

    Spare 2: This Time It's Even More Personal

    Spare 2: Frozen Todger

    ??

    I await my royalties.
    Followed by Spare with a Vengeance....
    Live Free and Die Spare.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,556
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    Your creepy god cult was not actually founded on the concept of popularity at all costs. Do you realise how the likes of Jesus son of Joseph, John the Baptist and saints Peter and Paul met their end?

    Course you don't.

    It's like your defence of Johnson whose downfall resulted from bearing false witness, contra the commandments, on behalf of a gay groper, contra Paul to the Romans. You don't even make it as a bigot.

    Pretty sure Romans 1 rules out pegging btw.
    I never mentioned popularity at all costs but Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message and they and their successors spread Christianity from a small group of followers in the Middle East to the more than 2 billion Christians there are in the world today.

    Harry however has chosen to trash the King, trash the Prince of Wales and cease to be a working royal and he must face the consequences.

    Even I know that Paul, erm, rewrote Yeshua of Nazareth's message rather a lot. Loyal, it wasn;t.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    Your creepy god cult was not actually founded on the concept of popularity at all costs. Do you realise how the likes of Jesus son of Joseph, John the Baptist and saints Peter and Paul met their end?

    Course you don't.

    It's like your defence of Johnson whose downfall resulted from bearing false witness, contra the commandments, on behalf of a gay groper, contra Paul to the Romans. You don't even make it as a bigot.

    Pretty sure Romans 1 rules out pegging btw.
    I never mentioned popularity at all costs but Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message and they and their successors spread Christianity from a small group of followers in the Middle East to the more than 2 billion Christians there are in the world today.

    Harry however has chosen to trash the King, trash the Prince of Wales and cease to be a working royal and he must face the consequences.

    Jesus was a Socialist, therefore you are a Socialist!
  • Options
    EPGEPG Posts: 6,572
    We know that the United States has a higher material quality of life than Europe - of course you can throw out a list of social problems likely arising from their history, but the average person in the US works more, gets paid more, has a bigger house, gets more medical treatment, and so on. One of the very few factors people reckon is important for this is labour mobility. Most of the country doesn't have a tradition of living in a certain town or even a certain state across multiple generations, which is different to Europe (very much including the UK here). They move to chase opportunities, Europeans wait for them, and we pay a certain cost for that.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 11,325
    On a topic tangential to the offensive names one: how to spell cities or countries.

    There’s a long standing tradition for formerly colonised countries to insist they or their capital cities are spelt in a correct manner, and not the one given to them by colonisers: Beijing, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Myanmar, Harare, Kampala, Eswatini and so on. And quite right too, it’s a simple question of decolonising the geography.

    There is a version of this relating to landmarks first named for a European explorer or official and later renamed in the local indigenous language: Danali, Uluru, arguably Yr Wyddfa.

    Then there are a few edge cases where geopolitics force people to take one name or other: Myanmar/Burma, Zaïre/Congo, Kampuchea/Cambodia. Most recently Kyiv/Kiev. Generally a case of just treading carefully and not being deliberately provocative.

    But recently we have a couple of examples that I just don’t get. The most obvious being “Türkiye”. This isn’t some colonial hangover. The country was itself an imperial power. It’s just the way non-Turks spell the place. The Swiss don’t insist we all spell Geneva Genève or Genf, we don’t ask the French to stop saying Londres or Douvres, nor do the Italians object to Milan or Venice. Even the Russians don’t seem to have an issue with the multiple international spellings of Moscow. So why all of a sudden do Erdogan and his crowd demand we all say Türkiye?

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 119,077
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    Your creepy god cult was not actually founded on the concept of popularity at all costs. Do you realise how the likes of Jesus son of Joseph, John the Baptist and saints Peter and Paul met their end?

    Course you don't.

    It's like your defence of Johnson whose downfall resulted from bearing false witness, contra the commandments, on behalf of a gay groper, contra Paul to the Romans. You don't even make it as a bigot.

    Pretty sure Romans 1 rules out pegging btw.
    I never mentioned popularity at all costs but Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message and they and their successors spread Christianity from a small group of followers in the Middle East to the more than 2 billion Christians there are in the world today.

    Harry however has chosen to trash the King, trash the Prince of Wales and cease to be a working royal and he must face the consequences.

    Even I know that Paul, erm, rewrote Yeshua of Nazareth's message rather a lot. Loyal, it wasn;t.
    I may not agree with all of Paul's sayings but he certainly never trashed Christ
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,114
    I wish @MikeSmithson well for his operation. As I mentioned before, my own father had a rapid deterioration of his neck bones a few years ago, and delays of a matter of weeks in his treatment led to a less than best case outcome. That was an extreme deterioration though, and the need for speed is not always the same.

    So, I'd advise take doctors' orders seriously, if you feel worsening get it checked. I'd also advise that if you feel it is getting to a critical point with loss of feeling, capability etc., and it is at all practicable, get yourself to the A&E of the hospital doing the surgery (and if it is not the nearest, that's not necessarily where an ambulance would take you by default).
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,556
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    Your creepy god cult was not actually founded on the concept of popularity at all costs. Do you realise how the likes of Jesus son of Joseph, John the Baptist and saints Peter and Paul met their end?

    Course you don't.

    It's like your defence of Johnson whose downfall resulted from bearing false witness, contra the commandments, on behalf of a gay groper, contra Paul to the Romans. You don't even make it as a bigot.

    Pretty sure Romans 1 rules out pegging btw.
    I never mentioned popularity at all costs but Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message and they and their successors spread Christianity from a small group of followers in the Middle East to the more than 2 billion Christians there are in the world today.

    Harry however has chosen to trash the King, trash the Prince of Wales and cease to be a working royal and he must face the consequences.

    Even I know that Paul, erm, rewrote Yeshua of Nazareth's message rather a lot. Loyal, it wasn;t.
    I may not agree with all of Paul's sayings but he certainly never trashed Christ
    You didn't say that. YOu said "Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message".
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 11,325
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    I am part of whatever the remaining 18% said.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 119,077
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    So? You can't be a royalist and pick and choose. Make up your mind. Either go republican or shut up.
    Erm that is rubbish. That is like saying you can't be a fan of Parliamentary democracy and pick and choose between parties or politicians. You can support the institution and dislike some of of the individuals within it.
    Strongly disagree. Royalism is based on the cult of blood and divine privilege through inheritance. The moment one starts picking and choosing as to who should inherit - and, equally importantly - who *deserves* to inherit - then one has abandoned what fragments of logic and consistency remain of the royalist case.

    HYUFD shreds his own divine right doctrine every time he makes personal or sexual remarks about the royal family.
    No, constituonal monarchy is not just based on blood and inheritance, otherwise we would be an absolute monarchy still and James II and Edward VIII would never have been removed by Parliament as Kings.

    Agreement on the next in line of succession becoming monarch on the death of the old monarch depends on the consent of Parliament, via the Accession Council as was seen last September
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,165
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    Your creepy god cult was not actually founded on the concept of popularity at all costs. Do you realise how the likes of Jesus son of Joseph, John the Baptist and saints Peter and Paul met their end?

    Course you don't.

    It's like your defence of Johnson whose downfall resulted from bearing false witness, contra the commandments, on behalf of a gay groper, contra Paul to the Romans. You don't even make it as a bigot.

    Pretty sure Romans 1 rules out pegging btw.
    I never mentioned popularity at all costs but Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message and they and their successors spread Christianity from a small group of followers in the Middle East to the more than 2 billion Christians there are in the world today.

    Harry however has chosen to trash the King, trash the Prince of Wales and cease to be a working royal and he must face the consequences.

    One disciple didn’t.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 119,077
    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    Your creepy god cult was not actually founded on the concept of popularity at all costs. Do you realise how the likes of Jesus son of Joseph, John the Baptist and saints Peter and Paul met their end?

    Course you don't.

    It's like your defence of Johnson whose downfall resulted from bearing false witness, contra the commandments, on behalf of a gay groper, contra Paul to the Romans. You don't even make it as a bigot.

    Pretty sure Romans 1 rules out pegging btw.
    I never mentioned popularity at all costs but Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message and they and their successors spread Christianity from a small group of followers in the Middle East to the more than 2 billion Christians there are in the world today.

    Harry however has chosen to trash the King, trash the Prince of Wales and cease to be a working royal and he must face the consequences.

    One disciple didn’t.
    And he was so ashamed of himself for that betrayal he hung himself according to Matthew
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 65,301
    Ice Mountains of Pluto as seen from New Horizon spacecraft.
    https://twitter.com/MAstronomers/status/1613558907686756352
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 11,325
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    So? You can't be a royalist and pick and choose. Make up your mind. Either go republican or shut up.
    Erm that is rubbish. That is like saying you can't be a fan of Parliamentary democracy and pick and choose between parties or politicians. You can support the institution and dislike some of of the individuals within it.
    Strongly disagree. Royalism is based on the cult of blood and divine privilege through inheritance. The moment one starts picking and choosing as to who should inherit - and, equally importantly - who *deserves* to inherit - then one has abandoned what fragments of logic and consistency remain of the royalist case.

    HYUFD shreds his own divine right doctrine every time he makes personal or sexual remarks about the royal family.
    No, constituonal monarchy is not just based on blood and inheritance, otherwise we would be an absolute monarchy still and James II and Edward VIII would never have been removed by Parliament as Kings.

    Agreement on the next in line of succession becoming monarch on the death of the old monarch depends on the consent of Parliament, via the Accession Council as was seen last September
    Constitutional monarchy in the 21st century is based on the principle of “well we need someone to do all the flouncy stuff on national occasions so it may as well be that lot.”
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 119,077
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    Your creepy god cult was not actually founded on the concept of popularity at all costs. Do you realise how the likes of Jesus son of Joseph, John the Baptist and saints Peter and Paul met their end?

    Course you don't.

    It's like your defence of Johnson whose downfall resulted from bearing false witness, contra the commandments, on behalf of a gay groper, contra Paul to the Romans. You don't even make it as a bigot.

    Pretty sure Romans 1 rules out pegging btw.
    I never mentioned popularity at all costs but Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message and they and their successors spread Christianity from a small group of followers in the Middle East to the more than 2 billion Christians there are in the world today.

    Harry however has chosen to trash the King, trash the Prince of Wales and cease to be a working royal and he must face the consequences.

    Even I know that Paul, erm, rewrote Yeshua of Nazareth's message rather a lot. Loyal, it wasn;t.
    I may not agree with all of Paul's sayings but he certainly never trashed Christ
    You didn't say that. YOu said "Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message".
    Paul certainly never said anything in contradiction to what Christ said, even if he added some extra messages too
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    Your creepy god cult was not actually founded on the concept of popularity at all costs. Do you realise how the likes of Jesus son of Joseph, John the Baptist and saints Peter and Paul met their end?

    Course you don't.

    It's like your defence of Johnson whose downfall resulted from bearing false witness, contra the commandments, on behalf of a gay groper, contra Paul to the Romans. You don't even make it as a bigot.

    Pretty sure Romans 1 rules out pegging btw.
    I never mentioned popularity at all costs but Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message and they and their successors spread Christianity from a small group of followers in the Middle East to the more than 2 billion Christians there are in the world today.

    Harry however has chosen to trash the King, trash the Prince of Wales and cease to be a working royal and he must face the consequences.

    Even I know that Paul, erm, rewrote Yeshua of Nazareth's message rather a lot. Loyal, it wasn;t.
    I may not agree with all of Paul's sayings but he certainly never trashed Christ
    Christ was not an adulterous lying coward.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 11,325
    HYUFD said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    56% of British voters now want the King and Parliament to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal patronages and honorary titles, just 26% opposed a new Redfield poll shows

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632205/More-half-Brits-say-Harry-Meghan-lose-royal-titles.html

    I am part of the 56%.

    Rishi and Liz can now at least console themselves they are more popular than Harry and Meghan.

    Never have I seen a brand as self trashed here as Harry has done with his, just a few years ago he was the most popular royal after the Queen!
    Your creepy god cult was not actually founded on the concept of popularity at all costs. Do you realise how the likes of Jesus son of Joseph, John the Baptist and saints Peter and Paul met their end?

    Course you don't.

    It's like your defence of Johnson whose downfall resulted from bearing false witness, contra the commandments, on behalf of a gay groper, contra Paul to the Romans. You don't even make it as a bigot.

    Pretty sure Romans 1 rules out pegging btw.
    I never mentioned popularity at all costs but Christ's disciples remained loyal to him and his message and they and their successors spread Christianity from a small group of followers in the Middle East to the more than 2 billion Christians there are in the world today.

    Harry however has chosen to trash the King, trash the Prince of Wales and cease to be a working royal and he must face the consequences.

    One disciple didn’t.
    And he was so ashamed of himself for that betrayal he hung himself according to Matthew
    We have entered that part of the evening known to locals as HYUFD’s deadpan alley.

    The interactive biblical Wikipedia of PB.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 13,246
    pigeon said:

    stodge said:

    pigeon said:

    On topic: the NHS continues to do quite a lot well, but will inevitably continue to deteriorate over time. Demands upon it will continue to grow and the people with the money to pay to keep healthcare going (largely the same people making most of those demands) feel that they shouldn't be asked to cough up the necessary funds.

    Certainly if the ambulance service continues to be as dire as it presently is then you'd think there would be an opening in the market for a private provider to step into the breach for those willing and able to fork out for the insurance, starting in London and gradually spreading out from there - a bit like how Hanoverian property owners used to pay subscriptions for a private fire service. That's how healthcare privatisation will roll: it'll end up being rather like dentistry provision already is now. The Government won't sell the NHS off; rather, better off people will increasingly opt out, as is already happening with much elective surgery; NHS consultants will spend more time seeing private patients and less dealing with NHS lists; NHS hospitals with good reputations will start opening private wards for wealthy queue-jumpers simply to raise more money; and state provision will eventually end up as a badly resourced safety net for poor people and those who are uninsurable due to existing complex conditions.

    In short, if people who can afford to pay more tax refuse to do so, they'll eventually end up paying for private health cover instead and the NHS will get hollowed out. It's not the Tories who will destroy the NHS. The Tories, collectively, never have aimed to do that (even if some of their more libertarian-minded fringe may have wanted to.) Heresy against the state religion would be far too unpopular at the ballot box. It's their tight-fisted voters who'll kill it in the end.

    That's a brutal analysis and you could in theory apply the same to policing. Wealthier areas can pay for security - poorer areas have to make do with whatever law enforcement facilities are left.

    Arguing Conservative voters (who, based on their demographic, would be the ones most likely to need a functioning and reliable health service) is a particularly ironic comment.

    The issues of the NHS don't sit in isolation - they are a reflection of wider societal and cultural issues around how families and older people relate (no pun intended). The biggest problem is how those (especially elderly) people who ought to be out of hospital can be provided with the home care they need to free up hospital bed space for those in genuine need. We need to overhaul domiciliary care and give it the priority it needs.
    We're not going to find money for better elderly care without extracting the cash from the better-off elderly. Who else has it? Earned incomes are collapsing, so the money will have to come from assets, and the main store of asset wealth in the UK is property. Theresa May worked this out years ago, and much good it did her - because the ducks and their families will fucking strop if you tell them, for arguments' sake, that they have to part with a quarter of the value of their estates (in land value and/or inheritance taxes) to collectively fund a functional health and care system that will keep them as well and living independently for as long as possible, and look after them efficiently and kindly if they become too doddery to take care of themselves.

    Again, the people who have the means to pay for shit don't want to. And so they won't, until the decision is forced upon them - i.e. when the state is wholly incapable of doing the job and they have to pay to go private.
    The other side of the asset trap is inheritance (@HYUFD's favourite). The truth is the inheritance derived from the sale of assets owned by parents is for many children the only way on to the property ladder. If the parents live longer, however, that money arrives when the children are in their 40s or 50s and that's when they can finally get a property of their own.

    Those who champion inheritance would argue taking more of the value of property assets to pay for care or for the NHS closes off that route to property ownership.

    Perhaps we need to think about ownership and inheritance in a different way - perhaps part or all of the value of the asset could be released earlier (a kind of pre-inheritance) to enable the children to get on the property ladder earlier. I don't know how that could work in detail but we need some different thinking about assets, care and inheritance.

    Once we get past pre-inheritance, perhaps we could move the elderly out of ownership into long-term rental (though such rental would be negligible). The inheritance would be gone but once the property was no longer needed, it could be put back into the market - I know there's a lot of holes in this but sometimes thinking outside the semi-detached box is required.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 119,077
    EPG said:

    We know that the United States has a higher material quality of life than Europe - of course you can throw out a list of social problems likely arising from their history, but the average person in the US works more, gets paid more, has a bigger house, gets more medical treatment, and so on. One of the very few factors people reckon is important for this is labour mobility. Most of the country doesn't have a tradition of living in a certain town or even a certain state across multiple generations, which is different to Europe (very much including the UK here). They move to chase opportunities, Europeans wait for them, and we pay a certain cost for that.

    Not all of Europe, Swiss for example have a higher material quality of life than Americans as do Norwegians and Irish and more of them have healthcare
This discussion has been closed.