Does the population of NI want to have a referendum on abortion ?
It might be a good way to open a debate about what kind of future NI wants to have without it being as consequential as a border poll.
Perhaps some sort of devolved assembly could sort out these regional religious matters - I believe the Scotch council has recently brought in some puritan inspired taxes and tariffs for example.
we are obviously grateful to Wee Mrs McTurnip who has offered to abort all the paddies we send to Scotland, though clearly the bill will have to go to England.
Since NI has a protestant minority sub 35 this obviously will impact one community more than the other. No doubt the SNP will give it a zany topical name like No More Catholics.
The case for English independence is strong (and I'm not talking about footing the bill). The kind of sectarian bigotry and neo-imperialistic hubris displayed by unionists has played a big part in leading us to Brexit.
I think there is a lot of common ground between Euroscepticism and Unionism, but that's a good thing, not a bad thing.
Its a current term of art for what used to be called "Prototypes and Stereotypes", and its a fundamental component of how the mind conceives the world, fat chance of changing that by training. At its most simple level if you are walking down a corridor and open the door into a room, you have already in your mind a construct of what you are expecting to see, based on what you have seen in other rooms, the nature of the building, the decor of the corridors etc, its a mental shortcut to allow you to operate as the door opens without having to take the entire room in through your senses, evolutionary a very useful ability in fight/flight type scenarios. It has all sorts of side effects in the modern world in terms of how we use our experiences to construct models and prejudices about what we see, but I dont think there is any realistic chance of changing it by training.
Simplistically a prototype is a central tendency for an entity or idea, and a stereotype is the extent to which people believe that prototype is representative of all examples of the entity or idea.
Mr. Evershed, not heard the term 'implicit bias' before. Sounds a little like internalised misogyny or relative poverty, a nonsense term invented to ensure a real problem can never be solved because the definition is made so broad it'll always seemingly exist.
Mr. Evershed, not heard the term 'implicit bias' before. Sounds a little like internalised misogyny or relative poverty, a nonsense term invented to ensure a real problem can never be solved because the definition is made so broad it'll always seemingly exist.
So you have an implicit bias against implicit bias.
I do not doubt that the religious lobby is not the only opposition to assisted dying. However I do believe that, as with opposition to SSM and abortion, that is where the core opposition comes from. I am also aware that many religious campaigning groups encourage members not to mention their religious beliefs when voicing their opinions on social issues - I have seen specific advice from religious groups to base their opposition on other pretexts - in the case of assisted dying I believe that are advised to play up the issue that some old people might be pressurised into it.
There are delicate issues without a doubt but none which ought to prevent a well thought assisted suicide law being enacted with sufficient safeguards. At the end of the day what most people are looking for is an effective and painless way to end their own life at a time of their own choosing- I believe that in Dignitas the health professionals leave the room while the individual take the drug cocktail themselves. Talking of people "killing" others, is, in my view emotive and is exactly the sort of tactics that the anti-abortion lobby use in their campaigns. (II am not for a moment suggesting that is what you are trying to do but it is a tactic of the religious right in particular)
Does the population of NI want to have a referendum on abortion ?
It might be a good way to open a debate about what kind of future NI wants to have without it being as consequential as a border poll.
Perhaps some sort of devolved assembly could sort out these regional religious matters - I believe the Scotch council has recently brought in some puritan inspired taxes and tariffs for example.
we are obviously grateful to Wee Mrs McTurnip who has offered to abort all the paddies we send to Scotland, though clearly the bill will have to go to England.
Since NI has a protestant minority sub 35 this obviously will impact one community more than the other. No doubt the SNP will give it a zany topical name like No More Catholics.
The case for English independence is strong (and I'm not talking about footing the bill). The kind of sectarian bigotry and neo-imperialistic hubris displayed by unionists has played a big part in leading us to Brexit.
I think there is a lot of common ground between Euroscepticism and Unionism, but that's a good thing, not a bad thing.
Good for Tusk. His background as a nationally-elected politician shows.
Has the point been reached where it's impermissible to draw attention to external economic realities?
Of course not. But the EU isn't addressing its internal economic realities either (the Target2 imbalances &c.) At some point countries will have to leave the Euro or commit to a complete political union (which I don't think their electorates want).
That said, I sympathise with the Italian President's logic: this shouldn't be done by stealth. Though I think he is probably making a political mistake.
Target 2 imbalances are the consequence of capital fight, not because Germany is running a surplus and the periphery a deficit.
It's both, isn't it? With the latter leading to the former (which has become the more important driver).
In a word, no.
In 2007, Spain ran a current account deficit of 10% of GDP. And its Target-2 imbalance was... zero.
In 2018, Italy is running a current account surplus of 3% of GDP. Its Target-2 imbalance is [some extremely large number].
Target-2 imbalances happen when people pull Euros out of bank accounts in the periphery and move them to (mostly) Germany.
I think it is the best measure of people "voting with their feet" as to the risk of Euro breakup.
The dead attacker, 36, was named locally as Benjamin Herman, from Rochefort, a city about an hour from Liege. He was well-known to police after a string of crimes including robbery, assault and drug-dealing.
Local media reported that Herman was temporarily released from prison for several hours on Monday night for "family leave" to prepare his reintegration into society, despite a prison service assessment that he was very violent.
Good for Tusk. His background as a nationally-elected politician shows.
Has the point been reached where it's impermissible to draw attention to external economic realities?
Of course not. But the EU isn't addressing its internal economic realities either (the Target2 imbalances &c.) At some point countries will have to leave the Euro or commit to a complete political union (which I don't think their electorates want).
That said, I sympathise with the Italian President's logic: this shouldn't be done by stealth. Though I think he is probably making a political mistake.
Target 2 imbalances are the consequence of capital fight, not because Germany is running a surplus and the periphery a deficit.
It's both, isn't it? With the latter leading to the former (which has become the more important driver).
In a word, no.
In 2007, Spain ran a current account deficit of 10% of GDP. And its Target-2 imbalance was... zero.
In 2018, Italy is running a current account surplus of 3% of GDP. Its Target-2 imbalance is [some extremely large number].
Target-2 imbalances happen when people pull Euros out of bank accounts in the periphery and move them to (mostly) Germany.
I think it is the best measure of people "voting with their feet" as to the risk of Euro breakup.
Could you please explain what the significance of Target 2 imbalances is?
Mr. Hopkins, well, quite. It's just free people exercising their choice. And because more white people do it than others, some wet lettuce has decided that's a problem.
Its a current term of art for what used to be called "Prototypes and Stereotypes", and its a fundamental component of how the mind conceives the world, fat chance of changing that by training. At its most simple level if you are walking down a corridor and open the door into a room, you have already in your mind a construct of what you are expecting to see, based on what you have seen in other rooms, the nature of the building, the decor of the corridors etc, its a mental shortcut to allow you to operate as the door opens without having to take the entire room in through your senses, evolutionary a very useful ability in fight/flight type scenarios. It has all sorts of side effects in the modern world in terms of how we use our experiences to construct models and prejudices about what we see, but I dont think there is any realistic chance of changing it by training.
Simplistically a prototype is a central tendency for an entity or idea, and a stereotype is the extent to which people believe that prototype is representative of all examples of the entity or idea.
My employer mandates implicit bias training for all employees. It absolutely isn't about somehow magically eliminating it, it's about accepting it exists and reviewing ones actions and decisions to consider whether they've been influenced by it.
Whether it is a tactic used by some groups or not, there must be a concern about people in a vulnerable position feeling pressured into doing something they would not do freely. Calling it a pretext rather assumes that it is being dismissed ab initio, which I am sure is not your intention. That is why it is so important to separate the debate about assisted suicide from the question of the cost to the state of looking after a patient with a terminal illness. Or indeed the cost to the family.
I have great sympathy for those who find themselves in such a position and their loved ones. Seeing someone suffer with no seeming end is not something I would wish on my worst enemy.
My very great concern is that I am sceptical that it is easy as people say to introduce an assisted suicide law with sufficient safeguards that doesn't end up turning into a licence to kill. And if you end someone else's life that is what you are doing - even if you are doing it with their consent for the most compassionate of motives. (Claiming that something is emotive can be a way of using a euphemism to avoid describing what is happening. If you end someone's life you are killing them even if you are doing it to end their suffering. And it is very easy for people to persuade themselves that what they are doing is for the best of reasons.)
And once that is permitted for those doing it out of love I worry, I will admit, that we will end up with people doing it for all sorts of other - less high-minded - motives. And I also worry that before long the general expectation will be that if you are suffering from a terminal condition you should kill yourself to save others pain/cost/nuisance etc.
It seems to me that this whole issue centres on the question of whether someone genuinely wants to end their life, that they are not doing so because they are being pressured to do so and that they need someone else's help to do so. That means someone must be compos mentis to make such a decision, which does not help when someone is suffering from dementia, for instance. Maybe a living will is the answer there. I don't know.
Finally, unfashionable as it may sound, I do think that those with a religious / philosophical viewpoint have something valuable to contribute to such a debate. This view that people with a spiritual/religious perspective which informs their views are automatically bigoted is, frankly, pretty bigoted in itself. Why not consider the ideas rather than dismiss them simply because of who articulates them? There is something valuable, IMO, in a world where it often seems that the only worth of a human being is what they earn and consume to say that there is a sacredness to life which is worth treasuring.
Its a current term of art for what used to be called "Prototypes and Stereotypes", and its a fundamental component of how the mind conceives the world, fat chance of changing that by training. At its most simple level if you are walking down a corridor and open the door into a room, you have already in your mind a construct of what you are expecting to see, based on what you have seen in other rooms, the nature of the building, the decor of the corridors etc, its a mental shortcut to allow you to operate as the door opens without having to take the entire room in through your senses, evolutionary a very useful ability in fight/flight type scenarios. It has all sorts of side effects in the modern world in terms of how we use our experiences to construct models and prejudices about what we see, but I dont think there is any realistic chance of changing it by training.
Simplistically a prototype is a central tendency for an entity or idea, and a stereotype is the extent to which people believe that prototype is representative of all examples of the entity or idea.
My employer mandates implicit bias training for all employees. It absolutely isn't about somehow magically eliminating it, it's about accepting it exists and reviewing ones actions and decisions to consider whether they've been influenced by it.
Its a current term of art for what used to be called "Prototypes and Stereotypes", and its a fundamental component of how the mind conceives the world, fat chance of changing that by training. At its most simple level if you are walking down a corridor and open the door into a room, you have already in your mind a construct of what you are expecting to see, based on what you have seen in other rooms, the nature of the building, the decor of the corridors etc, its a mental shortcut to allow you to operate as the door opens without having to take the entire room in through your senses, evolutionary a very useful ability in fight/flight type scenarios. It has all sorts of side effects in the modern world in terms of how we use our experiences to construct models and prejudices about what we see, but I dont think there is any realistic chance of changing it by training.
Simplistically a prototype is a central tendency for an entity or idea, and a stereotype is the extent to which people believe that prototype is representative of all examples of the entity or idea.
My employer mandates implicit bias training for all employees. It absolutely isn't about somehow magically eliminating it, it's about accepting it exists and reviewing ones actions and decisions to consider whether they've been influenced by it.
Did you see the London 'cycling chief' reckons the lack of diversity in Londoners cycling is a problem?
Too many middle class white people. The chief, of course, is a middle class white guy. And a nincompoop.
He previously held a senior position at Nike as Director of global partnerships. Interestingly the middle class white guys making these comments rarely suggest they personally should make way for someone more representative of the community.
What is the answer - free bikes for all. Of course white middle class types are more likely to live in nice areas and houses with bike storage - if you are poor and live on a council estate you are more likely to get it nicked. So you might as well get the bus - it's free for under 18s!
Did you see the London 'cycling chief' reckons the lack of diversity in Londoners cycling is a problem?
Too many middle class white people. The chief, of course, is a middle class white guy. And a nincompoop.
Its the classic I am outraged on behalf of other people (who aren't actually outraged at all).
He isn't outraged in the slightest. There's a lot of unused upside on cycling chiefly because women are much less likely to cycle to work than are men. That he wants to improve female cycling rates isn't 'outrage' – it's the truth, and his job to improve it.
It's ironic to see neo-colonialists arguing that we should force the backward natives of Ulster to accept abortion whether they like it or not.
This particular colony has handed its decision-making back to the empire. Social policy can't go by default because Northern Ireland's politicians have abrogated their responsibilities. If they were incentivised to see some downsides of disengaging from real world politics, that would do no harm at all.
stop paying the MLAs
Wait, they're still getting paid?! I'd have thought about the third or fourth 'final deadline' for some kind of resolution that would have been halted.
Snip I have great sympathy for those who find themselves in such a position and their loved ones. Seeing someone suffer with no seeming end is not something I would wish on my worst enemy.
My very great concern is that I am sceptical that it is easy as people say to introduce an assisted suicide law with sufficient safeguards that doesn't end up turning into a licence to kill. And if you end someone else's life that is what you are doing - even if you are doing it with their consent for the most compassionate of motives. (Claiming that something is emotive can be a way of using a euphemism to avoid describing what is happening. If you end someone's life you are killing them even if you are doing it to end their suffering. And it is very easy for people to persuade themselves that what they are doing is for the best of reasons.)
And once that is permitted for those doing it out of love I worry, I will admit, that we will end up with people doing it for all sorts of other - less high-minded - motives. And I also worry that before long the general expectation will be that if you are suffering from a terminal condition you should kill yourself to save others pain/cost/nuisance etc.
It seems to me that this whole issue centres on the question of whether someone genuinely wants to end their life, that they are not doing so because they are being pressured to do so and that they need someone else's help to do so. That means someone must be compos mentis to make such a decision, which does not help when someone is suffering from dementia, for instance. Maybe a living will is the answer there. I don't know.
Finally, unfashionable as it may sound, I do think that those with a religious / philosophical viewpoint have something valuable to contribute to such a debate. This view that people with a spiritual/religious perspective which informs their views are automatically bigoted is, frankly, pretty bigoted in itself. Why not consider the ideas rather than dismiss them simply because of who articulates them? There is something valuable, IMO, in a world where it often seems that the only worth of a human being is what they earn and consume to say that there is a sacredness to life which is worth treasuring.
A Living Will or Health and Welfare Power of Attorney while you are still compos mentis.
I think there is an evolutionary explanation for why we think life is sacred and we strive to preserve it. The future of our species depended on it. But it is only useful while we are child bearing and rearing. Beyond that it is as redundant as our appendix. I hope that oldsters become more focused on quality of life than quantity of life and are supported in that by the medical profession.
Does the population of NI want to have a referendum on abortion ?
It might be a good way to open a debate about what kind of future NI wants to have without it being as consequential as a border poll.
Perhaps some sort of devolved assembly could sort out these regional religious matters - I believe the Scotch council has recently brought in some puritan inspired taxes and tariffs for example.
we are obviously grateful to Wee Mrs McTurnip who has offered to abort all the paddies we send to Scotland, though clearly the bill will have to go to England.
Since NI has a protestant minority sub 35 this obviously will impact one community more than the other. No doubt the SNP will give it a zany topical name like No More Catholics.
The case for English independence is strong (and I'm not talking about footing the bill). The kind of sectarian bigotry and neo-imperialistic hubris displayed by unionists has played a big part in leading us to Brexit.
Firstly Wales also voted for Brexit. Secondly without Scotland and NI Leave would have won by nearer to 55% than 52%. Most of the leading Unionists in indyref 2014 ie Davidson, Darling, Cameron, Brown etc were also the most vocal Remain supporters too, Mogg meanwhile has made clear he is more committed to Brexit than keeping Scotland in the UK and over a third of SNP voters voted Leave anyway
My very great concern is that I am sceptical that it is easy as people say to introduce an assisted suicide law with sufficient safeguards that doesn't end up turning into a licence to kill. And if you end someone else's life that is what you are doing - even if you are doing it with their consent for the most compassionate of motives.
And once that is permitted for those doing it out of love I worry, I will admit, that we will end up with people doing it for all sorts of other - less high-minded - motives. And I also worry that before long the general expectation will be that if you are suffering from a terminal condition you should kill yourself to save others pain/cost/nuisance etc.
It seems to me that this whole issue centres on the question of whether someone genuinely wants to end their life, that they are not doing so because they are being pressured to do so and that they need someone else's help to do so. That means someone must be compos mentis to make such a decision, which does not help when someone is suffering from dementia, for instance. Maybe a living will is the answer there. I don't know.
Finally, unfashionable as it may sound, I do think that those with a religious / philosophical viewpoint have something valuable to contribute to such a debate. This view that people with a spiritual/religious perspective which informs their views are automatically bigoted is, frankly, pretty bigoted in itself. Why not consider the ideas rather than dismiss them simply because of who articulates them? There is something valuable, IMO, in a world where it often seems that the only worth of a human being is what they earn and consume to say that there is a sacredness to life which is worth treasuring.
A Living Will or Health and Welfare Power of Attorney while you are still compos mentis.
I think there is an evolutionary explanation for why we think life is sacred and we strive to preserve it. The future of our species depended on it. But it is only useful while we are child bearing and rearing. Beyond that it is as redundant as our appendix. I hope that oldsters become more focused on quality of life than quantity of life and are supported in that by the medical profession.
There is wisdom and experience and joy amongst those past child rearing age. Life is about more than simply raising a child. That would make quite a few groups, not just the old redundant.
My very great concern is that I am sceptical that it is easy as people say to introduce an assisted suicide law with sufficient safeguards that doesn't end up turning into a licence to kill. And if you end someone else's life that is what you are doing - even if you are doing it with their consent for the most compassionate of motives.
And once that is permitted for those doing it out of love I worry, I will admit, that we will end up with people doing it for all sorts of other - less high-minded - motives. And I also worry that before long the general expectation will be that if you are suffering from a terminal condition you should kill yourself to save others pain/cost/nuisance etc.
Finally, unfashionable as it may sound, I do think that those with a religious / philosophical viewpoint have something valuable to contribute to such a debate. This view that people with a spiritual/religious perspective which informs their views are automatically bigoted is, frankly, pretty bigoted in itself. Why not consider the ideas rather than dismiss them simply because of who articulates them? There is something valuable, IMO, in a world where it often seems that the only worth of a human being is what they earn and consume to say that there is a sacredness to life which is worth treasuring.
A Living Will or Health and Welfare Power of Attorney while you are still compos mentis.
I think there is an evolutionary explanation for why we think life is sacred and we strive to preserve it. The future of our species depended on it. But it is only useful while we are child bearing and rearing. Beyond that it is as redundant as our appendix. I hope that oldsters become more focused on quality of life than quantity of life and are supported in that by the medical profession.
There is wisdom and experience and joy amongst those past child rearing age. Life is about more than simply raising a child. That would make quite a few groups, not just the old redundant.
Having reached four-score years, this is something I have to contemplate. My wife and I are in the process of revising our arrangements. Neither of us want to wait to die in the manner in which my in-laws did, and I’m not sure my mother was very happy with her last year or so.
My very great concern is that I am sceptical that it is easy as people say to introduce an assisted suicide law with sufficient safeguards that doesn't end up turning into a licence to kill. And if you end someone else's life that is what you are doing - even if you are doing it with their consent for the most compassionate of motives.
And once that is permitted for those doing it out of love I worry, I will admit, that we will end up with people doing it for all sorts of other - less high-minded - motives. And I also worry that before long the general expectation will be that if you are suffering from a terminal condition you should kill yourself to save others pain/cost/nuisance etc.
It seems to me that this whole issue centres on the question of whether someone genuinely g.
A Living Will or Health and Welfare Power of Attorney while you are still compos mentis.
I think there is an evolutionary explanation for why we think life is sacred and we strive to preserve it. The future of our species depended on it. But it is only useful while we are child bearing and rearing. Beyond that it is as redundant as our appendix. I hope that oldsters become more focused on quality of life than quantity of life and are supported in that by the medical profession.
There is wisdom and experience and joy amongst those past child rearing age. Life is about more than simply raising a child. That would make quite a few groups, not just the old redundant.
On a separate but related note, I do get a bit depressed with all these programmes about terminal illness on Radio 4. "My cancer diary" or "Living with lymphoma". It's like listening to the Grim Reaper.
My very great concern is that I am sceptical that it is easy as people say to introduce an assisted suicide law with sufficient safeguards that doesn't end up turning into a licence to kill. And if you end someone else's life that is what you are doing - even if you are doing it with their consent for the most compassionate of motives.
snip
It seems to me that this whole issue centres on the question of whether someone genuinely wants to end their life, that they are not doing so because they are being pressured to do so and that they need someone else's help to do so. That means someone must be compos mentis to make such a decision, which does not help when someone is suffering from dementia, for instance. Maybe a living will is the answer there. I don't know.
Finally, unfashionable as it may sound, I do think that those with a religious / philosophical viewpoint have something valuable to contribute to such a debate. This view that people with a spiritual/religious perspective which informs their views are automatically bigoted is, frankly, pretty bigoted in itself. Why not consider the ideas rather than dismiss them simply because of who articulates them? There is something valuable, IMO, in a world where it often seems that the only worth of a human being is what they earn and consume to say that there is a sacredness to life which is worth treasuring.
A Living Will or Health and Welfare Power of Attorney while you are still compos mentis.
I think there is an evolutionary explanation for why we think life is sacred and we strive to preserve it. The future of our species depended on it. But it is only useful while we are child bearing and rearing. Beyond that it is as redundant as our appendix. I hope that oldsters become more focused on quality of life than quantity of life and are supported in that by the medical profession.
There is wisdom and experience and joy amongst those past child rearing age. Life is about more than simply raising a child. That would make quite a few groups, not just the old redundant.
I agree about wisdom, experience and joy. That is quality of life. I enjoy it myself. Some have only pain and suffering and want it to end. This is too sad a conversation so I'm going to give up on it.
Did you see the London 'cycling chief' reckons the lack of diversity in Londoners cycling is a problem?
Too many middle class white people. The chief, of course, is a middle class white guy. And a nincompoop.
I wonder what his view on the diversity of people cycling in Beijing is ? Or Nairobi ?
No one ever suggests non white majority nations aren't diverse enough even though much of the world isn't very diverse. Japan and Korea are 98-99 per cent ethnically Japanese and Korean respectively and it's very hard for people not of those ethnic origins to move there permanently or gain citizenship. Yet you never see international bodies criticising them for their (lack of) immigration and diversity.
You imply in needs addressing, maybe people are happy doing it the way they are doing it, maybe they dont appreciate others telling them how they could be doing it better ? The nanny state is alive a well it seems.
Around a third of Lewisham East voters voted Leave anyway so I would be surprised if Labour lost more than 10% due to Brexit
I think the Lib Dems are working on that particular problem.... The Tories cannot, of course..... And with Corbyn as their Leader, neither can Labour.
I'm very impressed by the LibDem effort in Lewisham East. It reminds me of Witney and Richmond Park, both of which I took an active part in. I'm sufficiently impressed that I put another lump on LibDems beating the Tories with Ladbrokes at 21/20 (powered up or whatever they call it). Now how do I get to Lewisham East ...
I don't want to interrupt the outrage cycle here but aren't the guys comments about getting more BAME people cycling rather than demanding less white people ride bikes?
Unless there is some kind of limit I am unaware of and his plans would involve stopping white people cycling as a result.
You imply in needs addressing, maybe people are happy doing it the way they are doing it, maybe they dont appreciate others telling them how they could be doing it better ? The nanny state is alive a well it seems.
Yes, but nanny is trying to save a few bob on the heart disease, diabetes and obesity bill for the rest of us.
Cycling cultures like the Dutch and Danes have the lowest obesity rates in Europe, despite their love of dairy and deep frying.
Did you see the London 'cycling chief' reckons the lack of diversity in Londoners cycling is a problem?
Too many middle class white people. The chief, of course, is a middle class white guy. And a nincompoop.
I wonder what his view on the diversity of people cycling in Beijing is ? Or Nairobi ?
No one ever suggests non white majority nations aren't diverse enough even though much of the world isn't very diverse. Japan and Korea are 98-99 per cent ethnically Japanese and Korean respectively and it's very hard for people not of those ethnic origins to move there permanently or gain citizenship. Yet you never see international bodies criticising them for their (lack of) immigration and diversity.
Well quite. I live in a tourist hotspot in Asia, and yet its still less than about 6-7% white faces. I would be forced to raise an eyebrow if I was asked to check my privilege despite being middle aged and white since I have no standing in the society to speak of, I can't vote, I can't own land, and cant take one of a vast number of 'protected' jobs reserved for citizens. The privilege is being in a beautiful place, full of great people, and being able to spend most of my days out riding my motorbike under the tropical sun whilst making a comfortable living.
Mr/Miss/Lord High Mongoose Anazina, you realise it's legal for black people, brown people, Chinese people etc ad nauseum to buy and ride bicycles? If they choose not to, that's up to them.
There's no problem to address, except for the deranged desire to create racial tension where none exists by highlighting a problem that resides solely in the mind of the buffoonish 'cycle chief'.
You're right to fear for my constitution, though, spent most of the day trying not to cough/be sick. Minor, but irksome.
I don't want to interrupt the outrage cycle here but aren't the guys comments about getting more BAME people cycling rather than demanding less white people ride bikes?
Unless there is some kind of limit I am unaware of and his plans would involve stopping white people cycling as a result.
You imply in needs addressing, maybe people are happy doing it the way they are doing it, maybe they dont appreciate others telling them how they could be doing it better ? The nanny state is alive a well it seems.
Yes, but nanny is trying to save a few bob on the heart disease, diabetes and obesity bill for the rest of us.
Cycling cultures like the Dutch and Danes have the lowest obesity rates in Europe, despite their love of dairy and deep frying.
Indeed. That's the nanny solution, the alternative is to do something about the 'for the rest of us' part of your statement. The idea of 'polluter pays' is intensely popular on the left when talking about the environment, but for some reason when we are talking about people polluting their bodies it all goes a bit quiet.
I don't want to interrupt the outrage cycle here but aren't the guys comments about getting more BAME people cycling rather than demanding less white people ride bikes?
Unless there is some kind of limit I am unaware of and his plans would involve stopping white people cycling as a result.
I don't want to interrupt the outrage cycle here but aren't the guys comments about getting more BAME people cycling rather than demanding less white people ride bikes?
Unless there is some kind of limit I am unaware of and his plans would involve stopping white people cycling as a result.
Why is the colour of people cycling an issue at all? Surely the aim should be to get more people cycling? And if Berlin and Amsterdam have more people cycling maybe copy what they do or adapt it to London.
What can seem tiresome is the way that every bloody thing - including cycling - has to be seen through one prism only: the colour of someone's skin. There is more to people than that.
I am not a "white" person: I am a person with very many different characteristics and experiences which make up "me". To pick one characteristic about which I can do nothing seems to me to risk falling into the very trap which the anti-racists claim they are fighting against.
You imply in needs addressing, maybe people are happy doing it the way they are doing it, maybe they dont appreciate others telling them how they could be doing it better ? The nanny state is alive a well it seems.
Yes, but nanny is trying to save a few bob on the heart disease, diabetes and obesity bill for the rest of us.
Cycling cultures like the Dutch and Danes have the lowest obesity rates in Europe, despite their love of dairy and deep frying.
Indeed. That's the nanny solution, the alternative is to do something about the 'for the rest of us' part of your statement. The idea of 'polluter pays' is intensely popular on the left when talking about the environment, but for some reason when we are talking about people polluting their bodies it all goes a bit quiet.
Not from me! I would tackle the obesity epidemic with both carrot and stick. Encourage healthy lifestyles and discourage unhealthy ones via govt policy. Improving the ability to safely get about by bike is a part of this, but I would increase consumption taxes on fast foods too.
Around a third of Lewisham East voters voted Leave anyway so I would be surprised if Labour lost more than 10% due to Brexit
I think the Lib Dems are working on that particular problem.... The Tories cannot, of course..... And with Corbyn as their Leader, neither can Labour.
I'm very impressed by the LibDem effort in Lewisham East. It reminds me of Witney and Richmond Park, both of which I took an active part in. I'm sufficiently impressed that I put another lump on LibDems beating the Tories with Ladbrokes at 21/20 (powered up or whatever they call it). Now how do I get to Lewisham East ...
Somebody was saying that Lewisham reminded him of the Bromley byelection, when the Lib Dems missed out on winning the seat by a whisker. They do seem to be working hard there.
I don't want to interrupt the outrage cycle here but aren't the guys comments about getting more BAME people cycling rather than demanding less white people ride bikes?
Unless there is some kind of limit I am unaware of and his plans would involve stopping white people cycling as a result.
I don't want to interrupt the outrage cycle here but aren't the guys comments about getting more BAME people cycling rather than demanding less white people ride bikes?
Unless there is some kind of limit I am unaware of and his plans would involve stopping white people cycling as a result.
What has race got to do with cycling?
If your a Jezza disciple the only things that aren't to do with race are things that are due to discrimination on gender.
Must be off. Fortunately, this will decrease the 'diversity problem' of white men on PB. Play nicely, my ethnically and gender diverse cohorts of equal value.
They would refuse to accept collateral from Italian banks. Which means that they would have no drawing rights in respect of Euros. Which means unless an alternative currency is up and running immediately the entire banking system collapses. Which means no pay, no pensions, no sales, nothing. Who the hell needs tanks? That is so 20th century.
Call 5 days of public holidays, renominate all bank accounts into Lira, all shop prices into Lira, capital controls and float the currency into a +/-10% band of the Euro.
That's the easy part tbh, the harder part will be getting the mattress money converted into Lira and stopping shops accepting payment in Euros. The only way to do that will be mandatory search, seizure and conversion of large cash amounts at the Italian border.
Once the banking system is converted to Lira, drawing rights for Euros become irrelevant.
And in the second minute, when that +/- band of 10% is challenged what do they do then? How do they protect the Lira from rapid depreciation? Italy, like all Euro countries, does not even have a fully operative central bank. The most important Treasury functions are performed by the ECB. In the modern world how do they stop currency flight? It would happen electronically.
It is fantastically difficult.
That's why the capital controls would be implemented. Italy has a huge amount of gold, they would easily be able to defend a new Lira from a rapid devaluation. Also, in order to get the first few Lira auctions off the ground they could sell gold-bonds to start raising money.
There are solutions to leaving the EMU.
I suspect par value for the Lira would be something like €0.77-0.80, and it would take about a year for it to settle at that level. Just as it has taken about a year for Sterling to settle at about it's par value of $1.30-1.40.
The whole point of this would be to return to the happier days of a gently declining currency, higher inflation and a reduction in the overwhelming backlog of debt. That essentially rules out a par value over any extended period of time. It would not be impossible but the economic consequences would be extremely negative in the short term, almost certainly bringing down any government that went for it.
And...what would happen to Italians with their mortgages and business loans denominated in Euros ? A straight 25% increase in liability in Lira terms assuming a devaluation of circa 20%.
but I would increase consumption taxes on fast foods too.
Have you considered moving to Scotland - they have all sorts of nanny knows best taxes like this.
Good grief, what a stupid comment! It's not about 'nanny knows best', it's about taxing activities that cause future health costs to a) encourage people away from them, and b) reap some goevernment revenues to help pay for the ill effects. (See also alcohol and tobacco.)
I have been a cyclist in London since my early 20's, with intermittent gaps. I have the cycling injuries to prove it.
Reasons for cycling:
- keeps you fit and helps with weight loss - a marvellous way of destressing at the end of the day - you get to see London properly and discover streets off the beaten track - often more reliable than public transport - listening to music while cycling is a great joy
Reasons against: - no fun in the rain - in heavy traffic the air you breathe is probably not great - idiot drivers - cycling in a bus lane is purgatory - lorries - people opening taxi doors without looking - arriving somewhere all sweaty without being able to change is not great - having to carry clothes to work and shower/change there. As I got older and spent more and more time at work, my toilette was one of my few "me" moments at home. I may as well have slept at work if everything else was happening there. - no time to read a book - some ill-thought out cycle lanes - buildings being snippy about allowing you to lock your bikes to their gates - ludicrous rules in some parks. Regents Park used to be particularly difficult in this regard.
Not sure what conclusions to draw. Depending on your journeys and other factors, cycling may or may not work for you. Some of it will be down to local councils making things easier; but some is down to your own personal issues which governments can do little about.
There are lots of potential limitations on number of jobs, there are far less limitations in terms of cycling. I guess the cycle lanes could start filling up but that would be a good thing and probably result in less traffic so hopefully more cycle lanes being built. It seems unlikely the result would be demands for white people to stop cycling.
The aim is to get more people cycling, I assume the white people market for cyclists is closer to saturation point, thus expansion would be easier by going for untapped markets with lots of potential rather than ones that have been realised to an extent.
I would have assumed the free market consensus on PB would congratulate the guy, whose job/goal involves more people cycling on good business sense.
Or should this guy employ a less effective strategy for reasons of political correctness which wouldn't offend some white people?
I don't want to interrupt the outrage cycle here but aren't the guys comments about getting more BAME people cycling rather than demanding less white people ride bikes?
Unless there is some kind of limit I am unaware of and his plans would involve stopping white people cycling as a result.
What has race got to do with cycling?
Not a lot. When I was at ONS, I published a report on cycling to work using the 2011 Census data:
They would refuse to accept collateral from Italian banks. Which means that they would have no drawing rights in respect of Euros. Which means unless an alternative currency is up and running immediately the entire banking system collapses. Which means no pay, no pensions, no sales, nothing. Who the hell needs tanks? That is so 20th century.
Call 5 days of public holidays, renominate all bank accounts into Lira, all shop prices into Lira, capital controls and float the currency into a +/-10% band of the Euro.
That's the easy part tbh, the harder part will be getting the mattress money converted into Lira and stopping shops accepting payment in Euros. The only way to do that will be mandatory search, seizure and conversion of large cash amounts at the Italian border.
Once the banking system is converted to Lira, drawing rights for Euros become irrelevant.
And in the second minute, when that +/- band of 10% is challenged what do they do then? How do they protect the Lira from rapid depreciation? Italy, like all Euro countries, does not even have a fully operative central bank. The most important Treasury functions are performed by the ECB. In the modern world how do they stop currency flight? It would happen electronically.
It is fantastically difficult.
That's why the capital controls would be implemented. Italy has a huge amount of gold, they would easily be able to defend a new Lira from a rapid devaluation. Also, in order to get the first few Lira auctions off the ground they could sell gold-bonds to start raising money.
There are solutions to leaving the EMU.
I suspect par value for the Lira would be something like €0.77-0.80, and it would take about a year for it to settle at that level. Just as it has taken about a year for Sterling to settle at about it's par value of $1.30-1.40.
The whole point of this would be to return to the happier days of a gently declining currency, higher inflation and a reduction in the overwhelming backlog of debt. That essentially rules out a par value over any extended period of time. It would not be impossible but the economic consequences would be extremely negative in the short term, almost certainly bringing down any government that went for it.
And...what would happen to Italians with their mortgages and business loans denominated in Euros ? A straight 25% increase in liability in Lira terms assuming a devaluation of circa 20%.
Oh I agree. I have been saying for days now that leaving the Euro is extremely difficult.
Around a third of Lewisham East voters voted Leave anyway so I would be surprised if Labour lost more than 10% due to Brexit
I think the Lib Dems are working on that particular problem.... The Tories cannot, of course..... And with Corbyn as their Leader, neither can Labour.
I'm very impressed by the LibDem effort in Lewisham East. It reminds me of Witney and Richmond Park, both of which I took an active part in. I'm sufficiently impressed that I put another lump on LibDems beating the Tories with Ladbrokes at 21/20 (powered up or whatever they call it). Now how do I get to Lewisham East ...
Somebody was saying that Lewisham reminded him of the Bromley byelection, when the Lib Dems missed out on winning the seat by a whisker. They do seem to be working hard there.
Mmmm... just maybe there's the possibility that the Lewisham East voters will send a message via the LDs that they are not happy with today's politics. Stranger things have happened!
They would refuse to accept collateral from Italian banks. Which means that they would have no drawing rights in respect of Euros. Which means unless an alternative currency is up and running immediately the entire banking system collapses. Which means no pay, no pensions, no sales, nothing. Who the hell needs tanks? That is so 20th century.
Call 5 days of public holidays, renominate all bank accounts into Lira, all shop prices into Lira, capital controls and float the currency into a +/-10% band of the Euro.
That's the easy part tbh, the harder part will be getting the mattress money converted into Lira and stopping shops accepting payment in Euros. The only way to do that will be mandatory search, seizure and conversion of large cash amounts at the Italian border.
Once the banking system is converted to Lira, drawing rights for Euros become irrelevant.
And in the second minute, when that +/- band of 10% is challenged what do they do then? How do they protect the Lira from rapid depreciation? Italy, like all Euro countries, does not even have a fully operative central bank. The most important Treasury functions are performed by the ECB. In the modern world how do they stop currency flight? It would happen electronically.
It is fantastically difficult.
That's why the capital controls would be implemented. Italy has a huge amount of gold, they would easily be able to defend a new Lira from a rapid devaluation. Also, in order to get the first few Lira auctions off the ground they could sell gold-bonds to start raising money.
There are solutions to leaving the EMU.
I suspect par value for the Lira would be something like €0.77-0.80, and it would take about a year for it to settle at that level. Just as it has taken about a year for Sterling to settle at about it's par value of $1.30-1.40.
The whole point of this would be to return to the happier days of a gently declining currency, higher inflation and a reduction in the overwhelming backlog of debt. That essentially rules out a par value over any extended period of time. It would not be impossible but the economic consequences would be extremely negative in the short term, almost certainly bringing down any government that went for it.
And...what would happen to Italians with their mortgages and business loans denominated in Euros ? A straight 25% increase in liability in Lira terms assuming a devaluation of circa 20%.
The government renominates all domestic corporate debt to Lira. Only bonds sold in London would still be Euro nominated. Most businesses would not see any difference and I expect the government would stand behind the major ones that would be.
There are lots of potential limitations on number of jobs, there are far less limitations in terms of cycling. I guess the cycle lanes could start filling up but that would be a good thing and probably result in less traffic so hopefully more cycle lanes being built. It seems unlikely the result would be demands for white people to stop cycling.
The aim is to get more people cycling, I assume the white people market for cyclists is closer to saturation point, thus expansion would be easier by going for untapped markets with lots of potential rather than ones that have been realised to an extent.
I would have assumed the free market consensus on PB would congratulate the guy, whose job/goal involves more people cycling on good business sense.
Or should this guy employ a less effective strategy for reasons of political correctness which wouldn't offend some white people?
I very much doubt the "white people" market for cyclists is anywhere close to saturation point. Getting more people cycling from across the whole population should be the goal: old, children, women, men, people going to work and those just going about London.
Why is skin colour - as opposed to, say, hair colour - relevant?
It may be that if you look at why people do and don't cycle - see my other post - you might come up with some helpful policies rather than focusing on skin colour which may have nothing to do with why someone does or does not cycle.
There are lots of potential limitations on number of jobs, there are far less limitations in terms of cycling. I guess the cycle lanes could start filling up but that would be a good thing and probably result in less traffic so hopefully more cycle lanes being built. It seems unlikely the result would be demands for white people to stop cycling.
The aim is to get more people cycling, I assume the white people market for cyclists is closer to saturation point, thus expansion would be easier by going for untapped markets with lots of potential rather than ones that have been realised to an extent.
I would have assumed the free market consensus on PB would congratulate the guy, whose job/goal involves more people cycling on good business sense.
Or should this guy employ a less effective strategy for reasons of political correctness which wouldn't offend some white people?
I very much doubt the "white people" market for cyclists is anywhere close to saturation point. Getting more people cycling from across the whole population should be the goal: old, children, women, men, people going to work and those just going about London.
Why is skin colour - as opposed to, say, hair colour - relevant?
It may be that if you look at why people do and don't cycle - see my other post - you might come up with some helpful policies rather than focusing on skin colour which may have nothing to do with why someone does or does not cycle.
There are some activities that are disproportionately concentrated among some groups and unusually rare among others. As a matter of observation, disproportionately few cyclists seem to be black - though more than used to be the case 20 years ago. There's an interesting question why (Is it race? Is it economic deprivation?). It seems reasonable enough to investigate further.
I don't have a particular problem encouraging black people in particular to cycle. I just wish they (and their white fellow enthusiasts) wouldn't do it so chaotically on the street round the corner from where I live on that sodding cycling superhighway.
Only on PB could a reasonable observation on demographic differentials by the bloke charged with increasing cycling rates cause such outrage. Several of the comments below induced much LOLing on a gruelling day for me, for which I give thanks!
I very much doubt the "white people" market for cyclists is anywhere close to saturation point. Getting more people cycling from across the whole population should be the goal: old, children, women, men, people going to work and those just going about London.
Why is skin colour - as opposed to, say, hair colour - relevant?
It may be that if you look at why people do and don't cycle - see my other post - you might come up with some helpful policies rather than focusing on skin colour which may have nothing to do with why someone does or does not cycle.
You may have misread but I said closer and unless there is something about being white that makes someone more likely to cycle that would seem to be the case.
Skin colour seems to be very relevant to everyone unfortunately, even the people who complain about PC, in this circumstance because they are white people feel insulted by this. All because this person whose job/goal it is to encourage cycling decided to concentrate on a market with more unfulfilled potential in terms of cyclists, sounds to me like a good strategy to get more people cycling. Who cares if the market he is targeting doesn't include white people?! This will not, contrary to some of the complaints here stop a single white person cycling.
It seems simply an attempt to go for an untapped (or lesser) market. Purely good business sense, if not being PC upsets some people then I can live with that if the end result is more people cycling.
There are lots of reasons why people don't cycle, targeted campaigns often work otherwise the whole advertising industry would be pointless. If you have more unfulfilled potential among one base you would definitely go for that...
I very much doubt the "white people" market for cyclists is anywhere close to saturation point. Getting more people cycling from across the whole population should be the goal: old, children, women, men, people going to work and those just going about London.
Why is skin colour - as opposed to, say, hair colour - relevant?
It may be that if you look at why people do and don't cycle - see my other post - you might come up with some helpful policies rather than focusing on skin colour which may have nothing to do with why someone does or does not cycle.
There are some activities that are disproportionately concentrated among some groups and unusually rare among others. As a matter of observation, disproportionately few cyclists seem to be black - though more than used to be the case 20 years ago. There's an interesting question why (Is it race? Is it economic deprivation?). It seems reasonable enough to investigate further.
I don't have a particular problem encouraging black people in particular to cycle. I just wish they (and their white fellow enthusiasts) wouldn't do it so chaotically on the street round the corner from where I live on that sodding cycling superhighway.
I don't know whether it is disproportionately fewer. It may or may not be. It may be because of other factors than the colour of their skin. There are probably disproportionately fewer older cyclists than young ones. It would be worth finding out why and encouraging them.
That's my point. If all you do is focus on one characteristic you risk missing out on others. Surely the sensible thing to do is find out why people - of all types - do or don't cycle and what might make them change their mind and then see what public policy can do to help / nudge people in a certain way.
Anyway the mark of a true cyclist in London is being able to cycle up Swains Lane in Highgate and then freewheel all the way down to Muswell Hill on your right or left around Hampstead Heath and as near to Whitestone Pond as you can get. (And yes - when I lived in Muswell Hill I did this regularly.)
I don't want to interrupt the outrage cycle here but aren't the guys comments about getting more BAME people cycling rather than demanding less white people ride bikes?
Unless there is some kind of limit I am unaware of and his plans would involve stopping white people cycling as a result.
FEWER white people
NOT less white people.
After all that exercise they may be lesser whites people
There are lots of potential limitations on number of jobs, there are far less limitations in terms of cycling. I guess the cycle lanes could start filling up but that would be a good thing and probably result in less traffic so hopefully more cycle lanes being built. It seems unlikely the result would be demands for white people to stop cycling.
The aim is to get more people cycling, I assume the white people market for cyclists is closer to saturation point, thus expansion would be easier by going for untapped markets with lots of potential rather than ones that have been realised to an extent.
I would have assumed the free market consensus on PB would congratulate the guy, whose job/goal involves more people cycling on good business sense.
Or should this guy employ a less effective strategy for reasons of political correctness which wouldn't offend some white people?
I very much doubt the "white people" market for cyclists is anywhere close to saturation point. Getting more people cycling from across the whole population should be the goal: old, children, women, men, people going to work and those just going about London.
Why is skin colour - as opposed to, say, hair colour - relevant?
It may be that if you look at why people do and don't cycle - see my other post - you might come up with some helpful policies rather than focusing on skin colour which may have nothing to do with why someone does or does not cycle.
There are some activities that are disproportionately concentrated among some groups and unusually rare among others. As a matter of observation, disproportionately few cyclists seem to be black - though more than used to be the case 20 years ago. There's an interesting question why (Is it race? Is it economic deprivation?). It seems reasonable enough to investigate further.
I don't have a particular problem encouraging black people in particular to cycle. I just wish they (and their white fellow enthusiasts) wouldn't do it so chaotically on the street round the corner from where I live on that sodding cycling superhighway.
In Oxford cyclists continually try to kill themselves by overtaking cars turning left on the inside. Many are foreign students and not white.
I very much doubt the "white people" market for cyclists is anywhere close to saturation point. Getting more people cycling from across the whole population should be the goal: old, children, women, men, people going to work and those just going about London.
Why is skin colour - as opposed to, say, hair colour - relevant?
It may be that if you look at why people do and don't cycle - see my other post - you might come up with some helpful policies rather than focusing on skin colour which may have nothing to do with why someone does or does not cycle.
You may have misread but I said closer and unless there is something about being white that makes someone more likely to cycle that would seem to be the case.
Skin colour seems to be very relevant to everyone unfortunately, even the people who complain about PC, in this circumstance because they are white people feel insulted by this. All because this person whose job/goal it is to encourage cycling decided to concentrate on a market with more unfulfilled potential in terms of cyclists, sounds to me like a good strategy to get more people cycling. Who cares if the market he is targeting doesn't include white people?! This will not, contrary to some of the complaints here stop a single white person cycling.
It seems simply an attempt to go for an untapped (or lesser) market. Purely good business sense, if not being PC upsets some people then I can live with that if the end result is more people cycling.
There are lots of reasons why people don't cycle, targeted campaigns often work otherwise the whole advertising industry would be pointless. If you have more unfulfilled potential among one base you would definitely go for that...
Unless maybe doing so was seen as un PC?
I think more people should be encouraged to cycle. Finding out why they don't is a good place to start. Amazingly enough it is possible that the reasons why they don't have nothing to do with skin colour. I'm not sure why that's controversial.
What some people find tiresome is the way that everything is reduced to skin colour. It may be relevant. But equally it may not be. Maybe keep an open mind rather than start with a preconceived assumption, eh?
Only on PB could a reasonable observation on demographic differentials by the bloke charged with increasing cycling rates cause such outrage. Several of the comments below induced much LOLing on a gruelling day for me, for which I give thanks!
Try making a "a reasonable observation on demographic differentials " when commenting on recent child exploitation legal cases and see where it gets you.
What George Soros overlooks is that the EU has proved utterly incapable of transforming itself, however economically rational or politically compelling the case for doing so. Constitutionally it appears to have been designed in order to prevent any deviation from the path that its past and present elites are intent on following. The logic of the rest of his position is then that the Eurozone is going to collapse, and that the whole EU project will then be left teetering on the brink.
I very much doubt the "white people" market for cyclists is anywhere close to saturation point. Getting more people cycling from across the whole population should be the goal: old, children, women, men, people going to work and those just going about London.
Why is skin colour - as opposed to, say, hair colour - relevant?
It may be that if you look at why people do and don't cycle - see my other post - you might come up with some helpful policies rather than focusing on skin colour which may have nothing to do with why someone does or does not cycle.
You may have misread but I said closer and unless there is something about being white that makes someone more likely to cycle that would seem to be the case.
Skin colour seems to be very relevant to everyone unfortunately, even the people who complain about PC, in this circumstance because they are white people feel insulted by this. All because this person whose job/goal it is to encourage cycling decided to concentrate on a market with more unfulfilled potential in terms of cyclists, sounds to me like a good strategy to get more people cycling. Who cares if the market he is targeting doesn't include white people?! This will not, contrary to some of the complaints here stop a single white person cycling.
It seems simply an attempt to go for an untapped (or lesser) market. Purely good business sense, if not being PC upsets some people then I can live with that if the end result is more people cycling.
There are lots of reasons why people don't cycle, targeted campaigns often work otherwise the whole advertising industry would be pointless. If you have more unfulfilled potential among one base you would definitely go for that...
Unless maybe doing so was seen as un PC?
What some people find tiresome is the way that everything is reduced to skin colour. It may be relevant. But equally it may not be. Maybe keep an open mind rather than start with a preconceived assumption, eh?
I think more people should be encouraged to cycle. Finding out why they don't is a good place to start. Amazingly enough it is possible that the reasons why they don't have nothing to do with skin colour. I'm not sure why that's controversial.
What some people find tiresome is the way that everything is reduced to skin colour. It may be relevant. But equally it may not be. Maybe keep an open mind rather than start with a preconceived assumption, eh?
Surely the best way to get more cyclists though would be to go for markets with less fulfilled potential?
Unless there is some white gene involved in wanting to cycle but that seems unlikely...
I just can't understand why some white people are so insulted about what in simple business terms would be the obvious move. Take skin colour out of it and nobody would have a problem at all with going for this unexploited group of potential cyclists, it is the fact that this group is BAME and not white that seems to have ruffled some feathers.
Why should it be such a problem? why do people have such a problem with skin colour? why does everything need to be PC all the time?
For all the complaints about it from the right they seem to be the champions of it when it comes to white people, I've wanted ever since I was young for society to move (to an extent) past skin colour but it is the right far more than anyone else who stop that happening, they seem to think everything is a contest now and they have to fight for PC for white people.
It is tiring.
Some massive generalisations about the right in my rant there, obviously only small sections really.
I don't want to interrupt the outrage cycle here but aren't the guys comments about getting more BAME people cycling rather than demanding less white people ride bikes?
Unless there is some kind of limit I am unaware of and his plans would involve stopping white people cycling as a result.
FEWER white people
NOT less white people.
It makes no difference to comprehending the point in this instance, therefore the distinction is meaningless in this instance.
I think more people should be encouraged to cycle. Finding out why they don't is a good place to start. Amazingly enough it is possible that the reasons why they don't have nothing to do with skin colour. I'm not sure why that's controversial.
What some people find tiresome is the way that everything is reduced to skin colour. It may be relevant. But equally it may not be. Maybe keep an open mind rather than start with a preconceived assumption, eh?
Surely the best way to get more cyclists though would be to go for markets with less fulfilled potential?
Unless there is some white gene involved in wanting to cycle but that seems unlikely...
I just can't understand why some white people are so insulted about what in simple business terms would be the obvious move. Take skin colour out of it and nobody would have a problem at all with going for this unexploited group of potential cyclists, it is the fact that this group is BAME and not white that seems to have ruffled some feathers.
Why should it be such a problem? why do people have such a problem with skin colour? why does everything need to be PC all the time?
For all the complaints about it from the right they seem to be the champions of it when it comes to white people, I've wanted ever since I was young for society to move (to an extent) past skin colour but it is the right far more than anyone else who stop that happening, they seem to think everything is a contest now and they have to fight for PC for white people.
It is tiring.
Some massive generalisations about the right in my rant there, obviously only small sections really.
It doesn't ruffle my feathers. I'm keen on cycling. I think the reasons - based on my experience - for why people do and don't do it are quite subtle and change depending on circumstances. If the cycling tsar wants to encourage cycling I would suggest he focus on finding out those reasons.
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
I very much doubt the "white people" market for cyclists is anywhere close to saturation point. Getting more people cycling from across the whole population should be the goal: old, children, women, men, people going to work and those just going about London.
Why is skin colour - as opposed to, say, hair colour - relevant?
It may be that if you look at why people do and don't cycle - see my other post - you might come up with some helpful policies rather than focusing on skin colour which may have nothing to do with why someone does or does not cycle.
You may have misread but I said closer and unless there is something about being white that makes someone more likely to cycle that would seem to be the case.
Skin colour seems to be very relevant to everyone unfortunately, even the people who complain about PC, in this circumstance because they are white people feel insulted by this. All because this person whose job/goal it is to encourage cycling decided to concentrate on a market with more unfulfilled potential in terms of cyclists, sounds to me like a good strategy to get more people cycling. Who cares if the market he is targeting doesn't include white people?! This will not, contrary to some of the complaints here stop a single white person cycling.
It seems simply an attempt to go for an untapped (or lesser) market. Purely good business sense, if not being PC upsets some people then I can live with that if the end result is more people cycling.
There are lots of reasons why people don't cycle, targeted campaigns often work otherwise the whole advertising industry would be pointless. If you have more unfulfilled potential among one base you would definitely go for that...
Unless maybe doing so was seen as un PC?
I think more people should be encouraged to cycle. Finding out why they don't is a good place to start. Amazingly enough it is possible that the reasons why they don't have nothing to do with skin colour. I'm not sure why that's controversial.
What some people find tiresome is the way that everything is reduced to skin colour. It may be relevant. But equally it may not be. Maybe keep an open mind rather than start with a preconceived assumption, eh?
Okay but if we're keeping an open mind then why are you so pissed off that somebody is suggesting that it is?
It doesn't ruffle my feathers. I'm keen on cycling. I think the reasons - based on my experience - for why people do and don't do it are quite subtle and change depending on circumstances. If the cycling tsar wants to encourage cycling I would suggest he focus on finding out those reasons.
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
Anyway thanks as always for the debate.
Not cycling, but on my many and varied walks it's noticeable how few ethnic minorities I see out and doing recreational walks. Yes, I see a few dog walkers, but the number of 'serious' walkers / hikers I've met is very low - and far under the proportion of ethnic minorities in the country.
Why does this occur? Well, ethnic minorities tend to clump around towns and cities rather than the countryside, so perhaps it is lack of access. Then again, I've done plenty of urban walking and have not seen many. Perhaps walking/hiking is a middle-class activity, and working-class people cannot afford the time - then why were the great access marches led by working-class people (e.g. the Kinder Trespass) from the cities? Or perhaps it is cultural - but I fail to see why that might be.
The next question is whether it matters, and I'm torn on this. On one hand, it's great exercise and a superb away of getting to know the country and its people. On the other - well, it's just hiking ...
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype_theory
Simplistically a prototype is a central tendency for an entity or idea, and a stereotype is the extent to which people believe that prototype is representative of all examples of the entity or idea.
Edited extra bit: incidentally, if anyone missed the fairly early posting earlier, do give this piece of sore throat radio a quick listen (if you're interested in where Ricciardo well end up next year): http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2018/05/ricciardo-where-to-in-2019.html
Glad I did that yesterday. Much more coughing today.
So you have an implicit bias against implicit bias.
Got it.
I do not doubt that the religious lobby is not the only opposition to assisted dying. However I do believe that, as with opposition to SSM and abortion, that is where the core opposition comes from. I am also aware that many religious campaigning groups encourage members not to mention their religious beliefs when voicing their opinions on social issues - I have seen specific advice from religious groups to base their opposition on other pretexts - in the case of assisted dying I believe that are advised to play up the issue that some old people might be pressurised into it.
There are delicate issues without a doubt but none which ought to prevent a well thought assisted suicide law being enacted with sufficient safeguards. At the end of the day what most people are looking for is an effective and painless way to end their own life at a time of their own choosing- I believe that in Dignitas the health professionals leave the room while the individual take the drug cocktail themselves. Talking of people "killing" others, is, in my view emotive and is exactly the sort of tactics that the anti-abortion lobby use in their campaigns. (II am not for a moment suggesting that is what you are trying to do but it is a tactic of the religious right in particular)
Did you see the London 'cycling chief' reckons the lack of diversity in Londoners cycling is a problem?
Too many middle class white people. The chief, of course, is a middle class white guy. And a nincompoop.
Just googled and read it. Seems that it is commuters in the City of London.
I guess it reflects the workforce.
In 2007, Spain ran a current account deficit of 10% of GDP. And its Target-2 imbalance was... zero.
In 2018, Italy is running a current account surplus of 3% of GDP. Its Target-2 imbalance is [some extremely large number].
Target-2 imbalances happen when people pull Euros out of bank accounts in the periphery and move them to (mostly) Germany.
I think it is the best measure of people "voting with their feet" as to the risk of Euro breakup.
Ah, my coat!
Local media reported that Herman was temporarily released from prison for several hours on Monday night for "family leave" to prepare his reintegration into society, despite a prison service assessment that he was very violent.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/29/gunman-kills-two-police-officers-belgium-taking-woman-hostage/
Whether it is a tactic used by some groups or not, there must be a concern about people in a vulnerable position feeling pressured into doing something they would not do freely. Calling it a pretext rather assumes that it is being dismissed ab initio, which I am sure is not your intention. That is why it is so important to separate the debate about assisted suicide from the question of the cost to the state of looking after a patient with a terminal illness. Or indeed the cost to the family.
I have great sympathy for those who find themselves in such a position and their loved ones. Seeing someone suffer with no seeming end is not something I would wish on my worst enemy.
My very great concern is that I am sceptical that it is easy as people say to introduce an assisted suicide law with sufficient safeguards that doesn't end up turning into a licence to kill. And if you end someone else's life that is what you are doing - even if you are doing it with their consent for the most compassionate of motives. (Claiming that something is emotive can be a way of using a euphemism to avoid describing what is happening. If you end someone's life you are killing them even if you are doing it to end their suffering. And it is very easy for people to persuade themselves that what they are doing is for the best of reasons.)
And once that is permitted for those doing it out of love I worry, I will admit, that we will end up with people doing it for all sorts of other - less high-minded - motives. And I also worry that before long the general expectation will be that if you are suffering from a terminal condition you should kill yourself to save others pain/cost/nuisance etc.
It seems to me that this whole issue centres on the question of whether someone genuinely wants to end their life, that they are not doing so because they are being pressured to do so and that they need someone else's help to do so. That means someone must be compos mentis to make such a decision, which does not help when someone is suffering from dementia, for instance. Maybe a living will is the answer there. I don't know.
Finally, unfashionable as it may sound, I do think that those with a religious / philosophical viewpoint have something valuable to contribute to such a debate. This view that people with a spiritual/religious perspective which informs their views are automatically bigoted is, frankly, pretty bigoted in itself. Why not consider the ideas rather than dismiss them simply because of who articulates them? There is something valuable, IMO, in a world where it often seems that the only worth of a human being is what they earn and consume to say that there is a sacredness to life which is worth treasuring.
He previously held a senior position at Nike as Director of global partnerships. Interestingly the middle class white guys making these comments rarely suggest they personally should make way for someone more representative of the community.
What is the answer - free bikes for all. Of course white middle class types are more likely to live in nice areas and houses with bike storage - if you are poor and live on a council estate you are more likely to get it nicked. So you might as well get the bus - it's free for under 18s!
Lesson: Avoid PB Tory bandwagons.
https://compassionindying.org.uk/library/advance-decision-pack/
https://www.gov.uk/power-of-attorney
I think there is an evolutionary explanation for why we think life is sacred and we strive to preserve it. The future of our species depended on it. But it is only useful while we are child bearing and rearing. Beyond that it is as redundant as our appendix. I hope that oldsters become more focused on quality of life than quantity of life and are supported in that by the medical profession.
The way to get cycling rates up in London is to focus on the groups who are disproportionately less likely to cycle.
That is women (certainly) and ethnic minorities (apparently).
You are fishing in an ever-decreasing pool targeting fit, affluent men – many already cycle to work.
Cycling rates here have risen sharply in recent years but are still someway below Paris and massively below Berlin.
Your strategy to address this would be?
Unless there is some kind of limit I am unaware of and his plans would involve stopping white people cycling as a result.
Cycling cultures like the Dutch and Danes have the lowest obesity rates in Europe, despite their love of dairy and deep frying.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/05/29/britain-could-rejoin-european-union-brexit-says-jacob-rees-mogg/
There's no problem to address, except for the deranged desire to create racial tension where none exists by highlighting a problem that resides solely in the mind of the buffoonish 'cycle chief'.
You're right to fear for my constitution, though, spent most of the day trying not to cough/be sick. Minor, but irksome.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/help-men-work-less-to-close-gender-pay-gap-says-thinktank/
NOT less white people.
Britain could rejoin the European Union in the future, Jacob Rees-Mogg has admitted.
The leading Eurosceptic said any decision to reverse Brexit “would be a matter for the electorate”.
What can seem tiresome is the way that every bloody thing - including cycling - has to be seen through one prism only: the colour of someone's skin. There is more to people than that.
I am not a "white" person: I am a person with very many different characteristics and experiences which make up "me". To pick one characteristic about which I can do nothing seems to me to risk falling into the very trap which the anti-racists claim they are fighting against.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/left-wingers-heckle-minute’s-silence-to-honour-dame-tessa-jowell/ar-AAxXOn4
Billionaire says holding fresh referendum soon could save UK from ‘immense damage’
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/may/29/george-soros-drastic-action-needed-for-eurozone-to-survive
Reasons for cycling:
- keeps you fit and helps with weight loss
- a marvellous way of destressing at the end of the day
- you get to see London properly and discover streets off the beaten track
- often more reliable than public transport
- listening to music while cycling is a great joy
Reasons against:
- no fun in the rain
- in heavy traffic the air you breathe is probably not great
- idiot drivers
- cycling in a bus lane is purgatory
- lorries
- people opening taxi doors without looking
- arriving somewhere all sweaty without being able to change is not great
- having to carry clothes to work and shower/change there. As I got older and spent more and more time at work, my toilette was one of my few "me" moments at home. I may as well have slept at work if everything else was happening there.
- no time to read a book
- some ill-thought out cycle lanes
- buildings being snippy about allowing you to lock your bikes to their gates
- ludicrous rules in some parks. Regents Park used to be particularly difficult in this regard.
Not sure what conclusions to draw. Depending on your journeys and other factors, cycling may or may not work for you. Some of it will be down to local councils making things easier; but some is down to your own personal issues which governments can do little about.
@David_Evershed
Not only are they unreasonable demands but they are also clearly bad at English, as the messenger I take no responsibility.
@Indigo1
There are lots of potential limitations on number of jobs, there are far less limitations in terms of cycling. I guess the cycle lanes could start filling up but that would be a good thing and probably result in less traffic so hopefully more cycle lanes being built. It seems unlikely the result would be demands for white people to stop cycling.
@Cyclefree
The aim is to get more people cycling, I assume the white people market for cyclists is closer to saturation point, thus expansion would be easier by going for untapped markets with lots of potential rather than ones that have been realised to an extent.
I would have assumed the free market consensus on PB would congratulate the guy, whose job/goal involves more people cycling on good business sense.
Or should this guy employ a less effective strategy for reasons of political correctness which wouldn't offend some white people?
https://tinyurl.com/y77gqzts
Men are more likely to cycle to work, but where cycling to work is particularly popular, the difference between men and women isn't so big.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/24/politics/donald-trump-letter-kim-jong-un/index.html
Why is skin colour - as opposed to, say, hair colour - relevant?
It may be that if you look at why people do and don't cycle - see my other post - you might come up with some helpful policies rather than focusing on skin colour which may have nothing to do with why someone does or does not cycle.
I am assuming that as a generally left wing party they are pro abortion.
But presumably they are against Westminster intervening in devolved matters?
I don't have a particular problem encouraging black people in particular to cycle. I just wish they (and their white fellow enthusiasts) wouldn't do it so chaotically on the street round the corner from where I live on that sodding cycling superhighway.
Presumably the “more liberalised and like the U.K.” captured two overlapping segment of the Venn diagram
Skin colour seems to be very relevant to everyone unfortunately, even the people who complain about PC, in this circumstance because they are white people feel insulted by this. All because this person whose job/goal it is to encourage cycling decided to concentrate on a market with more unfulfilled potential in terms of cyclists, sounds to me like a good strategy to get more people cycling. Who cares if the market he is targeting doesn't include white people?! This will not, contrary to some of the complaints here stop a single white person cycling.
It seems simply an attempt to go for an untapped (or lesser) market. Purely good business sense, if not being PC upsets some people then I can live with that if the end result is more people cycling.
There are lots of reasons why people don't cycle, targeted campaigns often work otherwise the whole advertising industry would be pointless. If you have more unfulfilled potential among one base you would definitely go for that...
Unless maybe doing so was seen as un PC?
That's my point. If all you do is focus on one characteristic you risk missing out on others. Surely the sensible thing to do is find out why people - of all types - do or don't cycle and what might make them change their mind and then see what public policy can do to help / nudge people in a certain way.
Anyway the mark of a true cyclist in London is being able to cycle up Swains Lane in Highgate and then freewheel all the way down to Muswell Hill on your right or left around Hampstead Heath and as near to Whitestone Pond as you can get. (And yes - when I lived in Muswell Hill I did this regularly.)
Chaotic: yes.
But one of life's great experiences!
Ferguson is Australian.
In Oxford cyclists continually try to kill themselves by overtaking cars turning left on the inside. Many are foreign students and not white.
What some people find tiresome is the way that everything is reduced to skin colour. It may be relevant. But equally it may not be. Maybe keep an open mind rather than start with a preconceived assumption, eh?
Is there a Pro EU Party and if so who do they endorse?
Unless there is some white gene involved in wanting to cycle but that seems unlikely...
I just can't understand why some white people are so insulted about what in simple business terms would be the obvious move. Take skin colour out of it and nobody would have a problem at all with going for this unexploited group of potential cyclists, it is the fact that this group is BAME and not white that seems to have ruffled some feathers.
Why should it be such a problem? why do people have such a problem with skin colour? why does everything need to be PC all the time?
For all the complaints about it from the right they seem to be the champions of it when it comes to white people, I've wanted ever since I was young for society to move (to an extent) past skin colour but it is the right far more than anyone else who stop that happening, they seem to think everything is a contest now and they have to fight for PC for white people.
It is tiring.
Some massive generalisations about the right in my rant there, obviously only small sections really.
EDIT (as evidenced by their inabilty to go out and make the case during the Referendum campaign......)
Why would May and the government interfere in a devolved issue?
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
Anyway thanks as always for the debate.
Why does this occur? Well, ethnic minorities tend to clump around towns and cities rather than the countryside, so perhaps it is lack of access. Then again, I've done plenty of urban walking and have not seen many. Perhaps walking/hiking is a middle-class activity, and working-class people cannot afford the time - then why were the great access marches led by working-class people (e.g. the Kinder Trespass) from the cities? Or perhaps it is cultural - but I fail to see why that might be.
The next question is whether it matters, and I'm torn on this. On one hand, it's great exercise and a superb away of getting to know the country and its people. On the other - well, it's just hiking ...