Meenzer 14111 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 One of the posh silly cows was making the same point about someone having a blackberry....despite no phone supplier in the countryt currently offering shitty old models like a Nokia 610 or owt. Top of the range models are all free...except the ipod. Interesting episode of thinking allowed a few months back about poverty on Teeside... http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b010t...ical_Gardening/ Seem to recall they said that having a mobile...a tv....internet etc are basic needs, ownership of which doesn't necessarily correspond with a lift out of poverty. A contract mobile is hardly a necessity if cash-strapped or a basic human right though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayatollah Hermione 12781 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 No surprises but its basically a work of fiction. My mate played a gig with one of the Geordies (Michaela?) and she's fuck all like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 what a load of patronising shite it was. Put me right off watching "Geordie Shore" now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Simon Donald - "hoo noo broon coo", what was he on about, I'd get looked at daft if I said a lass looked like a coo. One of the Walker Wellies - "Shy bairns get noot" Do Walker folk say "Noot"? He's a bell end in person him like ignorant fucka. Someone needs to tell him no one in the history of Tyneside has ever called a car a "murtur" n'aal. Aye, he absolutely loves himself. I've actually met his brother, Chris, as well. Had a chat with him and he comes across as a sound bloke. Much more down to earth etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howmanheyman 27121 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Simon Donald - "hoo noo broon coo", what was he on about, I'd get looked at daft if I said a lass looked like a coo. One of the Walker Wellies - "Shy bairns get noot" Do Walker folk say "Noot"? He's a bell end in person him like ignorant fucka. Someone needs to tell him no one in the history of Tyneside has ever called a car a "murtur" n'aal. Aye, he absolutely loves himself. I've actually met his brother, Chris, as well. Had a chat with him and he comes across as a sound bloke. Much more down to earth etc. My old workmate chinned one of the Donald brothers years ago at school. Lets hope it was the lesser of the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Just turned this off because it was so shit whayy ayeee man i bin lookin really hard fa jobs lykk whyyyyy makin all me sacrifices like man, I've not been watchin ma 48 inch hd plasma screen tv as much to save on me electricity bill pet a cannit even afford ma bus fare There's one of them must spend £50 a week on slap, and she's got two fucking kids, could she not afford condoms? Can you even buy a TV that isn't an LCD or plasma these days though? A black and white portable doesn't exist as a cheap alternative does it? Because even the cheapest models are bloody good nowadays. Don't see why their family couldn't have clubbed in together and got them one second hand for christmas for a couple of hundred on ebay. One of the posh silly cows was making the same point about someone having a blackberry....despite no phone supplier in the countryt currently offering shitty old models like a Nokia 610 or owt. Top of the range models are all free...except the ipod. Interesting episode of thinking allowed a few months back about poverty on Teeside... http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b010t...ical_Gardening/ Seem to recall they said that having a mobile...a tv....internet etc are basic needs, ownership of which doesn't necessarily correspond with a lift out of poverty. Best of all was these bitches complaining about the 'mod cons' the northerners had (so they can't be bad off) but after 1 day they were out spending their dole on Newcastle United merchandise and drink. Way to go without treats you fucking idiots. I wasnt clear what her point was, that they werent that poor or 'how come they can afford them'? She was a bit of a cunt all round though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) The best was the really posh lass walking through Walker going "its absolutely charming!", then asking some scruff which bus to get and giving it "very friendly and helpful...and absolutely gorgeous!" She was a bit of a dick in the end. 'My parents had to sacrifice a lot for me, £26,000 a year school fees meant they didnt drive the very best cars or have the wardrobe they wanted' Geordie lass 'my parents never sacrificed fuck all for me cos they never had fuck all' The posh lass then went on to doubt either the ability for the girls to get jobs or whether they were really poor because they lived in houses with 'all the mod cons' which i presume meant TVs and washing machines etc. Found her distasteful but typical of someone with her background. Am pretty sure the Lesbian host used to live on Summerhill terrace too. Class distinction has become less pronounced for 70 years now because of technological advances. Cheap clothes, machinery etc. I have to say, I know some 'poor' people who have Ipads, 48 inch hd plasma screen tvs and all that shite on credit, could you really listen to their whinging with great sympathy? They could always move to Somalia, where the cost of living is cheaper. Edited July 27, 2011 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Just on a more general note, i thought it was good TV because our society is increasingly unequal and gap between the rich and poor has been getting worse and will continue to do so. The contrived nature of the show at least provided public service TV that should have communicated the right messages whether you're rich or poor. However, i really had to fight the internal cringe at the absurdity of the concept of 'geordie' being portrayed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 The best was the really posh lass walking through Walker going "its absolutely charming!", then asking some scruff which bus to get and giving it "very friendly and helpful...and absolutely gorgeous!" She was a bit of a dick in the end. 'My parents had to sacrifice a lot for me, £26,000 a year school fees meant they didnt drive the very best cars or have the wardrobe they wanted' Geordie lass 'my parents never sacrificed fuck all for me cos they never had fuck all' The posh lass then went on to doubt either the ability for the girls to get jobs or whether they were really poor because they lived in houses with 'all the mod cons' which i presume meant TVs and washing machines etc. Found her distasteful but typical of someone with her background. Am pretty sure the Lesbian host used to live on Summerhill terrace too. Class distinction has become less pronounced for 70 years now because of technological advances. Cheap clothes, machinery etc. I have to say, I know some 'poor' people who have Ipads, 48 inch hd plasma screen tvs and all that shite on credit, could you really listen to their whinging with great sympathy? They could always move to Somalia, where the cost of living is cheaper. The income gap is widening and will continue to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) I thought it was shite because like all reality shows these days, you can't help feeling these people are being fed lines and basically playing scenes out. That and the fact that they all seemed annoying as fuck. Did you get my PM about Milton Friedman chez? He would have sorted this shit out. Cut out social security and minimum wage for starters. Edited July 27, 2011 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I thought it was shite because like all reality shows these days, you can't help feeling these people are being fed lines and basically playing scenes out. That and the fact that they all seemed annoying as fuck. Did you get my PM about Milton Friedman chez? He would have sorted this shit out. Cut out social security and minimum wage for starters. Yes i did Forgive me for not quite being able to tell if you're taking the piss or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I think pop culture and the cult of celebrity plays a role, perhaps not a large one, in these young women ending up with 2 kids and no job by their early twenties. Young people are encouraged to be mindless by the culture. The idea of making sacrifices to achieve a long term goal is seen as repulsive. Then you've got a situation in this country where you need a certificate to wipe your own arse. It should be a lot easier for employers to take people on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I thought it was shite because like all reality shows these days, you can't help feeling these people are being fed lines and basically playing scenes out. That and the fact that they all seemed annoying as fuck. Did you get my PM about Milton Friedman chez? He would have sorted this shit out. Cut out social security and minimum wage for starters. Yes i did Forgive me for not quite being able to tell if you're taking the piss or not. I was being sincere, I know you're into macro-economics and I was interested to learn more about him and his ideas, thought you might have something to say about it. I was genuinely daydreaming and thinking about drug policy in Britain. I imagined the likes of Alan Titchmarsh bleating on about 'lethal skunk' destroying society and so on and it got me pissed off. Then I came across an interview with Friedman talking about the decriminilization of drugs and so on. Of course I am in favour of this sort of approach anyway, but he was very articulate and appeared to have great insight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I thought it was shite because like all reality shows these days, you can't help feeling these people are being fed lines and basically playing scenes out. That and the fact that they all seemed annoying as fuck. Did you get my PM about Milton Friedman chez? He would have sorted this shit out. Cut out social security and minimum wage for starters. Yes i did Forgive me for not quite being able to tell if you're taking the piss or not. I was being sincere, I know you're into macro-economics and I was interested to learn more about him and his ideas, thought you might have something to say about it. I was genuinely daydreaming and thinking about drug policy in Britain. I imagined the likes of Alan Titchmarsh bleating on about 'lethal skunk' destroying society and so on and it got me pissed off. Then I came across an interview with Friedman talking about the decriminilization of drugs and so on. Of course I am in favour of this sort of approach anyway, but he was very articulate and appeared to have great insight. A staunch libertarian who doesnt believe in governments, just markets. He is therefore probably someone who thinks that drugs should be controlled by markets, not governments. His contribution to economics is monetarism, which is about using interest rates and the money supply to stimulate demand (a rejection of Keynes). The limitations of monetarism have never been more sharply in focus than right now. We have a stagnated economy and interest rates are 0.5% (with the real inflation adjusted rate at 0%). When rates are 0%, how do you decrease the rate of interest to stimulate the economy? The debate is interesting because monetarists are ideologues who believe in the free market and hate governments, they do everything they can to discredit keynesian policies, one of which being how impactful government investment is. The latest all singing all dancing keynesian models show that when interest rates are 0% Keynesian stimulation is even more impactful (multiplier effects). The debate on EU/US deficits is still dominated by an out-dated view of Keynesianism and the contractionary impact of austerity in Greece and Ireland is direct evidence of the failure of policy makers to understand the new paradigm. As Nietzsche said, all things are subject to intepretation, whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power, not truth. Friedman and his ilk have wielded too much power for too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34880 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 The best was the really posh lass walking through Walker going "its absolutely charming!", then asking some scruff which bus to get and giving it "very friendly and helpful...and absolutely gorgeous!" She was a bit of a dick in the end. 'My parents had to sacrifice a lot for me, £26,000 a year school fees meant they didnt drive the very best cars or have the wardrobe they wanted' Geordie lass 'my parents never sacrificed fuck all for me cos they never had fuck all' The posh lass then went on to doubt either the ability for the girls to get jobs or whether they were really poor because they lived in houses with 'all the mod cons' which i presume meant TVs and washing machines etc. Found her distasteful but typical of someone with her background. Am pretty sure the Lesbian host used to live on Summerhill terrace too. Aye it was pretty excruciating when she was saying that. Saying "i really do wonder where all the money goes", completely failing to realize that there isn't any money. The good thing is that she mentioned she wanted a career in politics and there's now video evidence of why no one but the upper class should vote for her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) Heres a sentence from his Wiki that caught my attention: "As a leader of the Chicago school of economics, based at the University of Chicago, he had great influence in determining the research agenda of the entire profession." It also implies elsewhere that he was perhaps the most influential economist of the last 60 years. Immediately I thought that seemed a dangerous thing if true, for one person to have such a monopoly of ideas upon a very complex area such as economic policy. Personally I have a libertarian streak, but it's only a streak, because libertatrianism doesn't have satisfactory answers to certain questions, such as what would have been the libertarian response towards Kosovo? Edited July 27, 2011 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Heres a sentence from his Wiki that caught my attention: "As a leader of the Chicago school of economics, based at the University of Chicago, he had great influence in determining the research agenda of the entire profession." It also implies elsewhere that he was perhaps the most influential economist of the last 60 years. Immediately I thought that seemed a dangerous thing if true, for one person to have such a monopoly of ideas upon a very complex area such as economic policy. I thnk he is evil personified. Financial markets, free-marketeers etc all love him and they have slavishly followed his doctrines. When Sarah Palin talks about death panels in healthcare she is riding on Friedman's anti-government rhetoric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Why evil? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Why evil? Because markets are dangerous. Exhibit A: The state of the global banking and financial system. His work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Also read up on Friedman's influence on Minford and his influence on Thatcher. A tentacle of evil that reached right into Tyne & Wear all the way from Chicago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Which brings us nicely back on topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Nice, thanks Chez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 You not read the Shock Doctrine KSA? Naomi Klein would have cast Friedman in the Saddam Hussein role in the South Park Movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I'm not a fan of Klein as a thinker. I think she interprets some historical events (fall of the Berlin Wall for instace) in a way that suits her own viewpoints, but is inaccurate. I've seen some talks she's done regarding the shock doctrine, not read the book. She's a hot Jew, if Stevie's reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Aye, she's not edumacated in economics like Chez or owt. But her view of Friedman as worse than the devil gets a pretty thorough rationale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now