Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kosmin

  1. I think this is just as bad. There are numerous advantages and disadvantages to working in an office and working from home. I don't see why people can't be given the option of doing what works for them, provided their work continues to be done to an acceptable standard and the organisation continues to function well. I think a lot of these money saving ideas will be false economies.
  2. Not sure if he was handsome, but might he have been Genghis Khan?
  3. True. I wasn't saying Islamophobia and Gammophobia were exactly the same. But red-faced white people get lumped in with bigots just as some people who aren't Muslim get lumped in with terrorist zealots.
  4. Isn't dislike/hatred of Islamist Muslims (a subset of Muslims and a subset of people who look like they might be Muslims) at least as accepted as dislike/hatred of gammons (a subset of whites)? Aren't both at least arguably justifiable if a person does actually reveal themselves to be an Islamist or a bigot? Don't both become problematic when people jump to conclusions about whites or Muslims? On the question of non-white stereotypes applying to an entire race (rather than a subset, like gammons), I think the prevailing view is that it's OK for non-whites to insult whites, but not vice versa, because whites are powerful. This argument clearly doesn't work though. For example, Shahid Buttar (who primaried Nany Pelosi) said he received racist abuse from poor whites when he was young, but knew they were never a threat, because they were poor. He was only worried about racial prejudice when it was accompanied by real power. But surely this is doubly wrong. Poor whites can commit racist crimes and rich powerful blacks receiving racist taunts by poor people (e.g. footballers being booed for taking the knee) is considered a major racist issue. This isn't consistent with the claim that racism = prejudice + power. There's a lot of muddled thinking on race and suggesting that "gammon" is racist isn't necessarily the most egregious error.
  5. I doubt they actually do this. Imagine some anti-gammoners are going on a protest march (to stop Brexit, or rejoin the EU, or show solidarity with some group or whatever). Someone on the march looks like a "gammon", but clearly isn't, because he shares their views. Do they call him a "gammon" because he looks like one? Obviously not. Instead they use it as an insult to get a rise out of people they hate.
  6. They were suppose to wait for Winston Smith to dispose of Nicholas Nickelby down the memory hole before claiming "Gammon" was coined in the 21st century. Doubleplusungood!
  7. I don't think it's OK to refer to black people as monkeys. I'm not even sure it's OK to call people gammon (I just don't think it would be because of racism). Maybe it is a backward step to making offensive language OK. But has offensive language ever not been OK? Dickhead, *******, ******, scumbag, bitch, son of bitch, etc. are commonly used (Isn't the intent of causing offence more problematic than the content of the word?) Ban a word and then people just use another one.
  8. Is that how "Gammon" is used? I honestly don't know (I think I've only seen it used on these boards, in discussions of whether it is offensive/acceptable/racist). But my assumption was that people used it as an insult against people who had made their political views clear. I didn't think used "Gammon" to imply that literally all red-faced people must be bigoted. Does anyone deny being white is a necessary condition for being a "gammon?" Is it any different from being ginger? You have to be white to have red/ginger hair. Is it racist to call someone "ginger?" Doesn't the fact that other white people make fun of "ginger" and "gammon" suggest that it isn't racist? Isn't the hypocrisy the point? Presumably they reason that a "Gammon" can't complain about being called a "Gammon" without implicitly acknowledging that there is something wrong with their own bigotry (of course people who use this insult consider the gammons to be bigoted).
  9. Bossy is sexist if men who act the same way are not also called bossy (maybe it isn't sexist as long as there is another derogatory term which is used for the "bossy" men?). If there were non-white gammons who were never called gammons, then gammon could be offensive to white people. But as only white people can look like gammons, I don't think this it can be racist. It's more problematic when these terms are usually generally: "All women are bossy" and "All UKIP voters are gammons" can be considered sexist and racist, because they inaccurately attribute a characteristic to an entire class. But some women are bossy and some people do look like gammon, and even it's socially unacceptable to describe them in these terms, I don't think they constitute sexism or racism if they are accurate.
  10. Microsoft Word - PAS 9980 - Draft for Public Comment (cibse.org) This draft seems to indicate it applies to purpose built blocks only "Fire risk appraisal and assessment of external wall construction and cladding of existing blocks of flats" though it does also say "THIS DRAFT IS NOT CURRENT BEYOND 20 MAY 2021" Do you think it was extended to apply to conversions as well, or the author of the Sunday Times article was mistaken?
  11. I doubt this is relevant. We always heard how Britain subsidises the EU, so why are we so much worse off? (I assume you followed Brexit, so I assume you have some idea about this) Is there a guarantee that Scotland would be allowed to join the EU? How long would it take? I don't think they wanted freedom because they thought they were being mismanaged. I think they just wanted freedom. They didn't have freedom (they were part of empire, without democratic elections). Scotland isn't part of the British empire (Scottish people have the same rights as British people), so I don't think this is a meaningful comparison. People in British colonies were not given the option of their countries becoming part of Britain, with universal suffrage and sending MPs to Westminster. Clearly the people ruled over by Britain should have had their independence. But it is equally clear that in some cases the mismanagement has been exacerbated after they became independent. All this tells us is that people will endure worse circumstances if they are free. This is equally true of Labour voting areas within England. Should they also separate from Britain? Should the Conservative and Brexit voting areas in turn separate from an independent Scotland? I think there is some truth to this. But Brexit has harmed the EU as well. I think you underestimate the mutual benefit of co-operation. When this is disturbed, everyone is harmed. I don't see why Scottish independence would be different. If Europe wanted an independent Scotland, couldn't they force this? Couldn't they refuse any talks with Britain until another Scottish independence referendum was held? If it would be a massive coup, why wouldn't they do this? I think the EU might like Scotland to join in theory, but not in practice. Would Scotland be able to meet the economic conditions required to join? How would they do this without trading arrangements (the trading arrangements they would get once they join the EU!!!) etc. Greece fudged their numbers to join. Would the EU want to risk another Greece? Maybe I'm pessimistic. Maybe Scotland wouldn't have a lot of issues rejoining the EU. But Salmond and Sturgeon are just like Farage (they don't really have a clue what they would do if they got their wish; they just have blind faith in their vision).
  12. Starmer has been dreadful, but isn't there still some hope he will be gone before the next general election? Scottish independence seems fairly likely, but isn't it likely to have a lot of downsides, like Brexit? Tory MPs said Britain would get whatever it wanted in trade deals, because Europe needs us more than we need them, but unsurprisingly it turned out the opposite is true. Is there any reason to suppose a different outcome if Scotland became independent? It would probably be bad for England (just as Brexit has been bad for Europe), but worse for Scotland (as Brexit has been worst for Britain). We have already been unimportant on the world stage for 50 years. Johnson is a joke, but surely he would benefit the most from Scottish independence, as it would significantly reduce the proportion of the opposition.
  13. Would this apply to all houses except detached as well? Some flats share fewer walls than terraced houses!
  14. Have rents increased as a result of the tax changes made by Osborne? (I'm not sure, but thought they hadn't changed much in the years after this change*, despite the claims of the 'Axe the tenant tax' gang. Can anyone confirm or does anyone have evidence to the contrary?) If landlords could put up rents they would, but if they couldn't they would have to accept a lower net yield, or sell if that they considered the yield too low. * What has happened to rents over the last 18 months? Rents seem to be higher for the small number who have started new tenancies, but are landlords planning to increase rents en masse? If not, it suggests the market couldn't bear this. The increases are affordable to a small number of movers, but probably not the majority of renters.
  15. Set aside factors which could lead to lots of landlords selling at the same time. How many landlords plan to sell their BTLs in their lifetime? How many landlords plan to pass on their BTLs to their children? How many of those children will never sell? I don't know, but I imagine the majority of landlords plan to sell during their lifetime. Will there be enough new landlords to buy them (keeping the level of demand constant)? If not, that would represent a significant decrease in demand. Maybe this is still quite a long way in the future.
  16. Could be 'Capital in the 21st century' (I'm not sure if it's on netflix as I don't have a subscription. I watched it on Amazon) I think BTL is probably the main factor. For years there was a lot of additional demand as BTLs were net buyers. I'm not sure if this has levelled off, or if there were ever periods in which the number of BTLs decreased. I don't think there is necessarily any reason to expect a sudden exodus, but if there were surely it would have a massive impact. Shouldn't that give people cause for concern?
  17. I think public opinion is split (I saw some polls earlier which indicated 60% support, but apparently now it's closer to 50:50). Will this upset potential Tory voters in Tory seats? Will it upset them enough to vote for another party?
  18. Do you think it might be worth buying Microstrategy shares in an ISA?
  19. It depends what price the Blackpool owner and London owner bought at. I think it could be considered unfair on the "London owner" who bought recently and so didn't experience HPI and the "Blackpool owner" who could have bought in a different area a long time ago.
  20. It's already planned to increase to 68. This was initially due to happen between 2044 and 2046, but I think the latest is that this will happen between 2037 and 2039. Proposed new timetable for State Pension age increases - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
  21. Somebody needs to tell him the "levelling up" slogan was meant as a joke! Seriously though, his comments seem quite sensible, but even if there was agreement on this type of policy, I think choosing reasonable thresholds might be difficult.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.