RecklessAbandon Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 Personally I have been using Ground News as new aggregator which shows who is reporting what about a topic, the leanings, biases and factuality of a given news source. It also shows "blind spots" - news items that I might not see if I relied on a traditional "left or right" news source. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passing Time Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 2 hours ago, RecklessAbandon said: You just know those kids are getting bullied. The one dressed like his dad deserves to be 😂😂😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 6 hours ago, P.K. said: Oh the irony! I rarely link or copy/paste opinion stuff from elsewhere. My opinions are my own, gleaned from multiple international sources and analysed by myself. You, on the other hand, link plenty of non-original content, often unattributed (but usually crap from the Guardian), and @La Colombe offers little other than inane secondhand tweets. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 7 hours ago, RecklessAbandon said: You just know those kids are getting bullied. They likely go somewhere that's full of similar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 11 hours ago, TheTeapot said: There's a fair bit of bitterness around Isn't there always? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 1 hour ago, woolley said: I rarely link or copy/paste opinion stuff from elsewhere. My opinions are my own, gleaned from multiple international sources and analysed by myself. You, on the other hand, link plenty of non-original content, often unattributed (but usually crap from the Guardian), and @La Colombe offers little other than inane secondhand tweets. My my. So testy...! I link stuff from the Guardian simply because it's very unlikely to be lies... Certainly @La Colombe posts up stuff that the avid brexiteer will certainly find makes for uncomfortable reading but a broad spectrum of opinion makes for a healthy debate n'est-ce pas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 3 minutes ago, P.K. said: Certainly @La Colombe posts up stuff that the avid brexiteer will certainly find makes for uncomfortable reading but a broad spectrum of opinion makes for a healthy debate n'est-ce pas? Not uncomfortable. Just nonsense, and not even original nonsense. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 30 minutes ago, P.K. said: My my. So testy...! I link stuff from the Guardian simply because it's very unlikely to be lies... Certainly @La Colombe posts up stuff that the avid brexiteer will certainly find makes for uncomfortable reading but a broad spectrum of opinion makes for a healthy debate n'est-ce pas? Except it’s not a broad spectrum from you is it ( or your Twitter mate)? It’s either the Guardian or else Twitter for you two The rest of us will form our opinions from a number of sources. We will analyse them ( facts and opinions) and come to our own conclusions, not merely blindly accept the one source as being the oracle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Colombe Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 36 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said: Except it’s not a broad spectrum from you is it ( or your Twitter mate)? It’s either the Guardian or else Twitter for you two The rest of us will form our opinions from a number of sources. We will analyse them ( facts and opinions) and come to our own conclusions, not merely blindly accept the one source as being the oracle. Fucking hell, do you even know how Twitter works? It doesn't look like it. What a biff. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 (edited) On 7/8/2024 at 11:27 PM, woolley said: @Chinahand From its earliest times I never bought the spin around globalisation that took in politicians of the left and right alike, notably Blair as he was at the zenith of his powers when it was gaining real traction. One thing is absolutely plain. It wasn't about making the poor richer. I am still conflicted about this. This from the Institute for Fiscal Studies is a good introduction to some of the issues: The UK definitely has a problem with inequality - mainly due to the madness in the housing market and the total abject failure of the Tories to take on NIMBYs resulting in the young being excluded from the housing gains the old have benefited from. But generally I don't think the increased competition globalisation has brought has overall greatly increased inequality - it has also brought increased productivity and innovation which has benefited populations more. I'm conflicted by this as it is a huge meme that inequality has increased, but I'm not convinced the evidence proves it. And I'd appreciate other's views and evidence. In the UK the Equality Trust doesn't show large increases at all over the last 20 years: https://equalitytrust.org.uk/scale-economic-inequality-uk/ The bottom 50% earned 20.5% of income in 1940, the earn 20.4% today. The World Bank tracks the situation globally: https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/opendata/inside-the-world-bank-s-new-inequality-indicator--the-number-of- It shows a reduction in countries with high inequality: Gapminder still shows the proportion of the world living in abject poverty reducing: https://upgrader.gapminder.org/q/21/explanation The Economist has tracked things over generations: My view is uncertainty has increased, but overall wealth generation has continued. Putting up trade barriers, using politicians to pick winners (Industrial policies) and shutting down the incredible international supply chains which provide everything from trainers, prawns and ipads isn't a way to enrich people. Of course globalisation wasn't undertaken to reduce inequality. It was done to enrich shareholders and the executives who manage the companies they own, but there is a lot of evidence and theory behind the idea that being open to trade and international investments is a way to create wealth for all members of a population. I, for one, see the closing of trade and the replacement of hard nosed fund managers by the government's Industrial Policy Committee as a way of allocating capital deeply concerning, but I seem very much in the minority for thinking this. Edited to add another example from Carpe Diem: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-middle-class-is-prospering/ Edited July 10 by Chinahand 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said: Except it’s not a broad spectrum from you is it ( or your Twitter mate)? It’s either the Guardian or else Twitter for you two The rest of us will form our opinions from a number of sources. We will analyse them ( facts and opinions) and come to our own conclusions, not merely blindly accept the one source as being the oracle. Love the totally wrong assumption that my opinions are swayed by the twitterati when I only just know how to access it! Have to say that I also think your views are highly suspect when you pay actual money to read the garbage churned out by the remains of the Telegraph. The mere fact that you would only do that if you thought it was worth it doesn't say anything good about your judgement either... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 (edited) P.K. he's saying you are a typical Grauniad obsessive and La Colombe is trapped in the twitter echo chamber. It's not that inaccurate a caricature! The Grauniad has a sneering quality I have a difficulty with. Edited July 10 by Chinahand 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 (edited) 27 minutes ago, P.K. said: Love the totally wrong assumption that my opinions are swayed by the twitterati when I only just know how to access it! Have to say that I also think your views are highly suspect when you pay actual money to read the garbage churned out by the remains of the Telegraph. The mere fact that you would only do that if you thought it was worth it doesn't say anything good about your judgement either... I have told you before, at least twice that I don’t pay money to read the Telegraph. I piggy back on someone else’s subscription. So I don’t pay actually money to read it, nor do I for the Guardian who give their content away for free. Because they have to. Not that it really matters I have a mind of my own. You get my opinions on here for free. But if you would like to pay me for my thoughts I wouldn’t complain Edited July 10 by The Voice of Reason Addition of third para 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 11 hours ago, P.K. said: Oh the irony! It’s not irony. I have previously schooled you with definitions and examples of what does constitute irony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 29 minutes ago, Chinahand said: P.K. he's saying you are a typical Grauniad obsessive and La Colombe is trapped in the twitter echo chamber. It's not that inaccurate a caricature! The Grauniad has a sneering quality I have a difficulty with. @Chinahand I have to say "sneering" is a new one on me! The very idea that I'm a Guardian obsessive or whatever is just nonsense. I get it that you're a right-leaning centrist and I'm a left-leaning centrist brought about by witnessing first hand extreme poverty in the UK. And I mean extreme. I find the facts that a wealthy nation like ours has more and more people dependent on food banks and that 30% of our children are living in poverty absolutely abhorrent. Because in a wealthy civilised society it shouldn't have to be like that. Because as I'm sure you know that a key measure of how civilised a society is comes down to how they look out for their most disadvantaged citizens. It doesn't mean that I'm a socialist or any pigeon-holing crap like that. In fact I think that Labour's tendency to take a holistic approach to social welfare not only creates an underclass but is also prepared to nurture it forever so the cycle repeats itself ad infinitum to the detriment of all. The thing that really gets me is that with all the shenanigans like brexit and so forth it's obvious that folks either don't know or don't care that in turbulant times it's always those with the least who suffer the most.... Back to the present trying to claim I'm a "typical Guardian obsessive" when I don't know any and probably neither do you is just a bit OTT. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.