Well Number24 you live in Norway so maybe they do things differently there. I don't mean that snippily; I am simply not referring to your own govt.
I've learned one's 'belief' is there to be readily exploited by the State - by which I mean, the local Social Services, and so-called regulators. It's to string you along.
One must remember that the UK is an imperialistic nation, and while it can't pull these stunts on Johnny Foreigner any more, not having any colonies, it instead pulls the same tricks on its own people, beginning the the first ruse: 'They will pretend to be your friend...' Then offer you some trinket to win your trust, one that later you come to realise is useless.
Okay, it sound like we're on the same page on that. But to get absolutely clear: do you agree there are cases where positive discrimination is the right thing to do?
And in the case of cabinets: do you agree it's natural to balance in the cabinet according to gender, geography etc to make the cabinet more representative of the people. (Within reason and of course granted everyone is qualified)
No I do not believe in positive discrimination, it is too often driven by ideology and/or political agenda other than equality.
And in the case of cabinets: if balance cabinet according to gender, you risk discriminating against a more meritorious candidate. Geography is more difficult question; do you try to get everybody represented or do you try to mimic the balance of population/economic power? If former: you'll risk giving more sparsely populated areas too much weight, if latter the fringes get ignored. Here in Finland, we get from time to time these cries out for the better politicians "States Men". I'd say it's not a matter of poor material of the politicians, but it's about poor material of the voters. Back when the population was more interested in political matters, a poor politicians career didn't survive in the next election, they were weeded out. The current crop of voters have the attention span of a six year old, and that shows in the kind of candidates the parties put up for election.
What we need is an impartial "Political Ombudsman", who would publish the results how well every cabinet member or member of parliament or council kept their election year promises in voting for resolutions and laws, and how informed these people were in their decision making, just maybe then we would see some real progress.
"I mean, she almost kills bond...with her ass."
-Mr Arlington Beech
I don't belive in discrimination, but you forget the positive discrimination laws are (ironicly) there to stop discriminiation. When business over decades consistantly hire men and not women regardless of qulifications the system doesn't work. It may be fair and non-discriminiationg in paper, but it clearly isn't in reality. When protests and and guidelines from the authorities don't work either, what is one to do? Positive discrimination does sound bad on paper, but it has in many cases worked and given business many good employes they previously ignored.
Well, like I said: positive discriminiation can only be acceptable if the person getting the job is qualified.
Driven by ideology …. yes. id's say the right to have a chance to get a job if qualified even if you're a woman is ideological. The ideology is called is called feminism. Many parties belive people should have reasonable chance to get jobs they're qualified for regardless of gender, so it's political too. There are lots of things that are ideological and political, but also reasonable and the right thing to do. The civil rights movement in the US in the 50's and 60's was very much ideological and political, but it was also the right thing to do.
Both with cabinets and otherwise: if a person is clearly much more qualified the job he/she must get the job regardless. Anything else is wrong.
Let make an example where I stand: Founding a club where only men can have a membership, is not discrimination, telling women they can't do the same is.
Let make an example where I stand: Founding a club where only men can have a membership, is not discrimination, telling women they can't do the same is.
No I do not believe in positive discrimination, it is too often driven by ideology and/or political agenda other than equality.
Like I said, too much of unrelated political agenda is sold to people with false pretense. Gender equality is just only one of these vehicles.
I agree on the club example. Your second statement about gender equality …. well, it depends. If you by gender equality mean the genders are equal in every way (thinking, talents etc) you're right. There are differences. But if gender equality means having the same rights, I'm all for it.
Well Number24 you live in Norway so maybe they do things differently there. I don't mean that snippily; I am simply not referring to your own govt.
I've learned one's 'belief' is there to be readily exploited by the State - by which I mean, the local Social Services, and so-called regulators. It's to string you along.
One must remember that the UK is an imperialistic nation, and while it can't pull these stunts on Johnny Foreigner any more, not having any colonies, it instead pulls the same tricks on its own people, beginning the the first ruse: 'They will pretend to be your friend...' Then offer you some trinket to win your trust, one that later you come to realise is useless.
I just don't belive there's counsil or meeting of some kind where people decide to kill people to save money, that's it.
I don't have time for this. I'm going outside in the fine spring weather.
I just thought out a relevant example: women in the armed forces here in Finland. I'll simplify the hell out of it, but bear with me: certain spectrum of the political landscape said in order 1) women should be allowed to the army 2) it should be voluntary 3) all women should be allowed in the army 4) it can't be compulsory 5) it should be voluntary for everybody bc it would discriminatory otherwise 6) we need only a small voluntary army 7) we don't need necessarily an armed voluntary service, look at Swedes they don't need an army! see the pattern....
This of course took a couple of decades to brew. Coincidentally it was the same parties that saw the Warsaw pact nuclear missiles as "missiles of peace", but Pershings as a threat to the whole of humanity.
"I mean, she almost kills bond...with her ass."
-Mr Arlington Beech
No I do not believe in positive discrimination, it is too often driven by ideology and/or political agenda other than equality.
I realized that I wasn't quite clear here: what I mean is that I don't believe in POSITIVE discrimination, there is no such thing. There is only discrimination, the end result is always the same; some is discriminated against.
I just thought out a relevant example: women in the armed forces here in Finland. I'll simplify the hell out of it, but bear with me: certain spectrum of the political landscape said in order 1) women should be allowed to the army 2) it should be voluntary 3) all women should be allowed in the army 4) it can't be compulsory 5) it should be voluntary for everybody bc it would discriminatory otherwise 6) we need only a small voluntary army 7) we don't need necessarily an armed voluntary service, look at Swedes they don't need an army! see the pattern....
This of course took a couple of decades to brew. Coincidentally it was the same parties that saw the Warsaw pact nuclear missiles as "missiles of peace", but Pershings as a threat to the whole of humanity.
This is largely irrelevant to our largely irrelevant discussion )
Moving it to the politics thread, I guess.
I'm glad we've both been able to pretend to be sensible and friendly during our discussion
Nothing to pretend, your arguments were both friendly and sensible through the course of our discussion. It's just my frustration boiling over. To paraphrase Charles Dickens: "It was the worst of times, it was the worst of administrations..."
I know it has nothing to do with gender, but to have the papers fawning over our "Girl-Power Cabinet" and seeing from the inside how they handle this crisis just makes me want to go all Colonel Slade on them....
"I mean, she almost kills bond...with her ass."
-Mr Arlington Beech
And how, pray tell, is the poor/stellar management of the current SARS-COV-2 pandemic or the reasons for it thereof, in any of our respective countries, not relevant to corona virus thread?
"I mean, she almost kills bond...with her ass."
-Mr Arlington Beech
I wonder how our UK members are feeling in the light of over 20.000 fatalities ( not including homes for elderly) while in Germany we have less than a third of that number and are at least 10 days ahead of the curve.
I‘ve read a Guardian article, that the UK deliberately denied cooperation with an EU agency to source and purchase PPE.
The first explanation was, that the UK are not part of the EU anymore(not true)
Then they reportedly did not receive the mails and letters
Later a UK official said, that it was a political decision not to participate and 2 hours later he pulled that statement back.
We were talking about positive discrimination and even even Finland's armed forces, and none of it was related to Corona in the end.
I made a comment about the piss poor performance of our cabinet ministers directly in charge of managing this crisis in Finland, and that one the reason they are performing so poorly is that in forming that cabinet recruitment didn't happen in competency first basis. And it got kinda murky after that, but the undercurrent was very much about managing this crisis.
As an example of this:
"The government concedes that delays in joining an EU-wide order for protective equipment needed during the coronavirus crisis were due to ‘ambiguity of responsibility among officials.’
The Ministry of Social Affairs and Health released a report on the snafu on Sunday but declined to place the blame on any individual official.
Minister of Social Affairs and Health Aino-Kaisa Pekonen (Left) had previously said Finland joined the EU order in good time, but it turns out the country was the very last to sign up to the scheme on 27th March.
According to the report the internal mechanics for getting on board with the EU-wide procurement scheme falls between the responsibilities of Pekonen and Krista Kiuru (SDP) who is the Minister of Family and Basic Services."
And how, pray tell, is the poor/stellar management of the current SARS-COV-2 pandemic or the reasons for it thereof, in any of our respective countries, not relevant to corona virus thread?
It did go into gender politics and positive discrimination, as pointed out. No worries, it's back on-topic now.
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
I wonder how our UK members are feeling in the light of over 20.000 fatalities ( not including homes for elderly) while in Germany we have less than a third of that number and are at least 10 days ahead of the curve.
I‘ve read a Guardian article, that the UK deliberately denied cooperation with an EU agency to source and purchase PPE.
The first explanation was, that the UK are not part of the EU anymore(not true)
Then they reportedly did not receive the mails and letters
Later a UK official said, that it was a political decision not to participate and 2 hours later he pulled that statement back.
I wouldn’t believe anything you read in that, you may as well quote The Sun. That article was brought up in an interview on the news and it was considered as completely untrue.
I have been watching Andrew Cuomo's briefing and it struck me how authentically empathic he speaks about policemen, firemen, train drivers and the med. workers.
If Trump tries to do the same, he needs 2 teleprompters for it, reads the lines and gets done with it.
What a contrast!
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,749Chief of Staff
I wonder how our UK members are feeling in the light of over 20.000 fatalities ( not including homes for elderly) while in Germany we have less than a third of that number and are at least 10 days ahead of the curve.
To sound extremely cynical and heartless - it’s about the figure predicted at this point and, according to The Times, Germany has reached the critical level of 1.0 again so may have to revert back to lockdown...so whatever the German government is doing isn’t working either - either that or they’ve been stupid to open parts of the country again
But I repeat - that’s according to a report in The Times, I don’t know how accurate that is.
Well Number24 you live in Norway so maybe they do things differently there. I don't mean that snippily; I am simply not referring to your own govt.
I've learned one's 'belief' is there to be readily exploited by the State - by which I mean, the local Social Services, and so-called regulators. It's to string you along.
One must remember that the UK is an imperialistic nation, and while it can't pull these stunts on Johnny Foreigner any more, not having any colonies, it instead pulls the same tricks on its own people, beginning the the first ruse: 'They will pretend to be your friend...' Then offer you some trinket to win your trust, one that later you come to realise is useless.
I just don't belive there's counsil or meeting of some kind where people decide to kill people to save money, that's it.
To sound extremely cynical and heartless - it’s about the figure predicted at this point and, according to The Times, Germany has reached the critical level of 1.0 again so may have to revert back to lockdown...so whatever the German government is doing isn’t working either - either that or they’ve been stupid to open parts of the country again
But I repeat - that’s according to a report in The Times, I don’t know how accurate that is.
As much as I am hearing the article is correct on those numbers.
Many scientists say here, that the fixation on R is not helpful and it must be seen in context with other variables.
I personally think that we are opening up too soon - on the other hand, we‘ll need to find a way to live with the virus for a year or so and even I understand, that we can‘t lock up everything for so long.
Main scientists confirm that the recent openings are too soon and too fast.
Then we have Mr. Laschet, who wants to follow Merkel as chancellor who is with the help of his pr agency trumpeting out, that we can‘t kill the economy like that.
The issue with slowly opening up is to determine and execute rules.
As a first step, only small shops under 800sqm where supposed to open.
Immediately the large and influential chains sued with the argument, that bigger chains will be more competent to execute hygene and distancing standards so that rule,has been sacked and everybody is opening now.
I went to a grocery store today and was shocked seeing around 50% of customers NOT wearing any mask, scarf etc, though it is mandatory since monday.
You can‘t fight stupid but all this gives me the impression that we are running towards another stay at home order very soon.
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,749Chief of Staff
To sound extremely cynical and heartless - it’s about the figure predicted at this point and, according to The Times, Germany has reached the critical level of 1.0 again so may have to revert back to lockdown...so whatever the German government is doing isn’t working either - either that or they’ve been stupid to open parts of the country again
But I repeat - that’s according to a report in The Times, I don’t know how accurate that is.
As much as I am hearing the article is correct on those numbers.
Many scientists say here, that the fixation on R is not helpful and it must be seen in context with other variables.
I personally think that we are opening up too soon - on the other hand, we‘ll need to find a way to live with the virus for a year or so and even I understand, that we can‘t lock up everything for so long.
Main scientists confirm that the recent openings are too soon and too fast.
Then we have Mr. Laschet, who wants to follow Merkel as chancellor who is with the help of his pr agency trumpeting out, that we can‘t kill the economy like that.
The issue with slowly opening up is to determine and execute rules.
As a first step, only small shops under 800sqm where supposed to open.
Immediately the large and influential chains sued with the argument, that bigger chains will be more competent to execute hygene and distancing standards so that rule,has been sacked and everybody is opening now.
I went to a grocery store today and was shocked seeing around 50% of customers NOT wearing any mask, scarf etc, though it is mandatory since monday.
You can‘t fight stupid but all this gives me the impression that we are running towards another stay at home order very soon.
Unfortunately I think we will see this happening in many other countries…and I agree - “you can’t fight stupid”...and there’s plenty of evidence of that in the UK at present 8-)
Well Number24 you live in Norway so maybe they do things differently there. I don't mean that snippily; I am simply not referring to your own govt.
I've learned one's 'belief' is there to be readily exploited by the State - by which I mean, the local Social Services, and so-called regulators. It's to string you along.
One must remember that the UK is an imperialistic nation, and while it can't pull these stunts on Johnny Foreigner any more, not having any colonies, it instead pulls the same tricks on its own people, beginning the the first ruse: 'They will pretend to be your friend...' Then offer you some trinket to win your trust, one that later you come to realise is useless.
I just don't belive there's counsil or meeting of some kind where people decide to kill people to save money, that's it.
Here in Spain they started letting kids under 14 out an hour a day. Many photos circulating of parents abusing the social distancing order. Give them an inch they take a mile. Starting May 2 adults get to exercise and walk around. I think many fights are about to break out between those who abide by social distancing and those who don’t. I never liked people pressing on me at the checkout line to begin with. I’ve gotten really good at fake coughing and sneezing, though...should do the trick.
Unfortunately bars and restaurants will only open end of May (if all goes well in prior phases), but at only 1/3 capacity until mid June. Then it jumps to 50%. I know many pub owners who won’t survive this. Sad.
Comments
I've learned one's 'belief' is there to be readily exploited by the State - by which I mean, the local Social Services, and so-called regulators. It's to string you along.
One must remember that the UK is an imperialistic nation, and while it can't pull these stunts on Johnny Foreigner any more, not having any colonies, it instead pulls the same tricks on its own people, beginning the the first ruse: 'They will pretend to be your friend...' Then offer you some trinket to win your trust, one that later you come to realise is useless.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
No I do not believe in positive discrimination, it is too often driven by ideology and/or political agenda other than equality.
And in the case of cabinets: if balance cabinet according to gender, you risk discriminating against a more meritorious candidate. Geography is more difficult question; do you try to get everybody represented or do you try to mimic the balance of population/economic power? If former: you'll risk giving more sparsely populated areas too much weight, if latter the fringes get ignored. Here in Finland, we get from time to time these cries out for the better politicians "States Men". I'd say it's not a matter of poor material of the politicians, but it's about poor material of the voters. Back when the population was more interested in political matters, a poor politicians career didn't survive in the next election, they were weeded out. The current crop of voters have the attention span of a six year old, and that shows in the kind of candidates the parties put up for election.
What we need is an impartial "Political Ombudsman", who would publish the results how well every cabinet member or member of parliament or council kept their election year promises in voting for resolutions and laws, and how informed these people were in their decision making, just maybe then we would see some real progress.
-Mr Arlington Beech
Well, like I said: positive discriminiation can only be acceptable if the person getting the job is qualified.
Driven by ideology …. yes. id's say the right to have a chance to get a job if qualified even if you're a woman is ideological. The ideology is called is called feminism. Many parties belive people should have reasonable chance to get jobs they're qualified for regardless of gender, so it's political too. There are lots of things that are ideological and political, but also reasonable and the right thing to do. The civil rights movement in the US in the 50's and 60's was very much ideological and political, but it was also the right thing to do.
Both with cabinets and otherwise: if a person is clearly much more qualified the job he/she must get the job regardless. Anything else is wrong.
Like I said, too much of unrelated political agenda is sold to people with false pretense. Gender equality is just only one of these vehicles.
-Mr Arlington Beech
I agree on the club example. Your second statement about gender equality …. well, it depends. If you by gender equality mean the genders are equal in every way (thinking, talents etc) you're right. There are differences. But if gender equality means having the same rights, I'm all for it.
I just don't belive there's counsil or meeting of some kind where people decide to kill people to save money, that's it.
I don't have time for this. I'm going outside in the fine spring weather.
Edit...Nevermind, we’re back
This of course took a couple of decades to brew. Coincidentally it was the same parties that saw the Warsaw pact nuclear missiles as "missiles of peace", but Pershings as a threat to the whole of humanity.
-Mr Arlington Beech
Nope this was just a little "Related Detour", a Spin Off, if you will. N24 and I, we would never high jack a thread.... :v
-Mr Arlington Beech
I realized that I wasn't quite clear here: what I mean is that I don't believe in POSITIVE discrimination, there is no such thing. There is only discrimination, the end result is always the same; some is discriminated against.
But enough of that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW56CL0pk0g
-Mr Arlington Beech
This is largely irrelevant to our largely irrelevant discussion
So that would make it relevant?
-Mr Arlington Beech
I'm glad we've both been able to pretend to be sensible and friendly during our discussion
Nothing to pretend, your arguments were both friendly and sensible through the course of our discussion. It's just my frustration boiling over. To paraphrase Charles Dickens: "It was the worst of times, it was the worst of administrations..."
I know it has nothing to do with gender, but to have the papers fawning over our "Girl-Power Cabinet" and seeing from the inside how they handle this crisis just makes me want to go all Colonel Slade on them....
-Mr Arlington Beech
-Mr Arlington Beech
I‘ve read a Guardian article, that the UK deliberately denied cooperation with an EU agency to source and purchase PPE.
The first explanation was, that the UK are not part of the EU anymore(not true)
Then they reportedly did not receive the mails and letters
Later a UK official said, that it was a political decision not to participate and 2 hours later he pulled that statement back.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/apr/22/uk-government-accused-of-cover-up-over-eu-scheme-to-buy-ppe
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I made a comment about the piss poor performance of our cabinet ministers directly in charge of managing this crisis in Finland, and that one the reason they are performing so poorly is that in forming that cabinet recruitment didn't happen in competency first basis. And it got kinda murky after that, but the undercurrent was very much about managing this crisis.
As an example of this:
"The government concedes that delays in joining an EU-wide order for protective equipment needed during the coronavirus crisis were due to ‘ambiguity of responsibility among officials.’
The Ministry of Social Affairs and Health released a report on the snafu on Sunday but declined to place the blame on any individual official.
Minister of Social Affairs and Health Aino-Kaisa Pekonen (Left) had previously said Finland joined the EU order in good time, but it turns out the country was the very last to sign up to the scheme on 27th March.
According to the report the internal mechanics for getting on board with the EU-wide procurement scheme falls between the responsibilities of Pekonen and Krista Kiuru (SDP) who is the Minister of Family and Basic Services."
https://www.hameensanomat.fi/uutiset/heres-our-evening-round-up-of-the-latest-coronavirus-news-from-finland-monday-2-1186004/
... and the list just goes on and on and on...
-Mr Arlington Beech
It did go into gender politics and positive discrimination, as pointed out. No worries, it's back on-topic now.
I wouldn’t believe anything you read in that, you may as well quote The Sun. That article was brought up in an interview on the news and it was considered as completely untrue.
If Trump tries to do the same, he needs 2 teleprompters for it, reads the lines and gets done with it.
What a contrast!
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
To sound extremely cynical and heartless - it’s about the figure predicted at this point
But I repeat - that’s according to a report in The Times, I don’t know how accurate that is.
I’m not sure the UK government deliberately denied cooperation with the an EU agency as much as they just didn’t have a clue what was going on
Call yourself a Bond fan.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
As much as I am hearing the article is correct on those numbers.
Many scientists say here, that the fixation on R is not helpful and it must be seen in context with other variables.
I personally think that we are opening up too soon - on the other hand, we‘ll need to find a way to live with the virus for a year or so and even I understand, that we can‘t lock up everything for so long.
Main scientists confirm that the recent openings are too soon and too fast.
Then we have Mr. Laschet, who wants to follow Merkel as chancellor who is with the help of his pr agency trumpeting out, that we can‘t kill the economy like that.
The issue with slowly opening up is to determine and execute rules.
As a first step, only small shops under 800sqm where supposed to open.
Immediately the large and influential chains sued with the argument, that bigger chains will be more competent to execute hygene and distancing standards so that rule,has been sacked and everybody is opening now.
I went to a grocery store today and was shocked seeing around 50% of customers NOT wearing any mask, scarf etc, though it is mandatory since monday.
You can‘t fight stupid but all this gives me the impression that we are running towards another stay at home order very soon.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Unfortunately I think we will see this happening in many other countries…and I agree - “you can’t fight stupid”...and there’s plenty of evidence of that in the UK at present 8-)
Unfortunately bars and restaurants will only open end of May (if all goes well in prior phases), but at only 1/3 capacity until mid June. Then it jumps to 50%. I know many pub owners who won’t survive this. Sad.
The trick was used during the Black Death too.
Thanks for the report and stay safe.