Proceedings of the Castle Aching Parish Council, 1905

[Skinnylinny]

3 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

Most meals appeared to be delivered fastfood takeaways, and mysterious deliveries were furtively unloaded in the hours of darkness.

So you were spying on your neighbours, watching them preparing food through their kitchen windows? And able to tell the difference between a shopping delivery and takeout delivery (despite both being available from the same courier firms)? 

What makes any delivery "mysterious"? Plenty of modellers jokingly (or not-so-jokingly) comment about sneaking new models into the house, for example.

For what it's worth, claiming child benefit for additional children doesn't raise the benefit cap, which still applies, limiting income for a couple with children to £1835 a month outside London. Hardly enough to pay rent and bills on a multi-bedroom house, along with takeout delivery for "most meals" and "mysterious deliveries", whatever they may be.

[Compound2632]

Annual pregnancy and a reliance on fast food speaks of an inability to organise and plan, rather than deliberate dependency. 

[alastairq]

Often fast food works out cheaper than doing stuff oneself.

When one factors-in the costs of actually getting to the raw materials, purchasing only what was needed, rather than what the retailer dictates...Then the cost in terms of time , in preparation [time being a cost item as has been so often spouted on this whole forum, when modelling?}...and the cost of fuel in the cooking or preserving[fridges, for example....mine is probably more than 20 years old now]...of the food.....

Suddenly, fast food takes on a whole new perspective.

 

[Not everybody can afford to be selective or choosey, either....Whether in the choice of what fast food, or the type of food prepared]

 

The so-called benefits world is a lot smaller than the politicians [or the reactionaries?] would have us all believe.

What is to be considered is, whether actually going out and seeking [any form of?] employment may be a lot less 'cost-effective'' than imagined.

 

What with the 'gig' economy driving the lower end of the workplace, especially, then actually trading one's labour for a little pay suddenly seems a lot less attractive.

But that is what has happened to the work-market....

 

When my son was in the FE sector, going to a local college, he was amazed at how many fellow 'students' actually were 'compelled' to be there by the so-called 'benefit' rules....and who really didn't want to be there in the first place.

 

All about political appearances, and shifting the 'social' costs from one area to another within the economy.

 

What is missing from the workplace market, is the 'dignity' attached to even the lowest paid , or most menial, jobs.

Dignity mostly disposed of by employers.....but with a society so in lurve with property ownership [a fallacy in reality...most everyone being tied to the mortgage millstone [In French, ''Death-pledge''......which sums up the reality if things such as one's 'life plans' don't go according  to the rules?]}....who are so intolerant of those whom they 'see' as leeching off the 'State'....[Baroness Mone being a high flying example of this in my view...putting sink estate inhabitants to shame, surely?]...

 

Too much ''A-levels, gap year, Uni'' shoyte for my way of thinking, in our society.

 

I returned my driving licence vocational categories [c+E, D+E, etc] when the medicals went to 'annual', to remove the temptation to take on all the part time work that was being thrown my way...when I removed myself from the workplace market [to make room for up & comin' youngsters...which didn't happen 'cos they didn't fulfil the entry criteria....]...that the posh oldies call 'retirement'...but which I refuse to label myself with...even for convenience...

 

Instead of bashing the  benefits level of our social pond life, I wish folk would repeatedly bash the opposite end of the thieving, conniving, spectrum of society..the overpaid so-called 'bosses?''

There, rant over....

 

All of which, so depresses me when I read my latest issue of Private Eye...

[John Isherwood]

50 minutes ago, Skinnylinny said:

So you were spying on your neighbours, watching them preparing food through their kitchen windows? And able to tell the difference between a shopping delivery and takeout delivery (despite both being available from the same courier firms)? 

What makes any delivery "mysterious"? Plenty of modellers jokingly (or not-so-jokingly) comment about sneaking new models into the house, for example.

For what it's worth, claiming child benefit for additional children doesn't raise the benefit cap, which still applies, limiting income for a couple with children to £1835 a month outside London. Hardly enough to pay rent and bills on a multi-bedroom house, along with takeout delivery for "most meals" and "mysterious deliveries", whatever they may be.

 

Living forty years in the same house, built on a very dense layout, one could not but be acutely aware of the goings-on around us.

 

My references to social payments predate, by decades, any benefits cap, and couriers had not been invented at that time.

 

Whether you choose to believe it or not - I care not - the abuse of the benefits system to which I referred was real and widespread. Being a local government officer for forty years gave my a clear insight into how a significant minority 'work the system.'

 

I do not apply this criticism to those who, for a variety of reasons, need to rely on the State for their subsistence, but there is undeniably a substantial minority who could work, but choose not to do so.

 

I would add that, in 1970 and newly-married with a newborn, I worked very antisocial hours at an extremely physical job, earning £12.00 per week for a six day week - which was less than the benefits that I could have claimed. Self respect was not easily preserved.

 

You can tell me nothing about poverty that I have not experienced!

 

CJI.

[Skinnylinny]

You appear to be applying your experience of 40 to 55 years ago to the present day though. The world has changed vastly over the last 30 years or less - certainly it is unrecognisable now compared to even the 1990s or early 2000s. 

I don't believe it is the fault of people who find that benefits could offer a higher income than work - it sounds to me rather like you were being exploited if your employer was offering you less than you could have had as income through the benefits system! Unfortunately there's rather too much of that these days in my opinions. Employers wanting to employ people on zero-hours contracts, for pittance rates, with no guaranteed income, but wanting them to be infinitely flexible in when they might be called in (thus preventing them getting other jobs). 

The benefits system today is absolutely set up on the basis that they want you off benefits as quickly as possible and the DWP will find any excuse they can to stop paying. I have a friend who had their Jobseekers' Allowance (as was at the time) sanctioned for being 5 minutes late to a Job Centre appointment due to a broken down bus (despite the fact their work coach was running behind schedule and didn't get to them for 20 minutes after their arrival).

However, you also appear to have made up your mind on this matter and not be willing to listen to any other views, so I am not going to waste my energy trying to change your opinion. 

[John Isherwood]

9 minutes ago, Skinnylinny said:

You appear to be applying your experience of 40 to 55 years ago to the present day though. The world has changed vastly over the last 30 years or less - certainly it is unrecognisable now compared to even the 1990s or early 2000s. 

I don't believe it is the fault of people who find that benefits could offer a higher income than work - it sounds to me rather like you were being exploited if your employer was offering you less than you could have had as income through the benefits system! Unfortunately there's rather too much of that these days in my opinions. Employers wanting to employ people on zero-hours contracts, for pittance rates, with no guaranteed income, but wanting them to be infinitely flexible in when they might be called in (thus preventing them getting other jobs). 

The benefits system today is absolutely set up on the basis that they want you off benefits as quickly as possible and the DWP will find any excuse they can to stop paying. I have a friend who had their Jobseekers' Allowance (as was at the time) sanctioned for being 5 minutes late to a Job Centre appointment due to a broken down bus (despite the fact their work coach was running behind schedule and didn't get to them for 20 minutes after their arrival).

However, you also appear to have made up your mind on this matter and not be willing to listen to any other views, so I am not going to waste my energy trying to change your opinion. 

 

Human nature does not change, and I am not expressing an opinion - I am relating facts from personal experience.

 

I do not nowadays have to rely on benefits - except for the State Pension that I pre-paid for whilst working.

 

I have achieved that happy status through many years of hard work, but I still see many around me who choose not to work, but can evidently afford to smoke, drink and live on takeaways.

 

..... and in answer to someone else's statement that takeaways can be cheaper than home cooking - absolute rot; and time cannot have a value when you're not working anyway!

 

CJI.

[Nearholmer]

3 hours ago, cctransuk said:

Having lived in social housing for much of my life, and been all too aware of the anti-social behaviour of many of the 'can't be a*sed to work' brigade, I am confident in my assertion.

You having had some rough and lazy neighbours doesn’t amount to an intelligent analysis of the challenges of the UK labour market; it amounts to an anecdote. 

[Andy Hayter]

15 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

The UK is not short of labour - it is short of people who want to labour! Over-generous, long-term social benefit payments have bred a sector of society with no incentive to get off their a*ses!

 

Any politician proposing compulsory National Service lives in cloud cuckoo land. The morass of legal challenges, administration and protest will see the idea dropped as a VERY hot potato.

 

....... and I can't see their own offspring being too keen on it, either - or will there be a nice cushy alternative for the Westminster set?

 

CJI.

 

 

 I look forward to your reaction when the former builder who has severe sciatica, arthritic hands and white finger syndrome completes the operation on your spleen - which clearly needs venting.  😄

[John Isherwood]

21 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

You having had some rough and lazy neighbours doesn’t amount to an intelligent analysis of the challenges of the UK labour market; it amounts to an anecdote. 

 

Having had seventy-five years of life experience tells me all I need to know of human nature.

 

My long-term experience of social security 'dependent' neighbours in Cambridge was a walk in the park, compared to what goes on in more 'deprived' estates in our larger conurbations.

 

We differ as to where we ascribe the responsibility for that situation - but taking responsibility for my family's upkeep has proved to be the making of me. I have no regrets, and make no apologies for the character that life has stamped upon me.

 

CJI.

[John Isherwood]

28 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

 

 I look forward to your reaction when the former builder who has severe sciatica, arthritic hands and white finger syndrome completes the operation on your spleen - which clearly needs venting.  😄

 

I will spare you the details of the many and varied ailments / serious diseases which caused my wife to give up work many years ago, and which continue to seriously impact her enjoyment of life.

 

Why do so many people assume that those with views opposed to their own have a trouble-free life, sailing along on a cloud of self-congratulation and good luck?

 

Believe me, if I was to relate the encyclopaedia of injustice, bad luck and general lack of fortune that has characterised our lives, you might just begin to credit me with some knowledge of life.

 

I know what I have experienced, and my 'uncomfortable truths' are wholly based on life as I have known it.

 

CJI.

[Compound2632]

Boils down to Matt 7:1-3.

[Chris F]

It might not be my usual choice of reading material but it does have some useful bits.

 

It's Memorial Day over here in the shining city; perhaps we should all spend some time in quiet contemplation of the trials others experience until Isherwood returns to his lukewarm Daily Mail and the treadles of his sticker machine.

[John Isherwood]

50 minutes ago, Chris F said:

.... Isherwood returns to his lukewarm Daily Mail and the treadles of his sticker machine.

 

I'm afraid that you'll have to explain the significance of that Transatlantic insult(?) to me.

 

For the record, I am oblivious to the content of the press in all its forms - I can form my views of day-to-day issues unaided.

 

You will note that, as ever, I manage to express myself politely - why do my detractors always resort to insults; at least afford me the basic courtesy of a 'Mr.'.

 

CJI.

Edited May 27 by cctransuk

[Edwardian]

We all of us, of course, have had our share of life experience. To some it brings the humility of understanding that the more we learn the more we understand how much there is we do not know and how wisdom often requires the evolution or revision of our opinions. For others it brings the ossification of thought, a complacent sense of knowing all one needs to know, a confirmation of bias and the justification of prejudice.

 

It has often been my impression that those who, with grim inevitability, post provocative, contrarian or just plain rude interventions on RMWeb are likely to correlate with those whose mode of thought, and resultant opinions, are likely to be diametrically opposed to mine. To find evidence of this gives me no pleasure. Rather, I reflect that this hitherto rather sheltered corner of RMWeb is an exceptional indulgence; it will not be enhanced by, and may not survice, the advent of contrarians. 

 

I will offer an old North Country take on the consquences of an uncharitable mindset:

 

 

[John Isherwood]

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

We all of us, of course, have had our share of life experience. To some it brings the humility of understanding that the more we learn the more we understand how much there is we do not know and how wisdom often requires the evolution or revision of our opinions. For others it brings the ossification of thought, a complacent sense of knowing all one needs to know, a confirmation of bias and the justification of prejudice.

 

It has often been my impression that those who, with grim inevitability, post provocative, contrarian or just plain rude interventions on RMWeb are likely to correlate with those whose mode of thought, and resultant opinions, are likely to be diametrically opposed to mine. To find evidence of this gives me no pleasure. Rather, I reflect that this hitherto rather sheltered corner of RMWeb is an exceptional indulgence; it will not be enhanced by, and may not survice, the advent of contrarians. 

 

I will offer an old North Country take on the consquences of an uncharitable mindset:

 

 

 

Suffice to say that I am more than happy to be counted amongst those with opinions diametrically opposed to your own.

 

Two opposed opinions; but who is to say which - if either - is correct?

 

CJI.

[Edwardian]

Just now, cctransuk said:

 

Suffice to say that I am more than happy to be counted amongst those with opinions diametrically opposed to your own.

 

Two opposed opinions; but who is to say which - if either - is correct?

 

CJI.

 

If only all opinions were equal.

 

See the Dunning Kruger effect.

 

But it is a sad existence in which one takes pleasure in opposition to others, and not really the way we all rub along in this part of RMWeb.

 

Please close the door on your way out. 

[John Isherwood]

4 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

If only all opinions were equal.

 

See the Dunning Kruger effect.

 

But it is a sad existence in which one takes pleasure in opposition to others, and not really the way we all rub along in this part of RMWeb.

 

Please close the door on your way out. 

 

My greatest pleasure is in debate - whether I actually believe in the proposition that I make, or not.

 

The enjoyment is in the cut and thrust of argument; maintaining one's 'sang froid' is crucial.

 

As a member of the forum, I go where I choose and speak as I find. If the Moderators judge that I have transgressed decency, or expressed myself impolitely, I am sure that they will advise me accordingly - though I do try my utmost to observe the proprieties.

 

For the timebeing, I find my surroundings strangely comfortable.

 

CJI.

[Edwardian]

I suspect you may be over-rating your contribution to this forum by describing it thus.

 

 

See the Dunning Kruger effect.

[alastairq]

10 hours ago, Edwardian said:

I suspect you may be over-rating your contribution to this forum by describing it thus.

 

 

See the Dunning Kruger effect.

 Geeze.....that effect just about sums up 98% of drivers and riders out on our public highways.....

 

Can it be dealt with via the NHS?

 

[John Isherwood]

12 hours ago, Edwardian said:

I suspect you may be over-rating your contribution to this forum by describing it thus.

 

 

See the Dunning Kruger effect.

 

I'll just sit hear and listen, for the time-being - should something be raised that draws my attention, I'll be sure to make that known.

 

CJI.

[John Isherwood]

12 hours ago, Edwardian said:

See the Dunning Kruger effect.

 

Subsequently debunked!

 

CJI.

[Compound2632]

19 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

Subsequently debunked!

 

Specific explanations for the Dunning-Kruger effect may well have been debunked but the statistical evidence for its existence across a wide range of fields is well established, as far as I understand it. Do you have a body peer-reviewed scientific papers demonstrating otherwise? 

[John Isherwood]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Specific explanations for the Dunning-Kruger effect may well have been debunked but the statistical evidence for its existence across a wide range of fields is well established, as far as I understand it. Do you have a body peer-reviewed scientific papers demonstrating otherwise? 

 

Certainly not - my speciality is civil engineering.

 

I merely 'saw' the Dunning-Kruger effect as was recommended and found, not unexpectedly in that field, diverse opinions and research conclusions as to its existence or otherwise.

 

CJI.

Edited May 28 by cctransuk

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

I'll just sit hear and listen, for the time-being - should something be raised that draws my attention, I'll be sure to make that known.

 

CJI.

 

Oh, goody.

 

It is certainly true that there are people who exercise their right to be somewhere, without necessarily being welcome there. 

 

There is, for instance, a certain, fortunately small, class of people here who exhibit this tendency to derive their principal pleasure, and sense of self worth, from upsetting other people. Such people are to be pitied, of course, but I do not think we are obliged continuously to put up with them.  

 

My experience of you, for instance on the Terrier thread, is that you intervene tendentiously, generally from a position of some ignorance, often trying to draw some false equivalence between your opinion and, as often as not, some demonstrable fact, and you appear to take an absolute delight in just baiting people for the Hell of it. 

 

In this way, we learn quite a lot about the sort of character you are, but that is generally the only elucidation your unlooked for and unwelcome interventions bring. Yet, you write as if your sallies are some refreshing jet of witty brilliance lighting up a topic. This just reminds me of the study that shows the bottom 25% in any class will always over-estimate their performance, but, then, if you are in this group, it is almost a given that you won't really understand what the Dunning-Kruger study established. 

 

Have you thought, perhaps, of spending your time in some way other than trying to irritate people for the sake of it? Macrame, or learning the 'cello, perhaps? Or you could just reflect on how you treat other people and decide that you could spend your time positing things that were supportive or informative, or, even, amusing?

 

It is not, of course, for anyone here to tell you how to live your life, but I think it's fair to say that many of us would prefer that you did not exhibit your tendentious tendencies here. 

 

It must be a bleak existence to lead to such behaviour, but I do not think we should be forced to be anyone's cathartic therapy. Even Father Jack got to be nice once a year!

 

 

 

[John Isherwood]

32 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

Oh, goody.

 

It is certainly true that there are people who exercise their right to be somewhere, without necessarily being welcome there. 

 

There is, for instance, a certain, fortunately small, class of people here who exhibit this tendency to derive their principal pleasure, and sense of self worth, from upsetting other people. Such people are to be pitied, of course, but I do not think we are obliged continuously to put up with them.  

 

My experience of you, for instance on the Terrier thread, is that you intervene tendentiously, generally from a position of some ignorance, often trying to draw some false equivalence between your opinion and, as often as not, some demonstrable fact, and you appear to take an absolute delight in just baiting people for the Hell of it. 

 

In this way, we learn quite a lot about the sort of character you are, but that is generally the only elucidation your unlooked for and unwelcome interventions bring. Yet, you write as if your sallies are some refreshing jet of witty brilliance lighting up a topic. This just reminds me of the study that shows the bottom 25% in any class will always over-estimate their performance, but, then, if you are in this group, it is almost a given that you won't really understand what the Dunning-Kruger study established. 

 

Have you thought, perhaps, of spending your time in some way other than trying to irritate people for the sake of it? Macrame, or learning the 'cello, perhaps? Or you could just reflect on how you treat other people and decide that you could spend your time positing things that were supportive or informative, or, even, amusing?

 

It is not, of course, for anyone here to tell you how to live your life, but I think it's fair to say that many of us would prefer that you did not exhibit your tendentious tendencies here. 

 

It must be a bleak existence to lead to such behaviour, but I do not think we should be forced to be anyone's cathartic therapy. Even Father Jack got to be nice once a year!

 

 

 

 

Very eloquent - but, as I said, I'll just sit here and listen.

 

I had plenty of practice at that - sitting in Council meetings as the reporting Officer; only intervening when one (or more) of the Members made a patently inaccurate statement.

 

CJI.