SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[Tom]

I don't think you can stop all changes to land usage. You have to be pragmatic and pick your battles. Some development is always going to happen - your house, wherever it may be, sits on something someone once valued.

My council want to bypass a very old road not far from me and there's significant local opposition. Thing is, they're going to do it come what may, and they're correct - the road is needed. So my focus is on campaigning for the existing, crappy old goat track of a road to be filtered so that it can only be used to access the houses it runs past. So that nobody can use it as a shortcut, unless they're in a bus, or cycling.

 

[Aoami]

Tree-planting: Why are large investment firms buying Welsh farms?

Plans to encourage more tree-planting are under fire for "destroying" rural communities.

www.bbc.co.uk

Welsh hill farms being turned into monocultural pine forests to skew carbon numbers.

Now, I see both sides here - they want them to remain farms, we need to plant trees. But these companies see an opportunity to buy huge swathes of land at a discount and turn them into pine forests, which are very nicely treated from a taxation point of view, harvestable in short-term and you can sell the wood - so it doesn't "lock up the carbon" - it just finds it's way into rich people's dirty log burners.

What needs to happen with this land is that we fuck over the farmers (that's a given - but fuck over means "buy their land") and welsh culture (that's a shame) but we need to plant deciduous woodland, which is really slow growing, not cut it down (locking in the carbon) and over the centuries will turn into the Welsh Rainforest of old.

As it is, we'll corporatise it for profit, package it and then not see any environmental benefit of note.


We don't make it.

Fuck off out of Wales you cunt

 

[BloodOmen]

Fucking epic.

See Foo Fighters Troll Westboro Baptist Church With Bee Gees Classic Before Kansas Concert

Foo Fighters’ tour returned to Kansas Thursday, giving the band an opportunity to reignite their long feud with the Westboro Baptist Church.

www.rollingstone.com

 

[Gwadien]

 

[Raven]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DGtf7asP8I


Too much looking into the wrong camera bullshit that seems to be fashionable but... My word, I want to spend an afternoon in the pub with the guy that built it.

 

[Lamp]

Can't sleep. Had a weird dream

For some reason I had agreed to accept an impossible challenge: survive a combined attack from 989,009 (the number was very specific) Balrog-type demons. I had only a golfing umbrella to defend myself and some sort of Star Wars type blaster in the shape of a sword. I was crouched under my umbrella and woke up just before the attack started.

My brother-in-law borrowed a big umbrella of mine years ago - I think he lost it. Or maybe it was the 2 bags of Frazzles I ate before going to bed....

 

[BloodOmen]

 

[BloodOmen]

 

[Moriath]

View: https://twitter.com/SarahRoseCrook/status/1424738347977789444


parents complaining how much kids cost

 

[caLLous]

More "saying" than "complaining" (in the reply I can see above) but whatever makes you feel better about yourself.

 

[Raven]

Imagine if people had to actually look after their offspring themselves. How do they cope?

Cunts, can't look after kids, don't have kids. It's not hard.

And yeah, they are whinging. It's twitter.

 

[Moriath]

View: https://twitter.com/Baddiel/status/1424784381181313027


lol noobs storming a load of flats to complain about the bbc


View: https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1424726089549627395

 

[Raven]

Round them all up, chuck them in the sea. Idiots are boring now. They serve no purpose to society, get rid.

 

[Gwadien]

Imagine if people had to actually look after their offspring themselves. How do they cope?

Cunts, can't look after kids, don't have kids. It's not hard.

And yeah, they are whinging. It's twitter.

I think this is quite a weirdly backwards view.

Childcare is expensive due to red tape and excessive rules, it means that one parent will probably end up quitting work because it doesn't work out financially.

That means you've got one less parent in the economy and taking their kids day care places with them.

'only afford kids if you can have them' will never work, and having that attitude creates social mobility problems for the under classes tbh.

 

[dysfunction]

Kids for the rich only!

 

[Scouse]

'only afford kids if you can have them' will never work, and having that attitude creates social mobility problems for the under classes tbh.

Birth rate in blighty has nosedived. It may well be because it's hellishly expensive.

Of course, as income increases birth rate decreases - so intelligent people are giving up kids to have a better life whilst we pump out call-centre monkeys to parents who don't have the skills to get the educational leap in early years that their kids need if the tiny amount of social mobility that an education brings you is going to be a thing.

But there's a couple of things here. 1) It's not education that brings about social mobility - that needs to come from societal reform. And lack of social mobility has been a thing for so long it's clearly by design. Politicians kick the can down the road because it's only so long people give a shit about it in their lives before they move on to something else - so there's not a lot of noise, and the carrots they dangle about "we're making reforms" are enough to placate people.

2) Who gives a fuck anyway. There are too many humans on the planet.

 

[Yoni]

Childcare does not have to be expensive The costs of childcare: how Britain compares with Sweden old article but in Sweden it has not changed that much... currently " Child number one in a family costs 1382 SEK a month or a maximum of 3 % of the guardians' gross income. Child number two costs 922 SEK or a maximum of 2 % of the gross income. Child number three costs 451 SEK or a maximum of 1 % of the gross income. Child number four is free of charge."

Remember to divide the SEK by 10 for quick estimate.. It is more expensive to have daycare for your dog in Sweden than humans....

As for winging it is far from that the cost of childcare is fucking ridiculous in the UK and really punitive, sure parents make a choice (most of the time) as to whether they will have kids, it does not mean that they end up in a pay to work situation to put them in daycare...(I do not have kids btw not will I).

 

[Raven]

Why would people want to have children and then hand them over to someone else to bring up?

 

[Yoni]

Why would any woman want to have a child to have her own career limited due to the punitive costs of childcare? The UK is seriously backwards when it comes to maternity leave, paternity leave, chiildcare etc

 

[Raven]

The family unit is also essential to a child's growth and development. No point dropping them out, then just ignoring them.

There might well be a comparison between non-parenting and all the horrible little shits that have no moral compass, but I cba to find it.

tldr don't have children if you cannot look after them. We have plenty of people anyway.

 

[Yoni]

I think you will find that paid quality time with your children is much higher in Scandinavia then in the UK - 16 months per child in Sweden (80% of salary with 90 days dedicated to each parent) that can be taken any time up until the child is 6. You can also choose to work 75% until your child is 8.. I do agree there are plenty of people but it does not change the fact that parents in the UK do pay punitive amounts of childcare that effects the under classes and should be addressed.

 

[Scouse]

As for winging it is far from that the cost of childcare is fucking ridiculous in the UK and really punitive, sure parents make a choice (most of the time) as to whether they will have kids, it does not mean that they end up in a pay to work situation to put them in daycare...(I do not have kids btw not will I).

Whilst I take your point your high taxes would effectively mean childless me is subsidising other people's life choice to have kids - and as the planet is clearly overpopulated I now feel that is immoral.

Now, maybe what should be happening is that companies should be paying enough for people to cover the cost of one breadwinner. But human priority in the west seems to be corporate profit and economic activity being preferred over raising your kids.

But that's an aside. With the state of the planet right now and working within the bounds of our financial constraints there's absolutely a moral case to be made for the cost of childcare being foisted on people who decided to have kids.

Parents want a subsidised cake-and-eat it lifestyle. And I can't blame them for that either - you only have one life and it's natural to push for the best you can get.

But tough titties IMO.

 

[Scouse]

Why would any woman want to have a child to have her own career limited due to the punitive costs of childcare?

Why should it be women?

If we're equal then it should be a decision based on desire and life ambition, not sex.

Already covered the other "have it all" point

 

[Ormorof]

Why should it be women?

If we're equal then it should be a decision based on desire and life ambition, not sex.

Already covered the other "have it all" point

Because reality

Ravens model is how it used to work and it was mostly awful

 

[dysfunction]

The family unit is also essential to a child's growth and development. No point dropping them out, then just ignoring them.

There might well be a comparison between non-parenting and all the horrible little shits that have no moral compass, but I cba to find it.

tldr don't have children if you cannot look after them. We have plenty of people anyway.

Sending children to a nursery is actually a benefit for the child. It helps with socialising and learning. They do loads of things there that a parent wouldn't do or think to do.
It isn't non parenting sending a child to a nursery. Non parenting is having them at home and ignoring them them, letting them do what they want with no structure, control or boundaries.

And like I said earlier it would end up with the rich having kids. Would you stop poor people having kids? If no then or as you say horrible little shits being brought into the world with nothing, having nothing and basically being in a home that is detrimental to their development and health.

 

[Scouse]

Because reality

Outrageously sexist.

Ravens model is how it used to work and it was mostly awful

Three things: 1) I don't think Raven is saying go back to women in the kitchen. He's saying parents should look after their kids
2) I'm not sure it was "mostly awful".- When I talk to people who lived then that's not what they tell me.
3) If you talk to indigenous communities about our society they tend to marvel at what we've got apart from in two areas: how we treat our elderly and how we treat our children - and those two things are enough for them to think we're mad.

But regardless of the second but, I'm a little dissapointed to see the outrageous sexism still here.

"Nah love. I won't be giving up work. That's the woman's job".

 

[Scouse]

nd like I said earlier it would end up with the rich having kids. Would you stop poor people having kids? If no then or as you say horrible little shits being brought into the world with nothing, having nothing and basically being in a home that is detrimental to their development and health.

The poor aren't stopping. The middle classes are.

I'd argue that being brought up by the under-educated is the thing that's most detrimental to mental health. I know plenty of clever poor people who's kids are lovely.

But frankly, and as I've said - tough titties. If you want kids - you pay for them. The world can no longer afford profligate human propogation.

 

[dysfunction]

The poor aren't stopping. The middle classes are.

I'd argue that being brought up by the under-educated is the thing that's most detrimental to mental health. I know plenty of clever poor people who's kids are lovely.

But frankly, and as I've said - tough titties. If you want kids - you pay for them. The world can no longer afford profligate human propogation.

But you are saying the poor shouldnt have kids. So you wouldnt support them in any way if they did. How would that look in years to come??

Then stop people having kids period. That means everyone not just those that can't "afford" to have them. Cool discrimination there.
Such an antiquated way of thinking you and Raven have but then since you despise kids its no wonder really.

 

[Yoni]

I also do not think the world needs more humans however it is women (cis) who give birth, it is women who are expected to stay at home in the UK and who have their careers limited...not men - one of the most awesome things I remember when I first moved here was the groups of fika papa's ie groups of men with prams or toddlers in the park middle of the afternoon... this is something that is just not seen in the UK very often

 

[Raven]

I'm not saying women should stay at home at all. Parenting is a thing that should be carried out by the family unit, regardless of gender.

Why would it have to be the woman that carries most of the load?