BRFR Cake Stop 'breaking news' miscellany

[Pblakeney]

Is it stupid to not avoid paying IHT?

My kids are adults and reasonably well off. We have already given them a lot of money and told them that the money and property we have left is going to ensure that my wife and I have enough to live a comfortable life, including enough to pay for one or both of us to go into a decent quality care/nursing home should we have to, which is a possibility we must consider in our late 70s.

With the allowances we have they should inherit a tax free million quid between them, or more once tax is paid, if we remain healthy enough to stay independent. They are in full agreement with our plans.

If we had no kids then why should we worry about IHT?

Well done you for reading a post and interpreting the complete opposite of what was written.
I was replying to a post saying people paying IHT was the shocking part of the story. I'm saying those are the stupid ones.

 

[icowden]

If the N word offends people, especially black people then there was no need to air it. The people in the audience and on the stage heard it and that was unavoidable, and so it should have been, but broadcasting what was in effect an intrusion from the audience serves no purpose. I don't think that qualifies as excluding him from society.

A good op ed in the Grauniad here:
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/feb/23/why-the-bafta-awards-must-broadcast-live-bbc

Essentially looking at the fact that the BBC don't broadcast it live, but don't get time to properly edit it so they might as well put it out live...

 

[Rusty Nails]

Doesn't that apply to ANY word which offends people?

Presumably, any potentially offensive word could have been uttered (that being the nature of Tourette's).

That the use of the N word might offend or not offend white people is unimportant. If it offends those who it is aimed at it is important and airing it serves no purpose imo. I would happily be corrected on this by anyone the N word refers to rather than uninvolved bystanders.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Well done you for reading a post and interpreting the complete opposite of what was written.
I was replying to a post saying people paying IHT was the shocking part of the story. I'm saying those are the stupid ones.

Was this the part I got wrong?

Is it stupid to not avoid paying IHT?

 

[BoldonLad]

That the use of the N word might offend or not offend white people is unimportant. If it offends those who it is aimed at it is important and airing it serves no purpose imo. I would happily be corrected on this by anyone the N word refers to rather than uninvolved bystanders.

I do like assumptions 😊

I was not commenting on that particular offensive word, the point was/is there are many words which may offend certain people of groups.

If the information we are given, in connection with Tourette's is accurate, it is doubtful that the offensive word was actually chosen.

 

[First Aspect]

I do like assumptions 😊

I was not commenting on that particular offensive word, the point was/is there are many words which may offend certain people of groups.

If the information we are given, in connection with Tourette's is accurate, it is doubtful that the offensive word was actually chosen.

It wasn't.

If used voluntarily it can be offensive. Except when it isn't, or is at least deemed acceptable in context, such as when I stream The Wire on Netflix.

There is a pretty good argument that in context, this involuntary outburst was not offensive because 1) it was involuntary and 2) it is not connected with racist intent 3) it was involuntary, which is worth mentioning twice.

If someone took offense, well we can respect that. But a substantial part of the outrage du jour is misplaced.

 

[BoldonLad]

It wasn't.

If used voluntarily it can be offensive. Except when it isn't, or is at least deemed acceptable in context, such as when I stream The Wire on Netflix.

There is a pretty good argument that in context, this involuntary outburst was not offensive because 1) it was involuntary and 2) it is not connected with racist intent 3) it was involuntary, which is worth mentioning twice.

If someone took offense, well we can respect that. But a substantial part of the outrage du jour is misplaced.

oh dear, I think we are in agreement again! 😊

 

[Psamathe]

There is a pretty good argument that in context, this involuntary outburst was not offensive because 1) it was involuntary and 2) it is not connected with racist intent 3) it was involuntary, which is worth mentioning twice.

If someone took offense, well we can respect that. But a substantial part of the outrage du jour is misplaced.

For me offence is more about intent than a particular sequence of letters.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I do like assumptions 😊

I was not commenting on that particular offensive word, the point was/is there are many words which may offend certain people of groups.

If the information we are given, in connection with Tourette's is accurate, it is doubtful that the offensive word was actually chosen.

What assumptions?

I was writing about a specific use of a specific word to specific people, not theoretical unspecified words.

I have no issues with the bloke using that word ,or any others, when he did as he had no real control of it. Others might have issues with it but I am only concerned with the opinions and feelings of those it was aimed at.

 

[BoldonLad]

What assumptions?

I was writing about a specific use of a specific word to specific people, not theoretical unspecified words.

I have no issues with the bloke using that word ,or any others, when he did as he had no real control of it. Others might have issues with it but I am only concerned with the opinions of those it's aimed at.

Isn't the point that, if it was involuntary, then, it was not aimed?

IMHO, it is the call for an apology, the making of an apology and/or "beeping" out which is questionable, not the involuntary tics of the Tourette's sufferer.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Isn't the point that, if it was involuntary, then, it was not aimed?

It could have been a coincidence I suppose.

I do not know enough about Tourette's to say that the words used are totally random or subconsciously take the situation into account, but I don't believe Davidson meant to offend.

 

[First Aspect]

It could have been a coincidence I suppose.

I do not know enough about Tourette's to say that the words used are totally random or subconsciously take the situation into account, but I don't believe Davidson meant to offend.

Most people have knowledge of the word and what it means. His issue is the disinhibition.

If you know how to act and speak politely in society, it follows that you know what would be impolite, right? You can imagine saying something rude? But you can control whether or not to say it?

What's the difference between you and someone with tourettes? Just the last one.

 

[BoldonLad]

It could have been a coincidence I suppose.

I do not know enough about Tourette's to say that the words used are totally random or subconsciously take the situation into account, but I don't believe Davidson meant to offend.

Nor do I, think he intended to offend.

 

[Pblakeney]

Was this the part I got wrong?

My mistake. Too many negatives in one sentence for my little brain.
Yes, it is stupid to not avoid paying IHT. It is clever to avoid paying IHT.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

It could have been a coincidence I suppose.

I do not know enough about Tourette's to say that the words used are totally random or subconsciously take the situation into account, but I don't believe Davidson meant to offend.

They can be both. Often, as I am sure the case was here, the person with Tourette's sub conscious will often manifest the worst possible word in the context of the situation. They have no control over it, there is no intention to it and it does not reflect in anyway that person's views or beliefs.