BRFR Cake Stop 'breaking news' miscellany

[briantrumpet]

That's quite a big fine for just one fan's racist chanting.

 

[C R]

That's quite a big fine for just one fan's racist chanting.

View attachment 11665

That's because UEFA are antisemitic, innit.

 

[PurplePenguin]

Which one? "The UK is in a hole"? It's pithy, at least, even if there are another 29,864 words after that.

On the plus side, there are quite a few graphs with zero Y-axes, if you just want to look at the pictures and not get annoyed by the words.

"The UK is in a hole. Wages have barely risen in seventeen years, and the public realm is fraying. "

Actually the second sentence. Why pick 17 years and not 15 or 20?

 

[Pross]

"The UK is in a hole. Wages have barely risen in seventeen years, and the public realm is fraying. "

Actually the second sentence. Why pick 17 years and not 15 or 20?

Because it relates to the GFC which was a watershed? Why are numbers ending in a 0 or 5 considered more relevant. I can understand your annoyance if a date is cherry picked to make things look worse but surely the point here is that in 2008 those things were rising at a reasonable rate.

 

[First Aspect]

"The UK is in a hole. Wages have barely risen in seventeen years, and the public realm is fraying. "

Actually the second sentence. Why pick 17 years and not 15 or 20?

It is a prime number?

 

[Pblakeney]

surely the point here is that in 2008 those things were rising at a reasonable rate.

Your point is well made, and taken.
It could be argued that the growth was at an unreasonable rate and that the crash was inevitable due to that.

 

[First Aspect]

Your point is well made, and taken.
It could be argued that the growth was at an unreasonable rate and that the crash was inevitable due to that.

It's the junior doctor gambit. Pick a relative high point tomcrrate a false impression.

(Tbh I don't know why they don't pick some time in the 1800s when most of them had country estates... At least if BBC dramas are considered as historically accurate.)

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

Not that I was in the market for a Tesla anyway, but they seem to be the Evri of car makers. (Side note - US car manufacturers generally don't seem to cover themselves in glory generally.)

https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/which-brands-make-the-best-used-cars-a2811658468/

View attachment 11626

When I was test driving EV's earlier this year, the salesman I was talking to used to be a Tesla dealer (I had no interest in buying a Tesla BTW!). When I asked him what the quality was really like his answer was "crap". According to him the software was very good but the actual build quality of the cars and components used was poor, hence why he had now switched to selling Fiat!

 

[briantrumpet]

Because it relates to the GFC which was a watershed? Why are numbers ending in a 0 or 5 considered more relevant. I can understand your annoyance if a date is cherry picked to make things look worse but surely the point here is that in 2008 those things were rising at a reasonable rate.

This is their explicit point later in the essay - it's a useful data point that affected all world economies. They even do a zeroed bar chart. Yeah, you might guffaw at "can be tackled with consistently good decisions".

 

[PurplePenguin]

It's the junior doctor gambit. Pick a relative high point tomcrrate a false impression.

(Tbh I don't know why they don't pick some time in the 1800s when most of them had country estates... At least if BBC dramas are considered as historically accurate.)

Whilst it is no less annoying when done by junior doctors, they are ultimately negotiating, so cherry picking is expected. In this case, it is part of their academic theory.

 

[Pross]

Whilst it is no less annoying when done by junior doctors, they are ultimately negotiating, so cherry picking is expected. In this case, it is part of their academic theory.

It's not really cherry picking though is it? It's making the specific point that since the downturn of the GFC wage growth has been low so using the time of the GFC as the benchmark is logical. For reference here's a longer term view https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/kgq2/qna although annoyingly it stops at 2015 and I can't find anything as easy to check against for the last 10 years.

If we go back to a nice round year of 2000 the wage growth was:

2000 6.9%
2001 6.9%
2002 2.9% (not sure what caused the drop?)
2003 3.9%
2004 5.0%
2005 3.5%
2006 5.9%
2007 5.9%

The best year between 2008 and 2015 was 3.9%.

 

[PurplePenguin]

It's not really cherry picking though is it? It's making the specific point that since the downturn of the GFC wage growth has been low so using the time of the GFC as the benchmark is logical. For reference here's a longer term view https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/kgq2/qna although annoyingly it stops at 2015 and I can't find anything as easy to check against for the last 10 years.

If we go back to a nice round year of 2000 the wage growth was:

2000 6.9%
2001 6.9%
2002 2.9% (not sure what caused the drop?)
2003 3.9%
2004 5.0%
2005 3.5%
2006 5.9%
2007 5.9%

The best year between 2008 and 2015 was 3.9%.

It's cherry picking because the growth prior to 2008 was unsustainable and resulted in a financial crisis. If the financial crisis had occurred due to an external factor (like covid for example) then it might be a legitimate starting point, but it didn't.