Random Daily Banter

[Pblakeney]

Are you up to using one finger of both hands to type yet?

Two fingers, two hands I'll have you know.

 

[the snail]

So did I, but didn't have inspiring teachers. And by skipping Y11, I missed having to do English Lit. Always really hated being told what books to read, not least as I preferred to waste countless hours in the Bristol central music library next door.

Aha, outed as a fellow ex-cathedralian?

 

[briantrumpet]

Aha, outed as a fellow ex-cathedralian?

Yup. 75-81

 

[First Aspect]

This is the BBC sport top headline at the moment:

"Ryder Cup: Europe on top in foursomes - listen & live text"

(Fnarr)

 

[First Aspect]

This is the BBC sport top headline at the moment:

"Ryder Cup: Europe on top in foursomes - listen & live text"

(Fnarr)

Europe were rampant on top in the foursomes.

"Ryder Cup: Rampant Europe take first three points in foursomes - listen & live text"

 

[BoldonLad]

You have a point. Not-unrelated data here:

https://www.poverty.ac.uk/pse-research/going-backwards-1983-2012

View attachment 10164

Where does this "data" come from?, we have never been asked, for example, if we can heat our home adequately.

As it happens, it would have no effect, since my wife would almost certainly answer "no", and, I would answer "yes" 😊

 

[briantrumpet]

Where does this "data" come from?, we have never been asked, for example, if we can heat our home adequately.

As it happens, it would have no effect, since my wife would almost certainly answer "no", and, I would answer "yes" 😊

There's lots of data on the website, if you have the time and patience to peruse it via the various menus and links (especially via 'surveys').

 

[BoldonLad]

There's lots of data on the website, if you have the time and patience to peruse it via the various menus and links (especially via 'surveys').

It is the accuracy of the data I am doubting, not the volume of it, but, thank you anyway 😊

 

[briantrumpet]

It is the accuracy of the data I am doubting, not the volume of it, but, thank you anyway 😊

I suspect the doubts will be down to how the expectations of 'necessities' change over time. I'm sure if you did rigorous questionnaires of what has been considered 'necessary' just in my lifetime, those boundaries have moved significantly: we didn't have a phone in the house till I was 15 (and Dad didn't have a car), for example, so probably wouldn't have been classed as 'necessary'. So 'poverty' can never be measured in absolute terms, only by what populations consider necessary.

Think about the things that in our lifetimes probably would have gone from, if not 'luxury', not essential to essential for a normal household:

automatic washing machine; telephone; colour TV; internet connection; central heating. Go back another generation or two and indoor toilets, fridges and hot running water would have been classed as desirable rather than essential.

So there's the context for this:

Maybe another way of framing this would be that our expectations of what is essential has got ahead of what is affordable, though given wealth inequality, it could also be argued that unrealistic expectations are fuelled by inequality.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Where does this "data" come from?, we have never been asked, for example, if we can heat our home adequately.

As it happens, it would have no effect, since my wife would almost certainly answer "no", and, I would answer "yes" 😊

The website shown says where the data comes from. Either you accept that surveys are an acceptably accurate way to gather data or you don't. If you were not part of the sample chosen of course you have never been asked.

 

[BoldonLad]

I suspect the doubts will be down to how the expectations of 'necessities' change over time. I'm sure if you did rigorous questionnaires of what has been considered 'necessary' just in my lifetime, those boundaries have moved significantly: we didn't have a phone in the house till I was 15 (and Dad didn't have a car), for example, so probably wouldn't have been classed as 'necessary'. So 'poverty' can never be measured in absolute terms, only by what populations consider necessary.

Think about the things that in our lifetimes probably would have gone from, if not 'luxury', not essential to essential for a normal household:

automatic washing machine; telephone; colour TV; internet connection; central heating. Go back another generation or two and indoor toilets, fridges and hot running water would have been classed as desirable rather than essential.

So there's the context for this:

View attachment 10187

Maybe another way of framing this would be that our expectations of what is essential has got ahead of what is affordable, though given wealth inequality, it could also be argued that unrealistic expectations are fuelled by inequality.

I understand how times have changed, I think I would be right in saying I have been in it (the world) for longer than you.

 

[BoldonLad]

I suspect the doubts will be down to how the expectations of 'necessities' change over time. I'm sure if you did rigorous questionnaires of what has been considered 'necessary' just in my lifetime, those boundaries have moved significantly: we didn't have a phone in the house till I was 15 (and Dad didn't have a car), for example, so probably wouldn't have been classed as 'necessary'. So 'poverty' can never be measured in absolute terms, only by what populations consider necessary.

Think about the things that in our lifetimes probably would have gone from, if not 'luxury', not essential to essential for a normal household:

automatic washing machine; telephone; colour TV; internet connection; central heating. Go back another generation or two and indoor toilets, fridges and hot running water would have been classed as desirable rather than essential.

So there's the context for this:

View attachment 10187

Maybe another way of framing this would be that our expectations of what is essential has got ahead of what is affordable, though given wealth inequality, it could also be argued that unrealistic expectations are fuelled by inequality.

My understanding is that "Poverty" (in the UK) is defined by Income Level, not actual possessions. I believe the definition is a household with Income less than 60% of median earnings, after housing costs.

There is, I believe a slightly different definition for "relative poverty", based on some figure from 2010 or thereabouts.

I may have got the definitions arse about face, as far as I can see, it makes little difference, since most people who comment (on poverty), not necessarily on here, fail to clearly define which category of poverty they are referring to.

For 2024, Median Earnings were just short of £38,000pa, I doubt your typical billionaire's "earnings" are included in that figure.

 

[briantrumpet]

Anyway, non political, I like this... a colour version of the chequerboard illusion. The two squares A & B are exactly the same colour & shade.

 

[Bazzer]

Anyway, non political, I like this... a colour version of the chequerboard illusion. The two squares A & B are exactly the same colour & shade.

View attachment 10204

That reminds me of a former building in which I worked for a few years. The best environment I had ever worked in for many reasons, with the walls in the foyer covered with large Escher drawings, which I always find find fascinating.

 

[briantrumpet]

That reminds me of a former building in which I worked for a few years. The best environment I had ever worked in for many reasons, with the walls in the foyer covered with large Escher drawings, which I always find find fascinating.

I just hope that you went upstairs in the lift.