Top products from r/unitedkingdom

We found 81 product mentions on r/unitedkingdom. We ranked the 736 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/unitedkingdom:

u/anudeglory · 59 pointsr/unitedkingdom


Shop|16GB|32GB|Search|Deal Time|Online Stock|In Store
Comet|16|32|Search|Evening 22 Aug|OoS Will tweet if more

Out of Stock

Shop|16GB|32GB|Search|Deal Time|Online Stock|In Store
BHS Direct|16||||
Amazon UK|16|32|Search|00:06 23 Aug|16|32|Search|Afternoon 22 Aug|Removed from website
bt shop|16|32|Search|11ish 23 Aug|DISCONTINUED
Carphonewarehouse|16|32|Search|Afternoon 22 Aug|OoS
Crescent|16|32|Search||OoS went from 2000 to 0 with no reduction! Hmm||16|32|Search|11ish 23 Aug|DISCONTINUED
Currys|16|32|Search|Rumour: Early 23 Aug|OoS
Dixons|16|32|Search|Rumour: Early 23 Aug|OoS
John Lewis|16|32|Search|Aug 23 AM|OoS
Misco|16|32|Search| Soon! 10+ on eBay FULL price?|vanished their stock without a word.
PC World|16|32|Search|Rumour: Early 23 Aug|OoS/MC|a few left?|16|32|Search||also disappeared their stock
Staples|16|32|Search|9:30am Aug 23|OoS - Reduction on accessories!


  • OoS - Out of Stock

    Just in case but it says "Currently may not be available direct from HP".

    Please tell me of any others/corrections...

  • 11:31ish - - making an anouncement soon according to their twitter

  • 12:09ish MISCO another tempting tweet from them, brings their website down again!! haha - They're looking into now! lol

  • Anyone heard of this company, miitwo, it says to keep checking but I've never heard of them before, reluctant to put it in the table unless others can confirm. Domain registered to UK individual at London residential address. Hmmm. Their website is now in maintenance mode.

  • 14:00ish Still no news from MISCO - website barely loads, price still ~£290. Might be a good sign that they're not all gone and they're sorting their website out so it will be easier to get one. In hope!

  • 15:00ish Staples has reduced accessories for the Touchpad, not sure about others. Premature as most of don't know we have one lol

  • 15:37ish PLAY - touchpads not in search, 'old' direct links still work. What's afoot!? But show NONE in stock and no price!!!

  • MISCO just tweeted this "Due to unprecedented demand for the HP Touchpad - our stock has sold out" WHEN?! I don't like that, the price NEVER changed online. eBay stock now removed. They must have sold them all at full price fro refunds! I can't see of any other way. So much for their "announcement"

  • Misco is OoS. Doesn't look like there's any more to be had today. Unless I come across or anyone else finds something concrete, I will stop for now. Byeee.

  • Misco puts out an apology - - looks like they sold everything over the phone! Damn internet, should have gone with the old skool.

  • Amazon just cancelled my order :( 14:26, 24 Aug. Sigh.

  • There's always eBay - something about it just hacks me off though. Loads of them on there going for £100-£200. Opportunists. Bleh.

    PS- Thanks to all for updates I've missed :)
u/Limited_By_Anxiety · 16 pointsr/unitedkingdom

If you would like a couple of good reads on this subject Polly Toynbee's Hard Work and The Spirit Level by Wilkinson and Pickett, (Link to PDF oof some of the book) are very good reads as is Chavs by Owen Jones.

Also the Black report and Marmot review are heavy but eye opening reads.

I'm sure many people with say that this is good for the country but the evidence is that it simply costs us all, yes the gap has closed a little over the last few years but that trend will reverse and when you look at the degree of inequality within the UK in comparison to our EU neighbours we have such along way to go.

I think that one of the reasons that the government is so anti-EU is that they wish for this level of inequity to stay (and increase).

u/pseudonym1066 · 77 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Jacob Rees Mogg is not an honest actor in this debate. He presents himself as someone honestly wanting the vote respected.


But he hides his clear financial motivations.:


- His father wrote a book called "Blood in the Streets: Investment Profits in a World Gone Mad", source about how the rich can profit from a country going to the dogs.

- He is estimated to have made £7 million from the damage to the country due to Brexit source.

- He refuses to answer questions about the money he will make due to the damage to British economy due to Brexit. source

He seeks to profit financially from the damage to the UK economy due to Brexit.

Britain's loss is his financial gain, and he does not have the interest of the country at heart.

u/Miserygut · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

I thought the report would be a lot shorter... Bugger. ;)

The report is critical of Neoclassical orthodoxy in academic study and in the profession as a whole.

It suggests moving towards a multidisciplinary approach, allowing other sciences and subjects to contribute. Social theory, behavioural theory and biological underpinnings of microeconomic activities should be defined by other disciplines. Not based on the assumptions of how people behave made by economists. Big data and quantitative method should be the cornerstone of informed economic theory.

Further to this, the INET group is working towards a discussion-based approach to theory presentation. It talks about what policy was implemented in various real world situations, the results and discusses them both with the focus on many different subjects to explain the outcomes. This builds a breadth of understanding as well as teaching historical context.

This breadth of understanding is converted into critical thinking when approaching economic problems, real or imagined. Again, a restatement of the idea that knowledge of many subjects is important.

This train of thought runs through the entire critique of Manchester's Economic syllabus, and is gently applied to the subject in both academic and professional circles. The evidence is compelling and Picketty's treatise on economic equality should stand on it's own as a good example of unorthodox economic thinking - unorthodox in that it is based in reality.

I'm just finishing my degree and honestly, I feel ignorant of many aspects of economics. Perhaps my disengagement is down to studying so many theories that have literally zero grounding in reality - interesting but unrealistic. It's exciting to read that so many fresh eyes will be able to contribute to pushing it forward into a broader, more robust and cohesive discipline. It's a shame it'll take a couple of decades before the fruits of this endeavour come to bear, but better late than never!

u/Muted_Posthorn_Man · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

If you want to know about political history, how it affected/effected normal people and how we got to where we are then there are loads of books.

This is the beginning of a series of books about British society from 1964 up to 1979 and how society was changed by the politics of the time. It's great for explaining lots of things about where we are now and how we got here. Many of the problems and issues we face now were seen in their early stages here.

There's other books like:

which also looks at how politics impacted society and created many of the problems and benefits of modern society.

You can even go further back with books like:

which is a general introduction to the empire and how it continues to connect to us now.

These sorts of books won't exactly teach you about political parties and where they stand, but they can help you to understand these issues that continue to be the most important.

u/bibbade · 0 pointsr/unitedkingdom

I do not understand what you mean by short term?

This debate has been going on since the inception of the Argentinean country and well before either of us were born. While short term is relative you are using in it in quite an unusual way.

Which specific argument are you referring to here?

My suggestion undermines the social contract?
Only suggestion I made was to offer the citizens of Falkland large sums of money and a home in England in return for whatever holdings they have in the Falklands. You may have a point your trying to make but you need think it through and get it in writing.

Extend my argument.. What use is Hull...
Again see what i wrote above. But also I never advocated that it would be compulsory, you did that in your own head. However the CPOs do exist.

The government can take your land and compensate you for it. Happens when railways, roads, etc are built.

Public services..
Again this is an argument that you are making, not me. But a number of Tories including the Jeremy Hunt advocate a denationalisation of the NHS and introducing an insurance market system.
I disagree with this but you can take it up with the Tories that co authored the book

Defending the interests of British citizens
Unless we discuss what their interests are how can we defend them? It may well be in their interest to move to England with large sums of money. But crucially it may well be in the interests of the British citizens who live in Britain.

Bowing to diplomatic pressure
We don't really have a great deal of diplomatic pressure here so clearly I am not advocating that. What we do have is a great deal of ill will in the Americas.

It does however paint Britain as weak that we do not have the ability to end a blockade on our overseas territory. It highlights our lack of perceived strength in the USA, when we let our soldiers die for the USA, we let our image be tarnished by our unwavering support for the USA. That the USA then does not feel the need to at least support our sovereignty shows that we are not the world power we once were. Even China defies our right to sovereignty over the Falklands on paper at least, supporting the Argentinean claim.

By allowing the Falklands issue to remain unresolved we are allowing are international standing to diminish.

Have another attempt at explaining your views. This time think it through a bit more.

u/strolls · 2 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Practically everything I know about politics and economics is from reading the newspapers, Reddit and the odd book, over the course of the past few years.

It takes a long time to get a deep understanding of the way the world works, and schools (in my day, at least) barely try. They'd rather teach you about the Magna Carta and Henry VIII (in my experience) than the history that affects you and I today.

I recommend the /r/UKPersonalFinance subreddit - read it every day, ask questions about the stuff you don't understand (full disclosure, I'm now a mod there), and I highly recommend the NPR Planet Money podcast.

A good reading list might be Richard Wilkinson's book The Spirit Level, Ha-Joon Chang's 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism and Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century.

There's a lot resentful language in this sub towards the old, and towards certain categories of voters, but it's important to remember that few are malicious - many are just poorly educated, as I used to be. IMO the only think you can do is educate yourself and embrace evidence-based policies, even when they go against what you believe.

u/EllaTheCat · 5 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Kate Fox's book:

It gets better reviews on - she understands us, and helps non-English people understand our wacky ways.

u/vishnoo · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

basic supply and demand, if people can't afford commodities their prices drop.
(that's his dad)

while cheap properties, farms, houses and anything else will make the rich richer.

u/heslooooooo · 4 pointsr/unitedkingdom

If you're interested in this sort of thing you should definitely read Nick Davies Flat Earth News.

u/metalbox69 · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

>a very complex issue is summed up in a 500 word report

Yeah, you probably need about 600 pages to get the full shebang.

It was a low quality application of Piketty's thesis and he didn't even have the courtesy to credit his source.

u/fuckin442m8 · 12 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Yes; Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, & Israel (don't get me started on that one) were created or given independence post WW2 by Britain & France (who previously controlled many of them)

There's a good book about this and the years preceding .

u/Allydarvel · 3 pointsr/unitedkingdom

They would go after the lawyer and his family. There's a good book by a journalist on how the Mail operates It's actually very good on how all newspapers work. The Mail chapter is scary.

You can read about their lawsuits here and see the penalties for losing are higher than for winning. Also..not very many for a shitstirring paper?

u/goodyguts · 41 pointsr/unitedkingdom

If anything, the hive mind of twitter/reddit/any personalised media ever scares the shit out of me. Imagine you do/say something a little stupid and it becomes trending. Tens of thousands of people will start to shame you! I can't take criticism from one person! Imagine how it would feel to not only feel hated by everyone ever and dragged into the spotlight against your will, but also to have future employers able to see that one bad or misconstrued joke.

Also, the role of journalists has consistently kept government honest and people still want to hear the opinions of people who have the time and money to research stuff for them.

This book - Mandatory Reading

u/sh125itonlysmellz · -3 pointsr/unitedkingdom

o rlly?
Richard R. Weiner's 1981 book "Cultural Marxism and Political Sociology" is "a thorough examination of the tensions between political sociology and the cultural oriented Marxism that emerged int the 1960s and 1970s." You can buy it here:

Marxist scholars Lawrence Grossberg and Cary Nelson further popularized the term in "Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture", a collection of papers from 1983 that suggested that Cultural Marxism was ideally suited to "politicizing interpretative and cultural practices" and "radically historicizing our understanding of signifying practices." You can buy it here:

"Conversations on Cultural Marxism", by Fredric Jameson, is a collection of essays from 1982 to 2005 about how "the intersections of politics and culture have reshaped the critical landscape across the humanities and social sciences". You can buy it here:

Cultural Marxism," by Frederic Miller and Agnes F. Vandome, states that "Cultural Marxism is a generic term referring to a loosely associated group of critical theorists who have been influenced by Marxist thought and who share an interest in analyzing the role of the media, art, theatre, film and other cultural institutions in a society You can buy it here.

The essay "Cultural Marxism and Cultural Studies," by UCLA Professor Douglas Kellner, says " 20th century Marxian theorists ranging from Georg Lukacs, Antonio Gramsci, Ernst Bloch, Walter Benjamin, and T.W. Adorno to Fredric Jameson and Terry Eagleton employed the Marxian theory to analyze cultural forms in relation to their production, their imbrications with society and history, and their impact and influences on audiences and social life...

see for a list of cultural studies journals such as "Monthly Review", the long-standing journal of Marxist cultural and political studies"

"Cultural Marxism: Media, Culture and Society", Volume 7, Issue 1 of Critical sociology, of the Transforming Sociology series, from the Institute for Advanced Studies in Sociology.

u/perpetual_C000009A · 22 pointsr/unitedkingdom

I'm a little late to this party, but I did read a book called Watching The English by Kate Fox. She explains how to determine which 'class' somebody is by the words they use for things, and Settee is one example:
Or you could ask your hosts what they call their furniture. If an upholstered seat for two or more people is called
a settee or a couch, they are no higher than middle-middle.
If it is a sofa, they are upper-middle or above. There
are occasional exceptions to this rule, which is not quite as accurate a class indicator as ‘pardon’. Some younger
upper-middles, influenced by American films and television programmes, might say ‘couch’ – although they are
unlikely to say ‘settee’, except as a joke or to annoy their class-anxious parents.
If you like, you can amuse
yourself by making predictions based on correlations with other class indicators such as those covered later in
the chapter on Home Rules. For example: if the item in question is part of a brand-new matching three-piece
suite, which also matches the curtains, its owners are likely to call it a settee.

u/dreamstretch · 2 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Watching the English by Kate Fox, a social anthropologist and entertaining writer.

u/SipthatTing · 7 pointsr/unitedkingdom

He basically makes his money from critiquing the left. He wrote this book back in 2007

Literally "what happened to the left", and hes been cashing those "i don't like the left" checks for like 10 years at this point.

That said, hes not wrong, corbyn needs to go

u/lurk_in_progress · 5 pointsr/unitedkingdom

I expect this due in no small part to the success of this modern classic.

u/antitoffee · 2 pointsr/unitedkingdom

I'll just take this opportunity to recommend the following book:

Darrell Huff, "How to Lie with Statistics"

u/LinconshirePoacher · 9 pointsr/unitedkingdom

> it's not something Jeremy Hunt made up on a spot.

Well, it's not as if he co-authored a book on privatising the NHS.... wait what?

u/o_oli · 10 pointsr/unitedkingdom

This probably has nothing to do with it...

Ignore the authors surname, also totally not relevant.

But seriously, some politicians serve only themselves and their friends, its hardly a secret that its always been the case.

u/TheAuditor5 · 2 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Flat Earth news is a book all about this sort of 'churnalism'. Well worth a read.

u/billy_tables · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

Starting? It started with the SWP. As usual it's not mainstream, but it's not new either.

u/souleh · 3 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Read his fathers books to understand a bit of what makes Rees-Mogg the younger who he is.

u/Gusfoo · 0 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Read Watching The English: The Hidden Rules of English Behaviour by Kate Fox. It is unerringly accurate.

Edit: Really? Minus one`d for a book suggestion? Gosh.

u/KudoUK · 3 pointsr/unitedkingdom

It's because a lot of the quotes weren't from the TV series, but from the book

u/adsmski99 · 3 pointsr/unitedkingdom

I only vaguely remember 3 day weeks and electricity blackouts so I read this book.

u/0MadWatch0 · 3 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Here's a book by Reee-Smog's dad to explain it for you.

u/HisHaskness · 28 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Bedfordshire news has another picture which shows him and his tattoos to better effect.

Found him. Published author on Prison life.

(edit) Self published author

u/GrumpyYoungGit · 4 pointsr/unitedkingdom

> Tomorrow you'll forget about this, but these young people will have to live with it for a long time

relevant read

u/Sephirdorf · 2 pointsr/unitedkingdom

This is it. Written by Jacob's dad, it goes on about how to profit from a destroyed economy.

Blood in the Streets: Investment Profits in a World Gone Mad

u/Cadwaladr · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

> But a number of Tories including the Jeremy Hunt advocate a denationalisation of the NHS and introducing an insurance market system. I disagree with this but you can take it up with the Tories that co authored the book

shoehorn much? Irrelevant.

u/sard · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

I don't know why you're being downvoted. It's a pointless story released solely to make up for him fucking about in Las Vegas. The mindset that blindly publishes this crap is the same one that blindly published all the WMD bollocks being put out by US and UK governments prior to the Iraq war. 'Only publishing what they told me to gov' is not a defence.

I think you'll enjoy this book

and this website

u/ta9876543205 · -1 pointsr/unitedkingdom

You can stick your 'national statistics' where the son don't shine.

As a wiser man than me once put it: There are three kinds of lies, Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics.

So much so that there is even a book, How to Lie with Statistics

But since you have mentioned it, I want to see the following statistics:

  1. The number of kids going into medicine, engineering, law etc. from grammar school areas vs non-grammar school areas.

  2. The performance of the top 10 percentile of kids, tested for IQ at age 9 or 10, at GCSE and A-levels in grammar school areas as well as non-grammar school areas.

  3. The performance of the middle sixty percent of the kids, again tested for IQ at age 9 or 10, at GCSE and A-levels in grammar school areas as well as non-grammar school areas.

  4. The performance of the bottom thirty percent of the kids, again tested for IQ at age 9 or 10, at GCSE and A-levels in grammar school areas as well as non-grammar school areas.

  5. The level of satisfaction with senior school, considering such things as bullying and not-fitting in of the top 10 percentile of kids, tested for IQ at age 9 or 10, at GCSE and A-levels in grammar school areas as well as non-grammar school areas.

    And these are just from the top of my head.

    Talk to me about statistics when we have a few studies, not just one, over a period of a few years.

    Till then, if you even use the word statistics in a conversation with me, I'll just politely snigger.

u/shaidy64 · 3 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Interesting that Jacob Rees-Mogg's father literally wrote the book on disaster capitalism.

u/zedest · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

>Who has it been validated by?

Stiglitz backed the Labour manifesto at the last general election, a Nobel Prize winning economist. If you do a search on an academic database, you will find many more articles in support of the type of platform pushed by Corbyn.

>How does it?


>So you keep saying. Without any evidence.

If you have access to academic journals, then do a search, and read some of the results. If not, buy some books on the topic. It's as if you want the knowledge that comes with reading, without actually putting in the work. I've spent thousands of hours reading about topics such as this one over the past few years, a lot of effort and hard work has gone into constructing my political outlook, if you're not convinced by it, then all I can do is point you in the direction of academia, the same place I learnt about politics.

>I don't. And I also don't see you explaining exactly how he is tackling them.

I've explained multiple times. At this point you're rejecting it for the sake of rejecting it. If not for Corbyn, the Labour party would still be towing the line that austerity is an economic necessity. Corbyn is challenging the neoliberal common sense of how to run a countries political economy. I feel that you must not have a very good understanding of politics if you don't understand how Jeremy is responding to the problems i mentioned above.

Though, at this point, I'm fairly sure your just an anti-Corbyn shill that is trying to waste my time. You have not projected a coherent argument over the past few days, and the very few political claims you yourself have made, completely fail to withstand the criticism you appear to be holding my opinions to. Claiming you supported Corbyn at the start, but now you don't know what he's doing to solve the problems i mentioned above, as if this has changed.

No, it doesn't make sense I'm afraid. I doubt you ever supported Corbyn, and claiming you don't know how he's responding to the crises I mentioned, after claiming you've read the manifesto, either means you're not intelligent enough to understand basic politics, or you're being disingenuous, but either way, I've wasted enough time on you.

My advice, if you are a real person that doesn't particularly understand politics very well, buy some introductory books in the area of political economy, and you should soon see how and why Corbyn's platform is different to the Tories, Blair, and all the other political parties and politicians that accept the neoliberal parameters brought to this country by Thatcher.

Gonna block you now, because this conversation is going nowhere, and it won't go anywhere until you actually read about the subjects you're attempting to talk about. I will leave you with a few books, a good jumping off point.

u/RedcurrantJelly · 7 pointsr/unitedkingdom


Next he's going to say "And that Sovereign Individual over there, yes, Jeremy Corbyn - that disaster capitalist! Total hypocrite! Under Corbyn, blood will be running in the streets!"

u/RassimoFlom · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

Do you have a cogent argument for why that isn't the case?

This book was critically acclaimed and more or less makes my argument. Have a read of the précis.

Edit: And the downvotes do the talking...

u/Dokky · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

The British were aiming for independence in the 1960's originally, a transition of 20 years or so.

THE USA/USSR would not accept this, so Mountbatten et al had to rush through the disaster that was partition as we know it today.

I highly recommend ploughing your way through Correlli Barnett's 'Pride & Fall' sequence, if you haven't done so already :)

I have been flicking through 'A Line in the Sand' by James Barr of late, it is next on my list after finishing Anthony Beevor's 'Crete: The Battle & Resistance'.

u/mordrin · 5 pointsr/unitedkingdom
u/kitsandkats · 3 pointsr/unitedkingdom

All of these also apply to alcohol, not just the first point, except that alcohol is also physically addictive and causes social harms that cannabis does not - so aside from 'cultural' reasons, why is alcohol still legal? Are illegal drugs in general illegal because of the harm they do to our bodies and society, or for another reason?

Here are a list of titles that are not 'VICE' articles that I can recommend to you if you are genuinely interested in learning more about the topic of drug prohibition (they are all quite compelling in my view, you can check the credentials of the authors if you want):

Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs by Johann Hari

Drugs - Without the Hot Air: Minimising the Harms of Legal and Illegal Drugs by David Nutt

The Legalization of Drugs (For and Against) by Douglas N. Husak.

The War on Drugs: A Failed Experiment by Paula Mallea

I can recommend more titles if you like, but I think these are the easiest to digest.

u/PetitPoisMalefique · 10 pointsr/unitedkingdom

It's not journalism.

It's "news" websites, it is absolutely not journalism. It's not even "churnalism"[0], it is just page-click generation from things happening now.

Due to the infinite breadth of the web "news" can cover everything from the serious to the completely trivial. If we give this article more of our time and attention than an article on what is happening right now in Avdiivka then that that reflects badly on us, not the people providing such news-entertainment.

Real journalism is slow and expensive. We live in an age where spending a week or two getting to the bottom of a story is a wasted investment. By the time a the full story is uncovered everyone will have "moved on" and people won't pay it attention unless it is dramatically revealing somehow, which almost all of it will not be.

Journalism is seen as a wasted investment by papers and news media struggling to meet the bottom line.

Initially this led to churnalism, the process of barely re-writing stories from the wire before pushing out to live leading to a lack of critical eye and reporting PR puff pieces and heavily biased sources as "news". Now it has gone further and reporting twitter comments - even from effectively unknown people - is "news".

If Donald Trump tweets, then I considered that fair game for being news worthy. If someone random happens to say something a bit witty that the editor - I am not sure the correct term for someone who puts together these stories - it is not news and reprinting it as such is just pure entertainment. It is copying something witty for the sake of entertaining visitors and has absolutely no news worthiness. That it's put in both in text and then repeated as an embed is down to a combination of SEO and wanting to fill the page.

[0] Coined I think by Nick Davies in Flat Earth News, [2009]. Amazon links: UK US. A must read about the decline of British journalism which pre-dates the bulk of the phone hacking scandal, or at least the fallout from it and pre-dates the impact of twitter and social media on the news media.

u/_riotingpacifist · 5 pointsr/unitedkingdom
u/HivemindBuster · -1 pointsr/unitedkingdom

People like you are killing this sub. Businessinsider is a known clickbait merchant, no reasonable person would look at 21 out 30 and use the term "one of the worst" to describe that ranking. There is nothing in that article that suggests how extreme the difference between 21 and the countries below it are, the differences separating the ranking between 21st and 15th could be entirely statistically insignificant for all we know.

u/Cast_Me-Aside · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

> Now, I have to ask, (and there may be a reason - I am asking for interest not as a challenge) What does a "hippy Leftie" see in UKIP?

Ok, firstly let me invite you to read over this. It was a response to a question about how UKIP are setting the agenda.

Toward the end of that I referred to The Broken Compass/ The Cameron Delusion by Peter Hitchens.

Summarising Hitchens' argument in an extreme way gives you something like this:
a. Socialism is bad. Not even just BAD. Socialism is BAD!
b. The Labour party has a socialist plan that requires several decades in power.
c. The Conservative party is complicit in helping the evil socialist plan.
d. When the Conservatives are in power they deliberately don't roll back the evil socialism.
e. This allows the Left to roll out their evil plan in stages while the Right pretends to oppose it.
f. The Conservatives should be kept out of power until they're forced to reform and stop supporting this nonsense.

Hitchens is not, in my opinion, a good writer. He is, however, a compelling writer. I disagree with him almost diametrically on the conclusion he draws, but I do agree with a lot of the problems he identified getting to it.

How I see it is that:
a. There is no actual conspiracy. Just short-termism, self-interest, stupidity and greed.
b. The Left has become infected with the policies and attitudes of the Right.

(In the post I linked I explained the rush for the political Centre: Blair was so successful in leading his party in a huge lurch to the Right that playing the middle of the road became the only game in town.)

To quote George Galloway , "I care nothing for the Conservatives of the Liberal Democrats. I wish them political perdition. But I do care about the Labour party [...] and I want to [...] appeal to the Labour party to turn away and break decisively from the path of treason set for them by Tony Blair almost twenty years ago and from which they have not properly resiled. They must stop taking their supporters for granted. They must stop imagining that working people and poor people have no option but to support them[...]"

Quick detour: I sometimes read books in pairs. I bought The Cameron Delusion and Chavs: The demonisation of the working class at the same time. This is an interesting counterbalance to Hitchens, but much more to the point it's a reminder than the shitting on the working class is not the exclusive entertainment of the Right.

One more thing to cover quickly: Blair dragged Labour to The Centre If you imagine it like a ruler with Labour and the Conservatives starting at the ends this moves them to literally around the centre. (50cm'ish.) The Conservatives followed suit under Cameron, but the Centre is now somewhere in the region of 70-80cm. It's not impossible that people from the Right might not see it that way, but that's how it seems to me.

OK, I think that'll do for what I think is wrong with the Left:
a. Huge lurch to the Right.
b. Assumption that they're entitled to the support of the poor and the working class.
c. Comprehensive failure to represent the poor and the working class.

Setting aside Hitchens' conspiracy theory where I do agree with him is that you best influence your politicians by punishing them when they behave badly. This is where, "You MUST vote Conservative or Labour or you waste your vote!" serves us terribly. It means they can treat you like shit and you have to take it.

OK, a second detour: Anatol Rapoport proposed a game theory algorithm he called Tit For Tat. More or less this is, "Cooperate until the other player betrays you. Then punish them until they resume cooperation." Or: Every time you screw me over I will slap you until you quit it.

Aside from the fact that five year electoral cycles are a problem, I think this is a good way to handle politicians. They're not inherently valuable. They're not important or special. They are supposed to work for us. There're conflicts of interest in that, but that is what they're for.

(Having to rush a little now, need to leave for work soon.)

UKIP are eating support from the Conservatives. This forces the Conservative party to reconfigure to acknowledge its Right wing support. I don't agree with those people, but I do think their party ought to represent them and to stop assuming entitlement to their support.

The utter neglect of and spite toward the poor and the working class from Labour means that a lot of those people are considering voting UKIP. They might be misguided in doing so, but you're not going to argue that it's not going to happen.

This means that UKIP support influences both the Conservatives and Labour. Better yet, they leverage both sides, which means larger numbers, which means more influence.

u/nocaph · 8 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Oh good god, this subject annoys the shit out of me.

  1. Medicinal benefits of many currently illegal drugs for both physical and mental illnesses - many of which our range of currently available treatments is SEVERELY lacking. We're not allowed to use stuff we know works.

  2. Agency, if you choose to smoke, knowing the risks - you should be able to, it's your body (obviously caveats here about reasonable things like banning it in cars with kids etc - at that point you're harming someone else)

  3. Counterproductive creations of black markets. Make drugs illegal - a drug dealer will step in to fill that supply-demand gap in the market. People are always gonna do drugs, which means they're going to:

  • A) find themselves dealing with organised criminals or similar, sometimes at great risk to themselves and
  • B) The black market means that there's no regulation - and of course illegal drug producers will cut drugs with really nasty shit if it means extra profit.

  1. Criminalisation and the justice system. We are creating hardened criminals out of people who have committed relatively pathetic acts of "crime" with drugs. We take someone who is a normal person, we throw them in prison - and... do you think that's gonna help? Which leads me onto....

  2. Addiction and Mental Health. Our approach to drugs in the justice system is punitive rather than rehabilitating. In instances were addiction has developed - and in mental health where "self-medicating with drugs" has become a chicken & egg situation... we simply don't offer the support we should. If we have someone with addiction problems to a particular drug or drugs, we should help them - not throw them in jail. The evidence ALWAYS bears out that throwing them in jail makes things worse.

    We absolutely need to look to other countries who are way ahead of us on this (I mean christ, even the US has medicinal cannabis in many states) - and we need a scientific, evidence-based approach to drug policy. To be honest, that's how we should decide a TONNE of policy, not just limited to drugs or things of a scientific nature.

    Problem is:

    The Government SAYS that it is taking evidence-based scientific advice, but they are then lying to you when they say that they actually listen to it.

    The Government does have or at least did have an Independent Scientific Advisory Panel. Infamously - after Prof David Nutt, who was the head at the time, called for the legalisation and regulation of drugs based on the available scientific evidence.

    The Government didn't like his independent, scientific advice and so they immediately fired him.

    If anyone wants to learn more about the objective risks and benefits of drugs and reform ideas for the way we systemically approach drugs - I'd definitely recommend checking out his book "Drugs - Without The Hot Air".

    It's evidence-based science informing policy decisions. There is no opinion in that book, just science. Any suggestions are backed up by hard science.
u/bananarepubliccat · 3 pointsr/unitedkingdom

Account of one of the first govt debt "crisis" (more for the lender than the borrower), Phillip II in the 16th century:

The market has changed significantly since the 16th century but it is crisis are fairly common (there are several going on right now). Argentina, for example, is a serial defaulter (I think they have defaulted ~6 times) and they have just applied to the IMF...again, after exiting default completely a couple of years ago. It is important to understand that debt crises are dissimilar (for example, it matters whether your debt is owned domestically) but they are all damaging.