How Much Are You Hated By The Daily Mail?

[YorkNecromancer]

Whoever you are, wherever you are, the UK Tabloid The Daily Mail hates you, because it is stupid and evil, and the scum who run it are too.

Now, find out just how much they hate you!

http://toys.usvsth3m.com/are-you-hated-by-the-daily-mail/

[Wolfshade]

Just disliked...

[Kirsten]

ha, I am hated

[Deadlift]

Yep, I'm hated. I look like a Muslim, my wife was born abroad and I had pre marital sex. I'm a bad man and I'm going to hell.
Yay.

[Wolfshade]

Well the first step is recognising it. The next is to do something about it...

[Roy Gibson]

I'm going to hell. Yay.
Looks like they hate me too. And hell cant be that bad because
1. you wont be the only one there and
2. its warm :D

[Cap'nSmurfs]

Hated. With every fibre of their foul little beings.

[Lukas The Trickster]

I'm a transgender teenage, gypsy, asylum seeker on benefits, so HATED.

Just kidding. I'm 32.

[wayne williams]

i am proud to say i am hated so i cant be all bad.

[DarkLink]

Yep, I'm hated. I look like a Muslim, my wife was born abroad and I had pre marital sex. I'm a bad man and I'm going to hell.
Yay.

I hope you're happy with your virgins, you dirty terrorist;).

[Psychosplodge]

I'm apparently loathed...

[Wildeybeast]

Loathed. It was the Michael Gove question that did it for me.

[Deadlift]

Loathed. It was the Michael Gove question that did it for me.

That's ok, despite being a conservative at heart, I do loath Gove.

[daboarder]

Yep, I'm hated. I look like a Muslim, my wife was born abroad and I had pre marital sex. I'm a bad man and I'm going to hell.
Yay.

I'll race you there

Hated by the way

[eldargal]

Hated.:cool:

[Gotthammer]

Hated :p

[Mr Mystery]

Hated on so many levels...

Got as far as Gove....Who on a side note, really needs his head kicked in. And I'm normally a pacifist.

[Denzark]

Dammit can't get the link at work. However saw this today about Gove...

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brendanoneill2/100239342/the-gove-bashing-great-and-good-think-working-class-schoolkids-are-incapable-of-mastering-great-knowledge/

Just sayin'...

[Cap'nSmurfs]

There's certainly something to be said about what Americans call the subtle bigotry of low expectations. Things like poetry, art, classics, literature shouldn't be thought of as the preserve of some sort of academic Elect, we should be doing all we can to make sure everyone can experience and enjoy these things (as long as they want to!). Honestly, right up to the University, more academic work should be made more available, along with the resources to conduct it. The idea that there's some people who just Can't Handle It and need to be sent down a mine is appalling and should be fought.

On the other hand, it's actually debatable that the former is what Michael Gove wants to achieve.

[Mr Mystery]

There's certainly something to be said about what Americans call the subtle bigotry of low expectations. Things like poetry, art, classics, literature shouldn't be thought of as the preserve of some sort of academic Elect, we should be doing all we can to make sure everyone can experience and enjoy these things (as long as they want to!). Honestly, right up to the University, more academic work should be made more available, along with the resources to conduct it. The idea that there's some people who just Can't Handle It and need to be sent down a mine is appalling and should be fought.

On the other hand, it's actually debatable that the former is what Michael Gove wants to achieve.

It also avoids the point that not everyone is academically gifted, nor academically inclined, yet the Tories refuse to entertain this. They want a one size fits all curriculum, without taking an average.

Grammar Schools do well because they take in academically gifted pupils. Comprehensives get the same curriculum to teach (I think), but have a mix of academics, and those whose talents lie in more practical areas. Yet the Government (as a whole, not just the Tories on reflection) solely wants academics...

[Cap'nSmurfs]

I think that's right, and it's the unspoken second half to the Telegraph column. Everyone should be able to enjoy and experience the things I mentioned above; but the Conservative philosophy places them at the top of a hierarchy of value, where technical, physical or social skills aren't believed to be so worthy. Which is badly, deeply wrong.

[Mr Mystery]

Dear The Daily Mail.

I see you claim that the immigrants are coming over here, taking our jobs, causing your kids to sit around on benefits.

However, I see you also claim that the immigrants are coming over here, just to claim our benefits and not work.

I further see you also want an end to benefits, including for your kids.

Erm.... I have to admit to be a wee bit puzzled here. I mean, which is it?

[Wolfshade]

Dear The Daily Mail.

I see you claim that the immigrants are coming over here, taking our jobs, causing your kids to sit around on benefits.

However, I see you also claim that the immigrants are coming over here, just to claim our benefits and not work.

I further see you also want an end to benefits, including for your kids.

Erm.... I have to admit to be a wee bit puzzled here. I mean, which is it?

It is both. The quantum immigrant problem. They can exist in both states job stealer/scrounger at the same time, until you look at them then they collapse into one immigrant wavefunctions.

[Psychosplodge]

So immigrants are behaving as photons?

[Kaptain Badrukk]

I wonder what we could do with a line of immigrants and a prism then?

[Psychosplodge]

recreate the darkside of the moon, but the palette would be more limited.

[Mr Mystery]

I wonder what we could do with a line of immigrants and a prism then?

No, they're already coloured. Hence why the Daily Mail hates them.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

It doesn't help that there's about a 6 month limbo period before someone not on a working visa (ie on a fiancée visa) is actually able to work. As soon as my wife was able to, she got two jobs. Two!

[Mr Mystery]

http://ih3.redbubble.net/work.7503629.1.sticker,375x360.they-took-our-jobs-black-south-park-v1.png

[Cap'nSmurfs]

tuk are jorbs, sport are troupes

[Wolfshade]

I wonder what we could do with a line of immigrants and a prism then?

Let me just Daily Mail that for you

I wonder what we could do with a line of immigrants and a prison then?

[knas ser]

Hated. It was Gove that pushed me over the edge.

On a related note, there may be some of you who have not seen the wonderful Daily Mail Headline Generator (http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/) .

[Psychosplodge]

Hated. It was Gove that pushed me over the edge.

On a related note, there may be some of you who have not seen the wonderful Daily Mail Headline Generator (http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/) .

Thirty seconds of refreshing got me this


IS THE LOONY LEFT HAVING SEX WITH THE COUNTRYSIDE?

[Wolfshade]

I know it is a Buffy-ism not a Daily Mail-ism but I still like it:


That's the kind of wooly-headed liberal thinking that leads to being eaten.

[Psychosplodge]

WILL THE BBC HAVE SEX WITH YOUR DAUGHTERS?

Just topped the last, But if you believe BBC news the answer is yes.

[Insert_nickname_here]

I'm not sure if this was the mail or the express, but when prince William and Kate Middleton were engaged (so before marriage and baby) the headline was,

"Kate's daughter will be queen!"

Misleading in so many ways...

[Psychosplodge]

I think the generator ones featuring diana sound more express than mail.

[Mr Mystery]

Will binge-drinking turn house prices gay?

[Cap'nSmurfs]

Could foxes render the Conservative party impotent?

[Denzark]

I'm disliked for having pre-marital sex. Hmm.

[Pssyche]

Hated by The Daily Mail.

Like I needed a questionnaire to work that one out...

[Mr Mystery]

One of these days, the Mail will implode under the sheer weight of it's own hypocricy (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24395790)

Hopefully it will be one day soon. Sick of that hate peddling rag poisoining our country.

[Psychosplodge]

Has someone played the race card?
Sounds a race to the bottom this...

[Mr Mystery]

Kind of. Ish.

Despite Ed Milliband's protestations, a Jewish newspaper has said the Mail's tirade has hints of anti-semitism. To which the Mail now demands an apology, whilst refusing to apologise for besmirching the character of a dead man.

I really, REALLY loathe the Daily Mail.

[Wolfshade]

This dead man was reported as saying that he hoped Britian lost the Falklands...
I have not researched it or am able to put any form of context to the comment but it doesn't seem terribly pro-British.

It is also important to note that Ed Milliband is leading the defence and not his older brother Dave, I am sure that this not a politcally neutral move, especially during the Tory conference.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

There's a marked difference between being "pro-British" and "hating Britain". It's also possible to like or support one's country without thinking that it's always right.

[Psychosplodge]

As I said before, it's hardly surprising if it's true, him being a confirmed marxist.
But there's far more appropriate ways to tear into red ed, like his lack of policies beyond we disagree with the current government's policy on that issue.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

Just so. Go for the policies (do Labour have any? Maybe that's the problem!), don't attack the man's dead father.

And yes, a communist wasn't convinced by nations. Big surprise there~

[Mr Mystery]

Just so. Go for the policies (do Labour have any? Maybe that's the problem!), don't attack the man's dead father.

And yes, a communist wasn't convinced by nations. Big surprise there~

Tories managed a semi-election without policies! Then it turned out it was the same old 'blame then f*** the poor!' we should have expected.

[Wolfshade]

Tories managed a semi-election without policies! Then it turned out it was the same old 'blame then f*** the poor!' we should have expected.

Not really sure I would agree, certainly this is the highest personal tax allowance I have ever experianced. That has to help everyone especially the poorer.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

Not when you count in all the stuff for poverty relief and assistance which has been cut. Most of which are supplements for people who are in work. Taxes aren't actually a huge concern for people on the very bottom rung; they don't make enough money for it to make much difference. On the other hand, if your housing allowance is being cut (so you can't make rent), if your transport allowance is cut and privatised bus and train fares go up (so it's harder to commute), if food and fuel prices are going up... then that tax cut vanishes, fast.

Not everybody! There's always some winners, and as ever, the core Tory target is the petty-bourgeoisie. That's the lowest rung of the middle classes; Daily Mail territory. But there's a lot of losers from what they've done.

[Wolfshade]

If you earn minimum wage equates to what 14k and you only need to pay tax on that 4k, you'll be what up £300 that's an extra 5th... across the year.
The "bedroom tax" I think is a fair equaliser after all it brings those in private and those in council houses into the same scheme, otherwise it was unfair on those in private renting.
Also, don't forget that the benefits are related to inflation, unlike wages whereby in difficult times many people are seeing years of 0% raises so they would be worse off as they aren't lifted automatically.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

The fact wages have been stagnant for 30 years is basically one of the main reasons we're in this current mess. Work doesn't pay. It's not because welfare is too generous, it's because people aren't being paid enough. It's debatable whether you can redress this balance with minimum wage hikes - there are problems with that, for sure.

People fear massive redistribution from the wealthy, but then you're also free to check out economic growth and productivity statistics from the 1950s-70s, and then check out what the top rates of tax were. I don't think it's coincidental that the period of greatest economic expansion in this century also saw the most equitable distribution of wealth. You solve a lot of problems if people have enough money to get by, have nice things, save, and feel like they have a share in society.

The thing is that people fear massive redistribution from the wealthy, but they seem a-ok when the wealthy enact policies which see a massive redistribution towards themselves. Money buys a lot of power and propaganda. T'was ever thus~

Which is not even remotely to say that that the immediate postwar era was unproblematic, because it was, and deeply so. But the scaremongering about redistribution is mostly precisely that.

An equitable distribution of wealth isn't about handouts, it's about people being paid a fair share for what they do.

[Wolfshade]

Oh yes I'm not getting into that issue of is it that welfare is too generous or does work not pay. I've posted before about the dangers of minimum wages and their effects when hiked. I do think from a "fairness" point that people who work should have a higher standard of living. (There are of course some exceptions to this).

[Cap'nSmurfs]

I think we're in agreement with the idea that work should actually be rewarded appropriately, yes.

[Mr Mystery]

Trouble with the bedroom tax is that works on the false assumption those affected can easily downsize. Especially when you consider this is the same party that sold off the social housing stock cheap (understandable as policies go), and then comprehensively failed to replenish it.....including all the one bedroom places they now expect people to downsize into.....

[Wolfshade]

While there is an issue with the lack of places to down grade to. I think calling it a bedroom tax is misleading as it is the removal of the spare room subsidy and those in private rental already have that so it needs addressing to make it equal. And in principal I don't think you should get more money just for having spare rooms.
There is also the problem that trying to get tenants to move to smaller premises is very hard to do.

[Denzark]

While we're on the subject, just as there is no such thing as Bedroom tax - it is removal of a subsidy - UK government did not put university fees up to £9k. All they did was remove the legal restriction on universities charging this. If the bill has gone up, it is because that particular university administration put it up.

[Build]

Absolutely hated and yet for some reason I feel proud.

[Psychosplodge]

Trouble with the bedroom tax is that works on the false assumption those affected can easily downsize. Especially when you consider this is the same party that sold off the social housing stock cheap (understandable as policies go), and then comprehensively failed to replenish it.....including all the one bedroom places they now expect people to downsize into.....


While there is an issue with the lack of places to down grade to. I think calling it a bedroom tax is misleading as it is the removal of the spare room subsidy and those in private rental already have that so it needs addressing to make it equal. And in principal I don't think you should get more money just for having spare rooms.
There is also the problem that trying to get tenants to move to smaller premises is very hard to do.

Aren't we missing the point that all they did was level the playing field for everyone on housing benefit, regardless of who you are renting from?
Considering labour decided it was acceptable for people on benefits renting in the private sector, why isn't it also fair for those in social housing?


While we're on the subject, just as there is no such thing as Bedroom tax - it is removal of a subsidy - UK government did not put university fees up to £9k. All they did was remove the legal restriction on universities charging this. If the bill has gone up, it is because that particular university administration put it up.

Well once tuition fees were introduced there was only one way they were going to go wasn't there?

[Cap'nSmurfs]

I think it's disingenuous to try to claim that the Government did not themselves put up tuition fees, given that this is a power they don't have and never did. They did, however, use the power they did have to ensure tuition fees could be raised massively, with the full knowledge that they would be. This isn't a "this government" problem, though, Psycho is quite right to point out that this is a trend which started a while back and is just following an entirely logical (if depressing) course.

The ridiculous thing about the housing benefit changes is that this whole system and situation is one that was invented by the Thatcher-era Tories. Housing benefit was to be the mechanism through which the market fluctuations they were unleashing in housing were to be mediated; they knew full well the only reason much of London's workforce could ever hope to remain in the city was through judicious use of Housing Benefit. So they're now pulling the foundations from their own system.

It's not only people being evicted that will be the problem. That causes a massive knock-on effect throughout the whole market if lots are evicted all at once. You see, a lot of rented property isn't actually owned - it's mortgaged. The mortgage payments are met through rent. If you suddenly have a lot of voids (unoccupied rented properties) then you also suddenly have a lot of landlords unable to pay the mortgages on their properties. So you get a whole bunch of defaulted landlords, too. This whole situation is set up to explode pretty disastrously.

And then there's Help To Buy, which is just a pump primed to reinflate the housing bubble. That went so well last time.

Set aside arguments about fairness; these guys are dangerously incompetent.

[Psychosplodge]

It's not only people being evicted that will be the problem. That causes a massive knock-on effect throughout the whole market if lots are evicted all at once. You see, a lot of rented property isn't actually owned - it's mortgaged. The mortgage payments are met through rent. If you suddenly have a lot of voids (unoccupied rented properties) then you also suddenly have a lot of landlords unable to pay the mortgages on their properties. So you get a whole bunch of defaulted landlords, too. This whole situation is set up to explode pretty disastrously.

Ah fantastic, then the selfish *******s that inflated them suffer and us poor ****ers that work and want to get on the ladder can finally do it...

[Kaptain Badrukk]

You forget Splodge old hoss, that when the wealthy get pooped on it tends to flow downhill pretty fast, those of us at the bottow rarely do well out of it either :(

[Psychosplodge]

Yeah but most of these private landlords aren't they're just asset rich and use those assets to acquire more at silly prices.

[Kaptain Badrukk]

Well let us hope that it all works out, but I'm more cynical:(

[Cap'nSmurfs]

The Original Sin with Conservative economic policies is the fact that they're acting as if it was Labour which caused the economic situation we're in. They didn't - there was a massive financial crash and the worst recession in generations. Yes, the fiscal deficit was run up through a combination of bank bailouts and fiscal stimulus measures, but the former was necessary and the latter was also working well (check the stats). It's not like they decided to just spend all that money "irresponsibly"; we had the worst financial crisis since 1929, and the problems still haven't been fixed.

Labour's role in engineering the circumstances of the financial crisis deserves some scrutiny, but they were only doing what all western governments since Thatcher/Reagan have been doing - deregulating, financialising, letting capital run riot. They can hardly be attacked for doing exactly what the Tories would've done (and did, when they were in power).

The worst lie of all is that if we didn't have austerity measures, we'd somehow "end up like Greece". That wasn't even remotely a possibility. The situations are almost completely different, as anyone who's thought about it for more than about a second would realise. (Starter questions: is Greece an economy as big as the UK? Is the UK capable of generating the means of servicing its debt? Is the UK in the Eurozone?)

[Wolfshade]

It's not only people being evicted that will be the problem. That causes a massive knock-on effect throughout the whole market if lots are evicted all at once. You see, a lot of rented property isn't actually owned - it's mortgaged. The mortgage payments are met through rent. If you suddenly have a lot of voids (unoccupied rented properties) then you also suddenly have a lot of landlords unable to pay the mortgages on their properties. So you get a whole bunch of defaulted landlords, too. This whole situation is set up to explode pretty disastrously.

And then there's Help To Buy, which is just a pump primed to reinflate the housing bubble. That went so well last time.

Set aside arguments about fairness; these guys are dangerously incompetent.

Surely some of the above is cyclic. Landlords own multiple properties forcing people to rent rather than buy, because there is a high demand it pushes the price of rent up. This generates more cash for the landlord who can then push the profits into new properties, out bidding others and so the cycle continues. If the landlords didn't own so many properties then the investment buyers wouldn't be buying them which would force the house prices down? Making more properties affordable to the general populace.

The other issue uis that if the housing benefit mechanic was so poor why did no government change it?

The pay as you learn education system is flawed spectacularly.

Consider an english language course, there is little contact hours (comparatively) as the students require time to read the studies and then write their essays. To educate them they require a lecturer and a hall. These sorts of courses are gold mines to unis as the cost per student is very low yet they get significant money through tuition fees, indeed far inexcess of what it costs.

The consider a chemistry course, there is significant contact hours and lab space and equipment and materials. These are not cost effective and in small departments the number of pupils means that you end up with these courses costing the uni to run. One only have to look at the science departments in scottish and welsh universities and how many have closed to see the thin end of the wedge

Now this has always been the case but it seems that unis will then just push prices based on either prestige or that "everyone does it".

[Psychosplodge]

Surely some of the above is cyclic. Landlords own multiple properties forcing people to rent rather than buy, because there is a high demand it pushes the price of rent up. This generates more cash for the landlord who can then push the profits into new properties, out bidding others and so the cycle continues. If the landlords didn't own so many properties then the investment buyers wouldn't be buying them which would force the house prices down? Making more properties affordable to the general populace.

The other issue uis that if the housing benefit mechanic was so poor why did no government change it?

The pay as you learn education system is flawed spectacularly.

Consider an english language course, there is little contact hours (comparatively) as the students require time to read the studies and then write their essays. To educate them they require a lecturer and a hall. These sorts of courses are gold mines to unis as the cost per student is very low yet they get significant money through tuition fees, indeed far inexcess of what it costs.

The consider a chemistry course, there is significant contact hours and lab space and equipment and materials. These are not cost effective and in small departments the number of pupils means that you end up with these courses costing the uni to run. One only have to look at the science departments in scottish and welsh universities and how many have closed to see the thin end of the wedge

Now this has always been the case but it seems that unis will then just push prices based on either prestige or that "everyone does it".

Yep, even when I was at uni and it was £1K a yearish, the head of our course said exactly that.
That the university would love to replace the engineering department and fill the space with business students as it's profitable.
However as a former poly, the only way to get prestige was to excel at sport and engineering so they needed "us".

[Mr Mystery]

On the subject of University Tuition Fees....

I want to track down and punch in the face every single mewling little git who had a University education themselves, and now says 'why should I pay for someone elses?'

Perhaps because you got it free yourself, and that means others paid for your's, you selfish, greedy, nearsighted, grasping little ratbags???

[Cap'nSmurfs]

There are certainly economic cycles. Some of everything when you're dealing with economic matters is cyclical. But the Market is like Grace, it works through humans. :)


Landlords own multiple properties forcing people to rent rather than buy

But the landlords don't own the properties. This is a product of the credit and housing boom we've just had. When credit was cheap and easy, and one could flip one property to get another with relative ease, these people were able to acquire a bunch of properties at decent mortgage rates. Unfortunately, we had the housing market crash and the credit crunch; both of these situations were fuelled in large part by what I've just described, and they strike at the foundations of it. What you've described is how it's meant to work, but it only works in a scenario where landlords actually own the properties. Many of them don't. They're mortgaged. If they have voids, they can't pay their mortgages; they default, and the banks are out not only all the mortgage revenue they thought they were getting, but are also holding on to a bunch of crappy, worthless properties. Who is going to step in to purchase them?

Actually, there's a good answer to that: the Government, and local authorities. It's a matter of urgency that these bodies step in to buy up properties and make them available as social housing (or whatever). Some small examples of this are popping up (one in Stevenage, IIRC), but there needs to be more.

Otherwise you get a perfect storm of evicted people, bankrupt landlords, and banks which are, once more, suffering a large revenue shortfall while holding a bunch of toxic assets. That should sound familiar. ;)


The other issue uis that if the housing benefit mechanic was so poor why did no government change it?

As I've said, it was propping up the system. Nobody wanted to touch it, for fear of unleashing a meltdown. Besides, when times were good, credit was cheap and property values were going up and up, this didn't seem to be a problem. Remember that before 2007 almost everyone in the higher echelons of politics and economics believed that the Good Times Were Here and they'd never go away again.

-----------------------------------------

Given this is a thread on the Daily Mail (ostensibly), I've just seen this fantastic description of its nature over on tumblr dot com.

"The thing you always have to remember about the Daily Mail is that the Daily Mail is old and very strange. It is also very bad, of course, but its malignancy is quite unlike, say, Murdoch’s. Murdoch knows what he wants and his newspapers are instruments for getting it - and inasmuch as what he wants is a world of laissez-faire economics with commercial media selling to a mostly self-interested population, he has succeeded. The tone of the Murdoch press is self-righteous, often angry, but never fearful. It’s a vigorous, scaleable model - it works in most countries.

There isn’t anything quite like the Mail in other countries, though, because the Mail isn’t like that. The Mail cannot win. The Mail is still at heart a Victorian paper in a world where most of what a Victorian paper might have cared about has been lost. The Mail is self-pitying, fearful, vicious and desperate. It is Gollum and “Great Britain”, Imperial Britain is its Precious. All the weirdness of the Victorian mind is there in the Daily Mail - its secret lusts (“all grown up”), its moralising, its self-loathing self-policing, its addiction to mysticism (you don’t get Crystal Skull and Bible Code bull**** in the Sun), its love of snake oil and quackery, its worship of hype, its infinite snobbery, and obviously its foundational horror of and fascination with the Other. The Sun presented its readers with a ready-made self-image, a character class they could adopt. The Mail has always drawn on what’s really there. The end of Empire is the great wound in British culture, and the Daily Mail is its endlessly picked scab."

[Wolfshade]

I wouldn't advertise that...