"It showed a tidy, porticoed, small terrace house with a large white van nosing up to the front door, and the upstairs windows shrouded with England flags."
"We couldn’t help comparing the £200,000, modest, terrace house in Kent owned by maintenance worker Daniel Ware with Thornberry’s stately, four-storey, Georgian semi-detached home in Islington," - Rachel Johnson (Daily Mail).
So we're still on the subject of white van man's home in Strood. A "small", "modest" terrace house. Except, how small is it? It looks like a decent sized family home to me. Has Rachel ever seen black and white clips of small terraces? They still exist, as do small new builds. Builders like building small, they can get more money that way.
And "modest"? With those big fuck off columns? Do us a favour! Your typical working class snob wouldn't be seen dead going into a house like that!
Of course it wouldn't be the Mail without mention of the property's value. Strood is one of Kent's most "affordable" towns with its property prices lower than the national average. Except the national average is unaffordable for most people. £200k is silly money, Rachel. Obscene.
Sunday, 23 November 2014
Friday, 21 November 2014
Ms Knight and Mr Rochester
"Class contempt *in either direction* is the pits. Find other things to sneer at. Also, evolve." - India Knight (Twitter).
India, referrring to Labour MP Emily Thornberry's tweeted picture of a white van outside a house festooned with English flags. The context is the Rochester by-election won by those right-wing Tories, Ukip.
By using the generalisation "class contempt", India is sticking the whole of the working class in the nationalist pot. The contempt is in one or the other direction. Either from the middle class professional such as Thornberry to the working class such as white van English nationalist. And, I suppose, from white van English nationalists to middle class professionals. That kind of contempt, in either direction, not including the upper class because they are exempt, is "the pits".
Except, was it contempt? Maybe it was frustration that Ukip, a right-wing Tory party, were to win an election in a working class area in the midst of an unpopular Tory parliament. Of course, there are a lot of working class Tories about, especially in the south-east. It is the land of the self-made loudmouthed man.
The tweet did not display "class contempt". There was no contempt in it. It was showing nothing but a symbol of racial intolerance. English, born and bred. Proud of the country, proud of the flag. Send them home. They do not belong. There are too many of them. One day we'll wake up and we'll be living in a Muslim country.
So "evolve". Maybe one day you could be like India.
India, referrring to Labour MP Emily Thornberry's tweeted picture of a white van outside a house festooned with English flags. The context is the Rochester by-election won by those right-wing Tories, Ukip.
By using the generalisation "class contempt", India is sticking the whole of the working class in the nationalist pot. The contempt is in one or the other direction. Either from the middle class professional such as Thornberry to the working class such as white van English nationalist. And, I suppose, from white van English nationalists to middle class professionals. That kind of contempt, in either direction, not including the upper class because they are exempt, is "the pits".
Except, was it contempt? Maybe it was frustration that Ukip, a right-wing Tory party, were to win an election in a working class area in the midst of an unpopular Tory parliament. Of course, there are a lot of working class Tories about, especially in the south-east. It is the land of the self-made loudmouthed man.
The tweet did not display "class contempt". There was no contempt in it. It was showing nothing but a symbol of racial intolerance. English, born and bred. Proud of the country, proud of the flag. Send them home. They do not belong. There are too many of them. One day we'll wake up and we'll be living in a Muslim country.
So "evolve". Maybe one day you could be like India.
Thursday, 20 November 2014
I Love The BBC
"Meanwhile, let's put the licence fee in perspective. It is £145.50 a year. That's 40p a day. Not 40p per person but 40p per household. How can that be considered onerous?
My Sky package costs me the best part of £145 every couple of months. I'm not complaining about that. It is my choice to pay for Sky while, of course, I am obliged to pay for the BBC.
I do so in the knowledge that the corporation offers a range of TV and radio channels to suit every taste, thereby fulfilling its remit to serve the entire population..." - Roy Greenslade (Evening Standard).
So 40p a day for the BBC, £2.38 for Sky. How many hours viewing/listening? We probably watch an average of three BBC programmes a week, 93p a programme. Sky, we watch one a week. Roy's figures make this £16.66 a programme. Netflix, two a week, 68p a programme. We don't watch anything live so adverts are not an issue. We do not listen to BBC radio.
So this week:-
Top of the Pops 1979: 93p
The Fall (episode 2): 93p
Kenny Rogers: Cards on the Table: 93p
Would we pay 93p for any of these? Would others with our tastes with little income pay 93p for any of these? Are any of them Netflix quality? Do we get value for money?
But the BBC is serving "the entire population". Yes, that's everybody. Including people who watch and listen to absolutely no BBC programmes, paying for the entertainment of others.
My Sky package costs me the best part of £145 every couple of months. I'm not complaining about that. It is my choice to pay for Sky while, of course, I am obliged to pay for the BBC.
I do so in the knowledge that the corporation offers a range of TV and radio channels to suit every taste, thereby fulfilling its remit to serve the entire population..." - Roy Greenslade (Evening Standard).
So 40p a day for the BBC, £2.38 for Sky. How many hours viewing/listening? We probably watch an average of three BBC programmes a week, 93p a programme. Sky, we watch one a week. Roy's figures make this £16.66 a programme. Netflix, two a week, 68p a programme. We don't watch anything live so adverts are not an issue. We do not listen to BBC radio.
So this week:-
Top of the Pops 1979: 93p
The Fall (episode 2): 93p
Kenny Rogers: Cards on the Table: 93p
Would we pay 93p for any of these? Would others with our tastes with little income pay 93p for any of these? Are any of them Netflix quality? Do we get value for money?
But the BBC is serving "the entire population". Yes, that's everybody. Including people who watch and listen to absolutely no BBC programmes, paying for the entertainment of others.
Tuesday, 18 November 2014
Too Taxing
"Myleene Klass is a working single mother who knows more about the real world and supporting a family than Eds Miliband, Balls etc ever will." - Tony Parsons (Twitter)
I have a problem with "the real world". Everybody's world is real. That includes politicians and celebrities. And "supporting a family"? Miliband and Balls support their families. As do Cameron and Clegg. To say they don't support their families is putting them in the same category as people in families who give little or no support to those families. I really don't think this is the issue with politicians with families. The issue is with them not giving support to people outside their families. Say, people without money or hope or maybe without families to support them. Those kinds of people.
I have a problem with "the real world". Everybody's world is real. That includes politicians and celebrities. And "supporting a family"? Miliband and Balls support their families. As do Cameron and Clegg. To say they don't support their families is putting them in the same category as people in families who give little or no support to those families. I really don't think this is the issue with politicians with families. The issue is with them not giving support to people outside their families. Say, people without money or hope or maybe without families to support them. Those kinds of people.
TV Drinking Games
"I cannot remember the last time I watched a TV programme sober, either. Downton Abbey, Call The Midwife, Grantchester … all have passed me by in an alcoholic haze." - Liz Hodgkinson (Daily Mail).
I, too, have never watched any of these programmes sober. Or having partaken of any alcohol at all. I would only watch them if you paid me. And tied me to the chair.
I, too, have never watched any of these programmes sober. Or having partaken of any alcohol at all. I would only watch them if you paid me. And tied me to the chair.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)