Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Greedy landlords rub their hands with glee as Londoners queue in the cold to buy flats

maomao said:
Well it doesn't mean that at all as you would know if you had read and understood the link Kabbes provided to explain the phrase which was almost a day ago. So you've just spent ten minutes writing a post to make yourself look like an ignorant wanker when you could have saved yourself the trouble and looked it up in 30 seconds.
Click to expand...
to be fair, Diamond's always come across as an ignorant, muddle-headed wanker so it's not as though the post's out of character.
 
diamond is desperately trying to claim some dignity out of a performance where he's lost the arguments and insinuated that everyone else is a racist
 
Diamond said:
Can I just flag up this bullshit for a moment having proven that I suffer from epilepsy (which I am mightily surprised was demanded of me but was happy to discharge).

Your term "an epileptic tree of conversation", as far as I understand it, is a metaphor that associates epileptic seizures with thinking that is incoherent and irrational, perhaps even inherently instable.

For some reason, you think that is acceptable because you've manipulated a phrase that was first coined by a well recognised tv show and has apparently fallen into common parlance among a limited (and I use that adjective in every possible sense of the term) subset of society.

That is not a sound argument for associating limited cognitive ability with epilepsy.

I wasn't massively offended or really even that offended because I could immediately recognise the pompous idiocy at play.

Other people, with more severe degrees of epilepsy than me might well get mightily offended though so I advise you to generally avoid such language.

e2a - as I do now, I should add, having changed my opinion on the matter in the intervening period between 2004 (when maomao quoted me on using the term) and now, having developed the condition.
Click to expand...
Oh dear. You didn't understand the link at all, did you?

In short: no, that's not what it means. Read and absorb the information therein.
 
maomao said:
You stated clearly that his motivation for picking on the interviewee who clearly identified as a landlord rather than the two who were going to live in the flats, on a thread about landlords, was motivated by said landlord's foreignness. You implied prejudice to smear his position. I don't know who you think you're talking to because you're persuading no-one except yourself. You should apologise.
Click to expand...

He's a lawyer. He's obliged to believe the guff he proffers, or at least project a sense of belief.
 
campanula said:
At the most elemental level, I have to wonder at the failure of empathy here - that dislocation of a home as shelter, a basic human need as opposed to a financial instrument...and although I know nothing about the complicated economics of market distortions, I do know, most immediately, the horrible fear and insecurity of being homeless, for myself, my family....and on that most basic level, there feels something really quite abhorrent that property is empty while people are living on the streets (regardless of anyone's fucking race, nationality or origin). We need a 'market distortion, most essentially, at the level of my life (and everyone else I know).
Click to expand...

Yes, and that "market distortion" needs to be social housing with social rents and properly-integrated services, because otherwise we're still on the road to a neo-Victorian scene of "the underclass" (which, thanks to political rhetoric and supine academia, is now taken to include "the working poor" who claim benefits, as well as sponging disabled scum such as myself) living in squalid rookeries, while the bourgeoisie and the ruling class continue to accumulate wealth through exploiting us through our most basic human needs.
 
Diamond said:
The gang's all here I see.

Didn't someone mention something about ad hominem reasoning a few posts back...?
Click to expand...
The gang? First time I've been accused of that.

It doesn't mean everybody's ganging up on you if you're talking shite and you're being called on it. Which you are.

Epileptic trees = an off-the-wall, unbelieveable theory (as in 'why are those tree periodically shaking like that?' 'Because they have epilepsy', from a LOST storyline).

The tree weren't crazy. But the survivors of the plan crash were on an island where the unexplainable happened frequently, therefore, trees having epilepsy wasn't an impossible occurence. It didn't mean they were being derogatory to anyone with epilepsy.
 
Pickman's model said:
just to get this straight, you think that people with a more severe condition might get offended but people with the same as you or less might not. there straightaway is an example of the incoherent sort of thinking kabbes was talking about. i don't myself give much of a fuck one way or another but you might as well acknowledge when your thinking's all over the fucking shop.
Click to expand...

Let me explain the following to you:

I have had one seizure, which was tonic-clonic in nature and occured in June of last year. That is my only witnessed seizure to date. It caused me to dislocate both shoulders, fracture my shoulder capsules and cause shearing fractures to the top of both of my arms. That damage required four operations to rectify, after which I had to spend over two months with both shoulders immobilised 24 hours per day. After that followed another two months of rehabilitation before I could return to work. My case is unusual in that under most diagnostic criteria I don't meet the definition of epilepsy (i.e. two separate witnessed seizures at materially different points in time), however, given the seriousness of my injuries as a result of my seizure, they are, probably quite righly, taking the safe option in treating it as epilepsy.

As a result, my experience of a seizure is mostly to do with recovery from physical injury - I have no experience of regular seizures at all, however I do know what it is to live with the side-effects of anti-convulsant drugs, which are unpleasant.

Other people are far less fortunate. Some will have multiple seizures per week or per day (although very rarely do they directly lead to the physical damage that occured to me). Often, at the extreme end, they will be on more than one anti-convulsant, and perhaps other drugs such as anti-depressants as well (epilepsy has a very high co-morbidity with depression). These will cause a host of nasty side-effects and, more worryingly, probably because of neuro-plasticity, the clinical effects of the anti-convulsants are often "solved" by whatever causes the seizures, rendering the drugs useless.

At the far end of the spectrum are people constantly trying different cocktails of drugs to try and stop their seizures, people who can never drive, for whom cycling and other such sports offer a high risk and whose general quality of life is severely impaired.

So to finish - I have mild epilepsy (if it even indeed is defined as that) but it lead to very severe consequences on one occasion which ruined pretty much the whole of the second half of last year for me, which provoked my reaction to kabbes' obscure, crude and thoughtless metaphor, however there are others for whom such a reference might well hit home more directly to their everyday existence and coping mechanisms and I would speculate that they would not be too pleased to read those words.

[anyways...this is all massively off topic...]
 
Diamond said:
Let me explain the following to you:

I have had one seizure, which was tonic-clonic in nature and occured in June of last year. That is my only witnessed seizure to date. It caused me to dislocate both shoulders, fracture my shoulder capsules and cause shearing fractures to the top of both of my arms. That damage required four operations to rectify, after which I had to spend over two months with both shoulders immobilised 24 hours per day. After that followed another two months of rehabilitation before I could return to work. My case is unusual in that under most diagnostic criteria I don't meet the definition of epilepsy (i.e. two separate witnessed seizures at materially different points in time), however, given the seriousness of my injuries as a result of my seizure, they are, probably quite righly, taking the safe option in treating it as epilepsy.

As a result, my experience of a seizure is mostly to do with recovery from physical injury - I have no experience of regular seizures at all, however I do know what it is to live with the side-effects of anti-convulsant drugs, which are unpleasant.

Other people are far less fortunate. Some will have multiple seizures per week or per day (although very rarely do they directly lead to the physical damage that occured to me). Often, at the extreme end, they will be on more than one anti-convulsant, and perhaps other drugs such as anti-depressants as well (epilepsy has a very high co-morbidity with depression). These will cause a host of nasty side-effects and, more worryingly, probably because of neuro-plasticity, the clinical effects of the anti-convulsants are often "solved" by whatever causes the seizures, rendering the drugs useless.

At the far end of the spectrum are people constantly trying different cocktails of drugs to try and stop their seizures, people who can never drive, for whom cycling and other such sports offer a high risk and whose general quality of life is severely impaired.

So to finish - I have mild epilepsy (if it even indeed is defined as that) but it lead to very severe consequences on one occasion which ruined pretty much the whole of the second half of last year for me, which provoked my reaction to kabbes obscure, crude and thoughtless metaphor, however there are others for whom such a reference might well hit home more directly to their everyday existence and coping mechanisms and I would speculate that they would not be too pleased to read those words.

[anyways...this is all massively off topic...]
Click to expand...
i don't care whether you have epilepsy, whether it's serious or not, that's not my point. my point is that you said people who had a more serious case than you could find what was said insulting with no thought about what other people with less serious cases might think. it's your muddled thinking which aroused my ire, not your health issues.
 
Diamond said:
there are others for whom such a reference might well hit home more directly to their everyday existence and coping mechanisms and I would speculate that they would not be too pleased to read those words.
Click to expand...
Hopefully they'd mastered basic reading comprehension so wouldn't be a prob.
 
Pickman's model said:
i don't care whether you have epilepsy, whether it's serious or not, that's not my point. my point is that you said people who had a more serious case than you could find what was said insulting with no thought about what other people with less serious cases might think. it's your muddled thinking which aroused my ire, not your health issues.
Click to expand...

I have a less serious case. I am a member of that population. I set out what I thought.

You seem to have basic issues with reasoning here Pickman's.
 
Diamond said:
WTF? Seriously...?

I think I know what you mean but are you so dumb as to imply what you don't?
Click to expand...

You've just written 2 or 300 words on epilepsy, which I for one can't be arsed to read the whole of and haven't managed to address in what way 'epileptic tree' might be offensive to someone with epilepsy. You've got your head up your arse.
 
Pickman's model said:
i don't care whether you have epilepsy, whether it's serious or not, that's not my point. my point is that you said people who had a more serious case than you could find what was said insulting with no thought about what other people with less serious cases might think. it's your muddled thinking which aroused my ire, not your health issues.
Click to expand...

Just thinking about this - maybe the problem is that you like to define groups with having bright line boundaries and thoroughly integrated interests and responses.

Maybe that's why when I suggest that someone with a lesser degree of a condition (or characteristic) might find a comment relating to that condition (or characteristic) less offensive than a person possessing a higher degree of that condition (or characteristic) finding the same comment more offensive, you run in to difficulties.

It's a fine point but you'll probably get it, if you bother to give it any thought.
 
I think, Diamond, you lost me when you defended people's 'right' to make money regardless of the less easily quantified costs to us all. This is entirely your choice but you cannot be offended when others have different priorities. My view is predicated on a personal anxiety but still has repercussions for the wider society.And, going along with your own tribulations, you are perfectly able to see how the personal is the political - talking in an abstract manner about investments and market fundamentals does not lessen the impact on us as individuals. Even I can understand how property bubbles have distorted the economy for the past 2 decades but getting irate about perceived racism is a weaselly response - you should be able to defend your views without being sneery about other posters who disagree with your position. I am not convinced that a simple building programme on greenbelt really has any utility to address the fundamental problem...when house prices are rising hugely faster than wages, there is a deep problem which needs addressing.
What, incidentally, is your situation regarding housing? Do you have children unable to afford a home? Have you ever been insecurely housed? Can you imagine being homeless? Do you think these questions might have more bearing on your thinking than worrying about the fortunes of some investor?
I ask because it seems inconceivable to me that right now, in a freezing January, there are people sleeping in doorways while a whole industry servicing these homeless people has been as exploitative, in many ways, as the most Dickensian employer/landlord. Yes, there are many, many things wrong with this market economy, where everything can be monetised but the imaginary insults directed at investors (regardless of nationality) seem to come very far down the list to me.
Of course, I admit to a certain naivety...but I can imagine the horrors of homelessness and the deep grinding worry of life in a rapacious private rental sector very clearly indeed.
 
Diamond said:
I have a less serious case. I am a member of that population. I set out what I thought.

You seem to have basic issues with reasoning here Pickman's.
Click to expand...
you're a member of that group who has declared offence to what was said in proportion to severity of affliction, on no evidence: YOUR ignorant muddleheaded fuckwittery there for all to see above. before you have a pop at anyone else's reasoning
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

frogwoman
Jas Athwal - Labour MP owns several London flats full of ants and black mould
Replies
14
Views
943
PR1Berske
PR1Berske
Bingoman
Conservatives delete their twitter account lol
Replies
27
Views
942
ska invita
ska invita
Serene
Right-wing pundit Candace Owens now barred from New Zealand as well as Australia
2 3 4
Replies
100
Views
3K
emanymton
emanymton
Nigel
First Sikh Court To Be Established In Britain: London
Replies
15
Views
809
tonysingh
tonysingh
danny la rouge
Time is Up for The Times, which is going down the pan, and doesn’t rhyme with pie.
Replies
1
Views
218
SpookyFrank
SpookyFrank
Back
Top Bottom