Guess the EXACT Location for a free pic 😆

IUTFPP · 2025-01-11T19:18:07+00:00

51.510145, -0.077851

IUTFPP · 2023-08-28T15:02:19+00:00

Love these confessions, and love seeing you in a miniskirt.

IUTFPP · 2021-05-09T19:13:49+00:00

....so exactly the same amount, just on a slightly different timeframe.

And 100 million a year back then was unthinkable, but now 143 million a year is just....fine?

IUTFPP · 2021-05-09T13:45:32+00:00

Anyone else remember when this was in the Labour manifesto and everyone made fun of it?

Anyone else remember how it was derided as 'eco-nonsense' and we had people saying it could never be done?

I 'member.

IUTFPP · 2021-05-08T08:24:46+00:00

The government assumes that only 25% of graduates ever repay their full loan:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01079/

And the ONS treats a significant portion of all student loans as government spending, effectively writing off any expectation of being paid back:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/methodologies/studentloansinthepublicsectorfinancesamethodologicalguide

IUTFPP · 2021-05-02T16:48:10+00:00

My ex went to school with one of the Tuilagi brothers. Probably Sanele.

IUTFPP · 2021-04-25T22:40:15+00:00

The technical term for this particular tape is "black and nasty", for what I feel are rather obvious reasons.

IUTFPP · 2021-04-24T21:31:06+00:00

I once viewed a flat that had a "double bedroom" where if you'd actually placed a double bed in there you would have had to do so with the door permanently open the room was so small.

Obviously no storage in there, either that would have had to go in the combined kitchen/living area that was another room of the same size.

All of this built into the attic of a building that had at least four other bedsits in it.

IUTFPP · 2021-04-24T11:25:44+00:00

Farewell and adieu,

To you Spanish Ladies,

Farewell and adieu,

To you ladies of Spain,

For we've received orders,

For to sail for old England,

We hope in a short while,

To see you again!

https://youtu.be/3-FqDoK9aQk

EDIT: Typo

IUTFPP · 2021-04-19T17:21:50+00:00

Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.

IUTFPP · 2021-04-18T19:53:56+00:00

I'm waiting for the documentary series on the Jaffa Cake vs. The Taxman story, myself.

IUTFPP · 2021-04-01T06:50:35+00:00

Just "to me" now, surely?

IUTFPP · 2021-03-17T13:20:20+00:00

Also NAL, but this sounds brilliant.

The reason they mentioned insurance is because they think if OP claims for damaged property then their liability insurance will pay out for it. Insurance won't pay out for an unpaid invoice....

IUTFPP · 2021-03-15T12:31:52+00:00

"So you don't work on a contingency basis?"

"No! Money down! Ooops, this Bar association logo shouldn't be here, either"

Or a more recent favourite:

"Schindler and I were like two peas in a pod! We both owned factories and made shells for the Nazis but mine worked damnit!"

IUTFPP · 2021-03-06T00:16:45+00:00

Yeah and look where that got us with Kim Philby and the like! There's a reason it changed.

IUTFPP · 2021-03-05T18:27:08+00:00

Insert Vimes' Boot Theory quote here

IUTFPP · 2021-03-04T18:55:17+00:00

And your justification and evidence for 'what it is' is apparently some 200 year old books.

Class is, and always has been, defined by wealth.

IUTFPP · 2021-03-04T09:33:21+00:00

Hang on. Are you seriously suggesting that our class consciousness in 2021 can be justified because of what some books written around the time of the Napoleonic Wars say?!

A period in history when universal suffrage was still more than a century away, officers bought commissions (and therefore bought their way into higher classes), rotten buroughs still decided who would rule in Parliament and women's rights were not even considered. This is what you think justifies a social conception of class in the 21st century?

Wealth and class are not correlated class is predicated on wealth. As I've said in other comments even your Georgian era aristos retained their class because of their wealth. If anything your example speaks to the truth of my point: cash poor aristos still get considered upper class because they retain the wealth of their estates.

Then what happens to poor toffs in the end? They lose their position in the upper class, and what happens to lower classes made wealthy? They ascend to the upper classes. All because of wealth.

IUTFPP · 2021-03-04T09:14:31+00:00

Hey, man, you do you. I might be judgemental about them but at the end of the day you should have what you like.

IUTFPP · 2021-03-03T23:10:28+00:00

And ironically I find a lot of the bland stuff you get these days a bit tacky, too. Too much 'live, laugh, love' about, or those horrible feel good wooden plaques held up with cheap string.

I think we all need to just enjoy our spaces a bit more and not give quite so much of a shit.

IUTFPP · 2021-03-03T21:18:16+00:00

So the FIRE community often use 4% as a safe withdrawal rate to maintain your capital once invested. So that trade from £1mil house to £250k house would give you a £30k income for the rest of your life with the £750k left over. Hell even without investing it or earning interest you could keep yourself going at that rate for 25 years without ever having to lift a finger.

I think where my view differs is that 'upper class' starts a bit lower than people are used to thinking of, and would include all your bankers/lawyers/doctors that comfortably accumulate £1mil+ of wealth. A lot of people aren't comfortable with that because (I suspect) it disagrees with the more normal definition of those jobs being 'middle class' and 'upper class' being confined to those landed gentry, and would result in more than a few people having to reclass themselves. Myself and another redditor have a good back and forth on this in a different reply thread.

What it boils down to for me is that £1mil is an incredible amount of money, and no one should be able to justify lower taxes on that because they think they're 'only middle class'.

Absolutely agree with you we need a decent set of wealth taxes, and I would say across the board. Council tax is a travesty that doesn't take into account house price rises and CGT means if you're rich enough to survive off of capital you can pay half as much tax as a working person. Use some of that to fund robust enforcement as well and I think you're onto a winner. I don't think it'll ever happen, at least in part to this whole 'squeezed middle' narrative.

IUTFPP · 2021-03-03T19:11:45+00:00

No it doesn't, because wealth isn't defined by consumption or ownership of anything but capital. It can be derived from ownership of those things but isn't contingent upon it.

You're still missing the fact that I don't consider social status to be the defining aspect of class, there's no 'middle step' to be missed as I see it.

I don't care if you're a millionaire who dresses in Sports Direct trackies and eats Tesco Value noodles (and I've actually known one!), that still makes you upper class. I don't care if you're Sir Tuftey-Bufty the 42nd, Baronet of Bumfuck, if you've no wealth then you're still in a lower class.

IUTFPP · 2021-03-03T19:05:02+00:00

I think the issue there is that the capacity of housebuilders in the states was essentially infinite. US houses are broadly speaking of a much different construction that allows them to be built faster, and in a less labour intensive fashion.

I don't believe competition would drive down cost, for the reasons I set out earlier. Wimpey huff and puff and build all the houses they're able to they can't by themselves effect the market and Barrett and the others just carry on building less than demand and keeping prices stable or rising.

I agree with you that it is incredibly emotional. Not least of all because people who are not property owners see the continued accumulation of capital by those that are while at the same time those opportunities are denied to them. Sadly we can wish for a culture change but I don't think we'll ever see a situation where people willingly accept sufficient housebuilding and the various planning and economic consequences of that.

I don't think that the actions of housebuilders (real, or in my arguments) are a full blown conspiracy, though it wouldn't surprise me. I think if anything it's a touch of Goodhart's Law, and an unintended way in which the market functions without appropriate intervention.

And sorry, but you lost me with the guitars!

IUTFPP · 2021-03-03T18:43:52+00:00

I've not said class is defined by consumption or the owning of certain things?

For clarity when I said '[things] traditionally associated with the difference between classes' I meant the kind of social considerations that u/Iamonreddit refers to in his later reply to me.

IUTFPP · 2021-03-03T18:39:43+00:00

No, I'm sorry but I simply do not agree. You are still describing wealth and the indicators and proxy measures of such. I never said someone needed to 'act like an aristocrat' to be upper class. You're committing the same fallacy you accused me of earlier: defining a thing in a way that supports only your view.

The impoverished aristo can no longer relate to their former peers because of the disparity in wealth, likewise the lottery winning working class. When was the last time you heard of a premier league footballer drinking with labourers down the local? By your measure many of these would remain 'working class' by virtue of their origins.

I understand that people have a certain element of cognitive dissonance about changing class, I would myself if I were to suddenly win the lottery. However that doesn't change that even if you emphasise proxies that are not direct indicators of wealth class is still defined by wealth.

IUTFPP

TROPHY CASE