onewheeldave

I never said it did. What I said was that, in the current model, marketing is necessary for any company to get a hold in the market. Does what? guarantee success? I don't think so. I see you've brought quality in. Marketing can and does, enable companies producing low quality products and services to prosper- that's part of the problem which would be eliminated by banning marketing/advertising companies, as, after that, companies would have to rely on the quality of their product/service to ensure profit. ---------- Post added 12-05-2017 at 10:06 ---------- Why would you call that advertising? Why would it not just be you talking about your product and why you think it's good? I'm on this thread putting my reasons why I think society would benefit greatly if the marketing/advertising industry was ended. Am I advertising? Of course not. (I wouldn't be surprised if some apologist pops up to say I am advertising- I've heard marketing apologists in the past claim that everything is marketing ) But, I'm not advertising- to claim I am is a misuse of the word (misusing words is very common in marketing).

Obviously there's a thin line between informative media articles and advertising.

Before I answer that, could you clarify this- Given the absence of marketing companies, what would 'companies advertising/marketing themselves' consist of? ---------- Post added 12-05-2017 at 09:24 ---------- I'd suggest improving the quality of the product. I'm not sure what your issue is, do you prefer the current model where one company would simply pay more for better marketing?

Absolutely true. Marketing and advertising are leech industries that give nothing to society and are effectively a tax on all the organisations they 'work' for. Not well, but, only because we live in a world where companies are now obliged to spend between 10-40% of their profit on marketing. As Hairyloon points out above, if there were no marketing, then it would be a level playing field where service and quality would determine a companies success. Actually, pretty much ALL industries have no option but to use advertising and marketing to get clients/customers. These leech industries have become compulsory for a company to succeed. The most logical thing to do is to acknowledge that marketing/advertising are leech industries and then ban them. (To head off the apologists before they start- yes, actually, it CAN be done, as the bans on tobacco marketing have shown). Then instigate some form of tax so that the 10-40% of each companies annual profit that currently goes to the marketing leeches, is redirected to health and social care. The only negative would be that those currently 'working' in marketing/advertising would have to find proper jobs. The positives would be vast, not only freeing up all that currently wasted money, but also resulting in an economy where a companies sales would be directly related to the quality of product/service they offer, rather than how adept they are at shoveling cash into the right marketing services trough.

And these forms are so needlessly convoluted that every one of them carries the advice to get help from the CAB to fill them in. Why is that? Why does a benefits claim form have to be so difficult to fill in that it requires a professional advisor to fill it in properly? And now, of course, due to service cuts, it's often impossible to get an appointment at CAB before the form deadline. For some, in particular, those on the autistic spectrum, accessing the CAB is exceptionally difficult or impossible (I speak from experience and knowledge of other autistic people). What's the problem with someone with knowledge filling in forms for those who can't do it themselves? Do you expect such a person to do it for free? Do you work for free? ---------- Post added 11-05-2017 at 18:40 ---------- Are you disputing the validity of that list? Do you think it's OK that thousands of people are committing suicide due to their benefits being cut and them being unable to work?

The ones on the first list did. Have you even looked at it, or are you as much of an ostrich-head-in-the-sand as your posts would suggest? Here's a short excerpt- Full list here- http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2014/10/21/uk-welfare-reform-deaths-updated-list-october-21st-2014/ Which of the above got better? I can tell you're glad. Reality is though, that the existence of a few false claims, does not justify the current strategy of killing thousands of vulnerable disabled people who are entitled, and, in desperate need of, their benefits.

Yes, the problem is far bigger than most people are aware of. I visited the local user led mental health group and was talking about that list of people who committed suicide after being found capable of work by benefits assessors. One person at that group told me his niece had ended her life, after being found capable of work (she had a broken back), by jumping under a train whilst 3 months pregnant. Others told that, despite the group having low numbers of members, at least 3 past members of the group had ended their lives after having their benefits cut.

Few? The list I linked to was 80 people dead as a direct result of being found capable of work by ATOS- most of them committed suicide, a few of them starved to death- (Just to head off potential further apologism, I'll admit that yes, there are 'food banks' in the UK, but, like many 'support systems', many with mental health issues are unable to access them). So that's 80. And I've got a couple of other long lists of people dead after being abused by ATOS. But if those are too 'few' for you to take seriously, how about the fact that over a 2 month period, 4000 ESA claiments died within 6 weeks of being found 'capable of work'? (other estimates have it as 10,600). https://kittysjones.wordpress.com/2015/08/27/government-reveals-that-more-than-4000-died-within-six-weeks-of-being-deemed-fit-for-work/ http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2012/10/04/10600-sick-disabled-people-died-last-year-within-six-weeks-of-their-claim-ending/ There's a cull going on here. And, IMO, it's actually more sinister than what the nazis did to the Jews, because this is death by bureaucracy. These victims are being killed by normal people ticking boxes on convoluted 'assessment forms'- people who are 'just doing their jobs'.

Not true. A lot of people who do suffer from depression end their lives- they've suffered from depression. It's these kind of misconceptions (that everyone has suffered depression) that leads some people, some of whom are celebrities, to speak openly and publicly about their condition. Traditionally, of course, mental illness and depression have been considered shamefull. Sufferers would be (and still are) classed as 'weak', so victims didn't speak of it, due to fear of repercussions and bullying. I'm no fan of celebrity, but I do appreciate the fact that some celebrities have had the courage and sense of social responsibility to talk openly and publicly about their conditions- hopefully that will make the bullies think twice before they open their mouths in future.

Are 'celebs' immune from depression?

Well, the nazis scapegoated and killed Jews. Our society is scapegoating and killing the disabled. The Nazis herded their victims into gas chambers. Our bureaucrats don't have the stomach for that, instead, they create and administer disgusting systems (Atos etc) that remove peoples benefits, so they commit suicide. http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2014/10/21/uk-welfare-reform-deaths-updated-list-october-21st-2014/

I quit on DVDs cos I got sick of having to sit through adverts and being prevented from going to the start of the movie. I was happy to pay for content, but, it was just way less frustrating to download/torrent the content in such a form that I could actually watch it when I wanted, rather than being forced to endure adverts first.

Yes- I got my python from the snake shop. I was very impressed by the fact that I picked out several several items for decoration, water bowls etc, and John said I didn't need such pricey ones, and picked out cheaper versions for me That's rare in businesses these days, and, as a result, they've had my custom ever since. Plus, as you say, they're very knowledgeable about snakes. Unfortunately, they've not currently got a big selection of larger snakes, though I did recently handle their Irian jaya python. And I did get to meet John's Blue Tongue Skink a few weeks back- very nice little fellow ---------- Post added 22-04-2017 at 12:34 ---------- Did that include any Irian Java Pythons? How did they compare to the other carpets (other than being a bit smaller)? In particular, do the Irians tend to come out in the viv? My Royal spends most of the day in his hide and I'd like my next snake to be a bit more of a display snake. I hear the carpets tend to like being out of the hides and perching on logs- wondering if that applies to the Irian Javas.

Just wondering if there are any snake owners in Crookesmoor, Walkely, Hillsborough, Central areas who'd like to meet up and talk reptiles? I've got a very nice Royal Python, quite small at about 30cm, and am looking into getting another snake, probably something bigger. Not necessarily a bigger species, but just more grown on. Been considering Irian Java Python, Carpet Python, maybe a King snake. What I'd like to do is see, and hopefully handle, a few different types, and talk to the owners about temperament, care, set-ups etc. (Also, would love to see a blue-tongued skink) While I've only got the one snake, I do also have 3 axolotls, 4 toads and a African Pigmy Hedgehog. Reply to this post or om me if anyone's interested in sharing their snake experience.

I would love to. Problem is you'd no doubt continue to comment on, and, misinterpret/misrepresent my posts, and I wouldn't know anything about it, or, be able to correct said misinterpretations/misrepresentations. Anyway, the offer was made, the solution was proposed, as usual you tried to misrepresent it (as "being dictated to" ) and, basically, declined to engage with a sincere and sensible suggestion. Noted. And I'll leave it at that.

No. you've just said that. I've said nothing of the kind. Read my posts.

??? I'm not dictating anything to anyone- I'm asking a question & proposing a solution to the fact that any communication between you and me leads to nothing productive and leads to aggravation for both if us. You can say 'yes', you can say 'no', or, continue to do whatever it is you're doing up to now, in which case I'll take it as a 'no', while noting that the (sincere) offer was made.

Wasn't nearly- Scraping i.e. touching. I don't have time for this rubbish Obelix, neither of us is benefiting from our interactions on this board- serious offer, think about it, let me know, and, it can happen.

That's a- not true b- adds no weight whatsoever to your bizarre claim that there's something wrong about collecting video evidence of bad driving that puts cyclists lives at risk If you're going to continue to criticize the use of helmet/dash cams, why not present some actual reasons. (Clue- cos there aren't any)

Wow- your long-standing and persistent dislike of me and everything I post, has led you to attack a perfectly reasonable and accurate statement (that a bus touching a bicycles handlebars is highly likely to lead to a death) by posting contextually irrelevant latin terms Way to go:clap: I post on these threads to make the world a better place and save lives, not quibble with perpetual snipes cos someone doesn't like me. Here's a suggestion- you and me make a gentlemans agreement: I don't comment on your posts, you don't comment on mine. How about it?

The cyclist is in a far, far better position to judge what 'too close' is, than the person in, what is effectively, a metal box, and, on the right hand side of said box. The cyclist being able to see the left side of said box, just inches away. No it wouldn't! You're exaggerating for effect! Some cyclists are nervous, but a bus passing on the other side of the road is exactly where the bus should be when passing, and, no cyclist is so nervous that they would experience excess anxiety at that (because, if they really were that anxious, there's no way they'd be on the road) Are you serious!! A bus contacting handlebars is basically attempted murder. No, not subjective- objective, as, there are clearly circumstances where the judgement is clear, and, would stand up in court. Ironically, you've mentioned them both above (other side of road=fine, touching bars=not fine).

It's an analogy Bodie! He's just trying to get you to think about your opinions. After all, you've just criticized people who have the foresight to secure video evidence of activities that harm others. ---------- Post added 21-04-2017 at 10:03 ---------- To be fair, the discussion here isn't exclusively about a left turn- it's moved on to videoing harrassment of cyclists, which is a very serious subject, and, which occurs with great frequency in Sheffield. It was only last year when a cyclist was killed on a road very near me (the one that runs between the Ponderosa and Crookes Valley park)- run over from behind by a drunk driver, who than fled the scene. That's when dash cams make a lot of sense. The more drivers get it into their heads that, when they abuse, cut up, threaten and endanger cyclists lives, there's quite a good chance someone's going to get it on video, the more likely they're going to think before they perform whatever stupid manouver they're contemplating.

In my years of cycling there have been 2 occasions when I was overtaken, way, way too close by lorries. No chance of '"get out of the way", as, on the left, inches away, was the curb (inches away as I had to move left due to the lorry), and, or the right, the lorry, forcing me further to the curb. Only thing to do, was keep my cool, keep a very rigid grip on the bars, and hope to survive till the thing passed. Which luckily, I did. A lot of cyclists don't have my stability, and, a lot would not have been able to keep their cool- I have no doubt that less competent cyclists would have gone under the wheels, as would I, if there'd been any debris on the road. Drivers of buses or lorries who put cyclists through that, should be sacked, and never be allowed to drive again. You were lucky- in that situation, you can't 'get out of the way'. As the families of many dead cyclists are painfully aware.

Do you understand what it means when a Bus is driving too close to a cyclist?! Do you realize how many cyclists are dead because of buses/lorries/cars driving too close? Cyclists who had families and futures, cut down because a motorist "drove too close" to them. The last thing we need is bus drivers who don't understand the potential consequences of irresponsible and dangerous driving around cyclists.

Let me correct your 'correction'. I said- Firstly, you're in the wrong tense- I said, not "won't", but "wouldn't". Your second error is in assuming that by "wouldn't" I'm somehow implying the police chose not to do anything. In reality, "wouldn't" simply means they would not have done anything ("wouldn't" is just a contraction of "would not") Now if, as you say that police "couldn't" (I've corrected your tense mistake there), have done anything then, clearly, it is also true, as I said, that they "wouldn't" have done anything.