Today I'm angry about.....

[BWFC_Insane]

It's a good article on why the figure is wrong. I'm not sure it's a particularly convincing idea against the idea of adding up the wealth of the poor though, beyond 'they didn't manage it this time/it's really hard to do'.

The actual idea of adding it up and comparing still seems legit to me. 'The top 85 richest people have $1.7tr!!!!!' isn't as powerful as 'The top 85 richest people in the world have $1.7tr which is the same combined wealth as [massive number of people] who make up [large proportion of the world's population]'.

There's still no doubt that there are a f*ck load of people who don't 'have' $1.7tr' between them. It's just really difficult (maybe impossible - what does 'have' mean?) to put a number on it.

I disagree.

The nonsense of saying that a a very indebted, perhaps even totally insolvent, banker in New York is a lot worse off than someone with no possessions (but no liabilities) in sub-Saharan Africa is a good hypothetical example that focuses the mind on the folly of searching for and comparing these 'numbers'.

I know the point you are trying to make, but come on, that is a horrid comparison....

[Harry Genshaw]

Went to Middlebrook today against my better judgment as it's always heaving there on a Sunday. We'd seen a dining table we wanted on Wednesday and had gone back to buy it today. In the intervening 3 days the feckin price had gone up by £100 and they weren't for budging.

Needless to say I'll be waiting for the sales at Easter when it will probably be back at Wednesdays price

If it'd a chain ... & the shopping 'malls' normally are, they usually have little room for manoeuvre .... it may even be the place they are using as a particular price window so they can later drop it and claim the reduced price is a genuine saving.

You were right on the little room for manoeuvre Bobo. Twas bugging me all yesterday so I called in this evening to speak to the manager to see if they would sell it at the advertised rate from 3 days earlier. I mentioned about how they weren't losing out by selling it to me at that price, that she could see why i'm hardly likely to pay an extra £90 & their loss would be another companys gain.

The manager's response? "The computer doesn't allow us to do it"!!!

[Prufrock]

It's a good article on why the figure is wrong. I'm not sure it's a particularly convincing idea against the idea of adding up the wealth of the poor though, beyond 'they didn't manage it this time/it's really hard to do'.

The actual idea of adding it up and comparing still seems legit to me. 'The top 85 richest people have $1.7tr!!!!!' isn't as powerful as 'The top 85 richest people in the world have $1.7tr which is the same combined wealth as [massive number of people] who make up [large proportion of the world's population]'.

There's still no doubt that there are a f*ck load of people who don't 'have' $1.7tr' between them. It's just really difficult (maybe impossible - what does 'have' mean?) to put a number on it.

I disagree.

The nonsense of saying that a a very indebted, perhaps even totally insolvent, banker in New York is a lot worse off than someone with no possessions (but no liabilities) in sub-Saharan Africa is a good hypothetical example that focuses the mind on the folly of searching for and comparing these 'numbers'.

I'm still not convinced it goes any further than explaining (convincingly) why the way chosen to calculate who the poorest people are is flawed.

The contrast is only there as a rhetorical device. Sure, when people put forward these numbers based on flawed thinking that should be pointed out, but not to the detriment of the actual point behind it which is that $1.7tr is a shitload of cash to be shared between 85 people. No matter how you define 'wealth', any definition is going to see the the number of people it takes, counting up from the bottom, to get to $1.7tr be ginormous.

If it's not, then fair enough. If actually it turns out the largest number of people you can gather together before reaching $1.7tr isn't that big at all, and in fact we live in a fairly well-balanced world, then great, let's make that point. Otherwise it's yet another issue where the entire debate focuses on the definitions and parameters to be used and then oops everyone forgets what the point was in the first place which is 'hey look, that guy has a billion private jets, and all those people don't even have food/water/schools/healthcare'.

[Bruce Rioja]

The manager's response? "The computer doesn't allow us to do it"!!!

It's probably perfectly true, Harry. I once found in a Cafe Rouge that they were unable to turn a croque monsieur into a croque madam via the simple addition of a fried egg because they couldn't book it out. My own fault for going there in the first place.

Anyhow, by law, in order for them to be able to sell this table at a discounted price in their next BIGGEST EVER SALE they need to have offered it at full price for a 'reasonable period' within the past (I think it's 60 but I could well be wrong) days. So that's why they won't be budging as they're not allowed to. Be patient, young Padawan, it'll be back on at the lower price before you know it.

[Harry Genshaw]

Agreed. Just hope I've not spent it by then!

[Bruce Rioja]

Agreed. Just hope I've not spent it by then!

The car service money girl's not sniffing around again, is she?

[Prufrock]

The manager's response? "The computer doesn't allow us to do it"!!!

It's probably perfectly true, Harry. I once found in a Cafe Rouge that they were unable to turn a croque monsieur into a croque madam via the simple addition of a fried egg because they couldn't book it out. My own fault for going there in the first place.

Anyhow, by law, in order for them to be able to sell this table at a discounted price in their next BIGGEST EVER SALE they need to have offered it at full price for a 'reasonable period' within the past (I think it's 60 but I could well be wrong) days. So that's why they won't be budging as they're not allowed to. Be patient, young Padawan, it'll be back on at the lower price before you know it.

I think, off the top of my head, that it's 28 days in the last 6months.

[Harry Genshaw]

Agreed. Just hope I've not spent it by then!

The car service money girl's not sniffing around again, is she?

that won't be happening again!

[Beefheart]

The manager's response? "The computer doesn't allow us to do it"!!!

It's probably perfectly true, Harry. I once found in a Cafe Rouge that they were unable to turn a croque monsieur into a croque madam via the simple addition of a fried egg because they couldn't book it out. My own fault for going there in the first place.

Anyhow, by law, in order for them to be able to sell this table at a discounted price in their next BIGGEST EVER SALE they need to have offered it at full price for a 'reasonable period' within the past (I think it's 60 but I could well be wrong) days. So that's why they won't be budging as they're not allowed to. Be patient, young Padawan, it'll be back on at the lower price before you know it.

This reminds me of when I was in America and we went to an Appleby's for breakfast (don't, the food was fecking awful). But anyway, I ordered a breakfast which included either 2 sausages or 2 rashers of bacon, I asked the waitress 'Can I have one of each?' her reply 'Sorry Sir, we can't do that' (I checked her name tag, it didn't say HAL 9000).

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Paypal. Fecking robbing bastards.

Was buying something online from a local UAE website. Everything is in the local currency (AED). I get to the paying bit and select Paypal as I couldn't be bothered going getting my credit card from the other room. A few clicks later I wind up on the Paypal site to stick my password in. At this point the price has magically changed to USD. Not a problem I think as AED is pegged to USD and this happens all the time here. I stick my password in and magically we're back in AED...only we've used Paypal's dodgy rate to get back to AED and it's now nearly 10% more expensive.

So watch the robbing bastards if you use them

[clapton is god]

^ Very true. One of my incomes is from a Canadian company but paid in US dollars then converted to UKP. I always get around 10% less that what I started with. They always end up on the winning side of any money laundering conversion.

[boltonboris]

Repatriation of currency is a big earner for a lot of people.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

The fact the transaction was in Dirhams from start to finish, the currency conversion bit is just plain fraud to me. They didn't need to do it. If I was paying in a different currency I could understand that someone somewhere would be charging a bit on the conversion rate. Converting it and then converting it back to cream a bit off is totally out of order.

[bwfcdan94]

Recruitment companies. Some can be quite helpful but most are complete c**ts. However when I received a phone call from a recruitment company today I approached it with a very open positive attitude. After 20 mins of being told that my c.v looked really good and basically being praised for my hard work, I was then informed that there was some interviews for a position in Manc on Thursday, I was offered an interview and was a bout to accept when the recruitment company explained that they (the recruitment company) work on commission and therefore by accepting the interview I would have to pay £300 of costs to the recruitment company for the privilege. More so during the 12 week probation period that would (if I was the successful applicant after the interview stage) I would have to pay a further £1200 to the recruitment company so that they could cover themselves in case it turned out I was sh*t.

In simple this recruitment company had got hold of a role and was basically looking to tax unemployed people if they wanted the opportunity to apply for the role and even the successful applicant may end up being chucked by their client if they are not required after the probation period. It's just morally wrong on so many levels. It makes the various payday loan companies seem like quite legitimate businesses in comparison.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Steer well clear Dan. Sounds like a dodgy company, I'm not even sure what they proposed is legal - it certainly isn't here. The recruiting company pays recruitment fees.

[TANGODANCER]

Glad you were smart enough to spot it and avoid, Dan. Well done for being alert.

[boltonboris]

Yeah, that's not right. If a employer wants a recruiter to find them an employee, the employer should pay the costs..

That's just pure illegitimate nonsense. Are you after an accountancy role in Manchester Dan?

[bwfcdan94]

Yeah, that's not right. If a employer wants a recruiter to find them an employee, the employer should pay the costs..

That's just pure illegitimate nonsense. Are you after an accountancy role in Manchester Dan?

Yes infact I am only looking in Manchester/Bolton/Preston area and have applied for approximately 250 roles over the past 4 months with no success (not even an interview). This bloke said at the start very very quickly his first name but did not mention his company or his last name, he kept using the phrase "what we do" but when I asked him his name at and company again at the end of the phone call he said his name at twice the pace any normal person would speak and didn't even mention the company. I am not sure what he was doing was even legal but the key for me was that he said "he waz based in Manchestar", basically he had a thick south London accent and spoke very unprofessionally, even used innit twice. He was not even prepared to tell me the name of the role and simply referred to the business this job was supposedly for as "his client" refusing to give any information on who it was. I wouldn't be surprised if he got my details of a job website and phoned me up pretending to be legitimate.

[bwfcdan94]

Glad you were smart enough to spot it and avoid, Dan. Well done for being alert.

Thanks, did I mention he also hid his number. He said towards the end of our conversation he would send me an email this morning but he still hasn't.

[Nicko58]

Glad you were smart enough to spot it and avoid, Dan. Well done for being alert.

Thanks, did I mention he also hid his number. He said towards the end of our conversation he would send me an email this morning but he still hasn't.

Sounds like a scam to me, Dan. You're well rid.