Tag: Suckage

Things that totally suck

Not Just No

Drive Time, Gummint, Watermelons

…but “fuck off and die” no.

I refer here, of course, to this push to make us all give up our regular gasoline-powered cars and replace them with fucking Duracell* vehicles.

Here’s one tale of woe.

And here’s the problematic infrastructure.

So fuck ’em.

Come to think of it, we could always switch to horses, except that those assholes at Peta will probably throw a hissy about that too.

I think I need to go to the range (he said, apropos of nothing).  Those guns aren’t going to shoot all by themselves, you know.

*And I mean no disrespect towards Duracell, who make excellent batteries.  I’m just not going to use them to power my car.

Quote Of The Day

Economics, QOTD

From some guy in Florida:

“If you look back to the Great Depression, the house was only three times the average salary. Now, it is eight times the average salary.  The car was 46% of the salary [back then], the car today is 85% of the salary. And here’s the craziest part:  [residential] rent then was 16% of the average salary, it is now 42% of the average salary.”

I’d love to see the same stats for groceries and electricity.  On the other hand, maybe not.

So What, It’s Only Jews

Marxists, Wokism

It’s hard to see how much worse the situation could get:

More than 30 synagogues in Massachusetts were targeted with bomb threats on Sunday, just days after its largest city, Boston, rejected millions of dollars in federal anti-terrorism grant money.

Why did they reject the funding?

The city council rejected the grant from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in a contentious 6 to 6 vote, with the opposition arguing that giving more funds to law enforcement would “do more harm than good” to minority communities.

Oh well, that’s okay then.  After all, it’s only Jooz who’d be targeted by the terrorists, but of course Jooz don’t classify as a “minority” group anymore because White Rayciss Who Invaded Peaceful Gaza.  Or something like that.

Let Boston sink.

Proper Attire

Business, Corporate Wokism, Travels

Oh FFS, this just takes the cake:

British Airways bosses have apologized for telling cabin crew members what bras to wear under new ‘transparent’ uniforms which led to comments from passengers.
The see-through blouses were issued as part of a new uniform, unveiled earlier this year, designed to ‘take the airline into the next chapter’ and for a non-binary crew.
Last year BA relaxed the rules around its strict uniform policy and went gender-neutral to allow male pilots and crew to wear make-up and carry handbags.

Lemme just deal with the low-hanging fruit first.

  • Companies have every right to create a “uniform” policy, and to dictate what does and does not constitute “proper” clothing under that policy
  • the corollary is that if the uniform consists of “transparent” clothing, they also have the right to set policy for “proper” undergarments
  • but if they do specify transparent clothing, they deserve everything that comes to them.

Now for the ugly stuff.

I’m sick and fucking tired of companies feeling that they have to apologize to their employees for bullshit like this.  Were the topic that of terrible salaries, foul working conditions and in short things that deserve corporate groveling, okay;  but for causing hurt feeewings?  Screw that.

But in to the topic at hand.

Nothing would make me question the capabilities of an airline’s crew faster than the whole thing turning into some kind of costume party, with the “men” wearing clown makeup and the “women” wearing no bra under a transparent blouse (although at first glance the latter wouldn’t seem too bad, please consider that the average age of trolley-dollies now appears to be 50, and all seem to have been recruited from branches of the Ugly Tree).

And frankly, I’m not sure I want to see any of the flight crew wearing transparent clothing, given that said crew will likely include girlymen and butchygirls, all of indeterminate gender.

I don’t know why I bother fulminating about this stuff anymore, considering that my chances of flying at all are minuscule, and on any British airline even less than that.

I’d give this one a try, though.

Always Upwards

Economics

Upon reading this cheerful little note:

The economy sustained above-trend growth in the third quarter of 2023, with gross domestic product rising 5.2% year-over-year, greater than the 2.1% that was seen in the second quarter of this year. Analysts are mixed on recession predictions for 2024, with strong growth but persistent inflation leaving mixed signals of the U.S. economy’s strength.

Since Biden took office, costs have risen over 17%, while average hourly wages have only risen 13.6% as of November. The resulting price increases mean that families have to pay more than $11,000 in additional costs to maintain the same standard of living.

…I have only this to say:  with the exception of commodities-based products like gasoline where raw material costs are closely tied to the retail price, once prices go up, they never come down.

Seriously:  when last did you see the everyday retail price of grocery store products — to give the best example — get reduced?

Forget it.  Ain’t gonna happen.  And as for those products which keep prices stable simply by shrinking their size (e.g. chocolate), if you’re expecting the products to go back to their original size once inflation comes down, I have an Arizona rainforest to sell you.

And as for “average hourly wages have only risen 13.6% as of November“, people on fixed income (like me) haven’t seen anything close to that — 4.5% for us, and that was well over a year ago.

And then there’s this:

About two-thirds of households at the bottom 20 percent of the income bracket pay over half their income in rent and utilities.

In my case, without New Wife’s salary it would be 78%.

Ask me how I feel about all this.

Option A:

Option B:

Option C:

Scare Quotes

Media Assholes

I am so sick of seeing bullshit headlines like this:

Why the quotes?  The actual report itself:

A manhunt for a suspected knifeman has been launched today after a ‘heavily pregnant’ woman was stabbed in Aberfan in a suspected ‘domestic incident’.

Let me just parse this.

  • The woman was “heavily pregnant” — i.e., she had a huge non-Lizzo-style belly, clearly apparent.
  • She was stabbed — obviously apparent, so no quotes.  But then we have:
  • A”suspected” knifeman (my quotes).  If she was so obviously stabbed, how could the stabber be a “suspected” knifeman?

I know, I know:  the reporter is simply reporting from what he’s been told by, one imagines, either the police or hospital staff, hence all the quotes.

And it’s all bullshit.  A pregnant woman was stabbed by a knife-wielding man (even that’s redundant), and police are looking for him.  The circumstances surrounding the stabbing were, apparently, that it was down to a domestic incident — i.e. the stabber was known by the stabbee — the details of which are still unknown.

If it turns out that it wasn’t a domestic incident — i.e. that the woman was stabbed by some nutcase because he hates Tuesdays and the voices in his head told him to hurt someone, anyone — then the time for amending the report comes when the newspaper can print that no, it wasn’t a domestic incident as first reported, it was just some random loony.

I’m sorry, I meant “loony”.

I realize that this is the Daily Mail  newspaper– hardly a paragon of acceptable journalism — but fucking hell, can we at least dispense with all the prevaricating quote marks?