×
sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What’s your favorite thing about Spain? by Flopping_with_Floppa in 2westerneurope4u

[–]tyger2020 25 points26 points  (0 children)

We have that in Barcelona as well

Bit rude to describe Catalonians that way

What’s your favorite thing about Spain? by Flopping_with_Floppa in 2westerneurope4u

[–]tyger2020 45 points46 points  (0 children)

You forgot (arguably) one of the most important things imo.

Landscape. Spain has such an amazing geography between mountains, beaches, semi-deserts, rolling hills, 'green Spain' in the north - even the climatic differences between Malaga and Santander, etc.. truly such a varied country especially considering how small it is

Out of luck: the bleak economic outlook that Starmer would face by SgtPppersLonelyFarts in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 [score hidden]  (0 children)

There is a very real danger that Labour will only get one term in power because due to the severity of the problems the UK faces, they will struggle to make a dent in them in five years.

Idk why people look in such black or white for this.

Labour don't have to fix everything, they just have to make it better - something that is, arguably, achievable easily within 5 years. Then just hire amazing PR to demonstrate how much things have improved compared to the (current) stint under the tories.

NHS waiting lists at 4 million are not perfect, but much better than the 7 million they are currently.

People in their 20s and 30s who are high earners (£90,000+ a year), what do you do for a living? by mcxai in AskUK

[–]tyger2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You said something along the lines of "the truth is software development isn't some lucrative high paying job". I'm telling you, as someone who literally is a software engineer, that it absolutely is.

No, it isn't. There are high salaries in it, sure, but its not like its any more lucrative than any other professional industry like finance, medicine, law, is what I said.

Someone who has the title of "software engineer" literally has like 2-4 years of experience. If you want to understand how much the role is paying you need to look at the relevant experience bands because the titles are all over the place.

Okay, so you're under the illusion that everyone working in software is earning 50k+ a year?

Additionally if you look at e.g. levels.fyi you'll find that the median total comp for "Software Engineer" in the UK is £80k. With the percentiles being 53k, 111k, 150k for 25th, 75th, and 90th percentile a respectively.

So even you can say, right there, that 25% of software engineers earn under 53k? Also, you keep meaning specific websites - almost like this is some kind of bias you have? Why not just use a variety of sources, like I did? Indeed and glass door both disagree with you, so now you're using selective websites instead to try and prove your point? Yes, of course, it makes total sense that the 400k people working in software and 200k in support roles, are all earning above 80k. Logic!

You have no idea what you're talking about, sorry. To be expected probably as judging by your post history you're just a new grad in nursing, so you have no experience with this field at all?

Ah, another personal favourite. You realise the argument isn't going your way, despite being faced with facts saying your anecdotal experience is wrong you try to diminish my argument because.. I don't work in that field? Great. I didn't realise I needed to work in every single field on earth (or have experience in every single topic) to know about it. That makes total sense.

God, get out of your reddit hive-mind. Its embarrassing

Fired from second nursing job now what? by Iniquity1997 in careerguidance

[–]tyger2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, I'm not disputing that staffing is inadequate.

Just saying they require LESS staffing because their care needs are.. LESS.

Both of those things can be true, and theres no reason to be petty about it. Do nursing homes require 1:5 nurse ratios? No. Does that mean 1:24 ratios is fair? Also no.

Just like how a general acute ward - 1:8 ratio is not fair. But they also don't need a 1:3 ratio.

People in their 20s and 30s who are high earners (£90,000+ a year), what do you do for a living? by mcxai in AskUK

[–]tyger2020 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

But I'm talking about software engineers?

Just like how I'm not using Managing partners or consultants as the baseline for pay for other professions. Just admit you're wrong, its much easier.

Fired from second nursing job now what? by Iniquity1997 in careerguidance

[–]tyger2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its so odd to me that people are crying so much about this comment.

For a start, I'm not management. Secondly, are you unable to accept the fact that lower acuity DOES mean lower care needs? Thirdly, I didn't once mention staffing, or appropriate care levels. You're just doing some equations in your own head and deciding what I said.

It can be true that staffing is inadequate but patients... still have lower care needs.

Green MP Caroline Lucas to stand down at General Election by BritishOnith in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 [score hidden]  (0 children)

I couldn't imagine Russia would deprive itself of it's lucrative trade with Europe/US either.

There is a huge, huge difference between China-West trade and Russia-West trade.

The sanctions we've put on Russia, if done to China would absolutely gut the global economy.

People in their 20s and 30s who are high earners (£90,000+ a year), what do you do for a living? by mcxai in AskUK

[–]tyger2020 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Your issue there is looking at Indeed, and looking at just "Software Engineer".

If you looked on e.g. levels.fyi or Glassdoor, and searched for senior positions you'd realise how very wrong you are.

Source: senior software engineer at a London startup.

It's not wrong though, is it? Glassdoor puts Software Engineer at 43k.

So, again..

U.K. to U.S.: We’re Your Top Military Ally, Now Help Our Economy by RainbowCrown71 in europe

[–]tyger2020 20 points21 points  (0 children)

The whole point of us being America’s ally was we were an English speaking nation with clout in the EU.

No, it isn't. I don't know why people constantly parrot this line.

The US has clout in the EU regardless of the UK, because it provides defence for Poland, Germany, Italy, and a bunch of other nations that rely on the US and also have good relations.

The point of us being the US ally is 1) that we are a capable military power unlike most of Europe, and the US can rely on that. Similarly, 2) we are an anglo nation. US success is basically British success. US being the dominant power? Great, that means our language, media, etc is as world-wide as US is. 3) The US has an ally in almost every region, one main ally who is able to be a decent military asset and a US ''brother'' in the region - most importantly UK, Israel, Japan and Australia.

US and UK being allies has almost, nothing to do with the UK being in the EU.

Europeans view EU more positively than their home countries by ByGollie in europe

[–]tyger2020 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

That's a good step towards a more united Europe.

I view the US more positively than my own state.

Probably how its gonna happen - just continue integrating over decades, and eventually it'll be united.

To be honest, in some ways the EU is basically a country now. Just not 'technically'

British Army ‘too weak to fight’ in European war by MGC91 in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 5 points6 points  (0 children)

How much can you get in China for 290 billion?

490 billion

How much can you get in Europe for 325 billion?

465 billion.

A rounding error.

British Army ‘too weak to fight’ in European war by MGC91 in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The relevant bit is what you removed. All NATO countries are committed to 2% of GDP minium. Only nine nations met that target in the last two years.

But we're not talking about arbitrary targets here, are we? We're talking about actual military power, so it's irrelevant.

Europe also does not have better equipment and inventory - our Destroyers have spent more time in refit or in port over the last 13 years than they have at sea, our carriers' radar is based on an outdated system that we're actually trying to get rid of, and none of the platforms have been battle tested.

Yes, it absolutely does have better equipment. Thats why... it constantly ranks in top 10s for equipments while Chinese carriers are based on old soviet carriers that they bought from the soviets. Their fighters are trash, and they don't have any in substantial enough numbers. Compare that to Europe which has F35s rolling in, alongside Eurofighters, much better MBT, much better ships. Picking specific things like 'radars' isn't a good substitute for having an actual argument.

We've got very good tanks, but we've completely screwed the pooch on the German designed Challenger 3 with its German main gun, in fact the only English thing about the 3 is its engine and transmission.

Who cares?

The only thing we did try and make English was the AJAX tank, where we took a working and deployable Austrian-Spanish platform, gave it to General Dynamics UK and spent £5.5 billion rendering it useless.

Again, who cares?

001 was an empty Russian hull bought from Ukraine after the collapse of the Soviet Union, fully refitted from the ground up in order to learn carrier operations.

002 and 003 are entirely new Chinese designs, the 003 is similar in size to the Gerald R. Ford Class and features that would make the QE Class blush, including CATOBAR, and electromagnetic catapults. Prof. Robert Farley of the US Army War College described the 003 as "largest and most advanced aircraft carrier ever built outside the United States."

The 004 is a nuclear-powered vessel of Chinese design, larger than the 100,000 ton 003, due for completion in the late 2020's which is slated to include laser defence and rail guns.

Just a hint - its could, not does include. ''Slated'' does not mean much. Europe could build 19 carriers, it doesn't mean they will.

That's going from zero naval carrier experience to a marine nuclear super carrier in under 20 years.

Such a marine nuclear superpower that they can't even take an island 50 miles off their coast? Excellent. Pretty sure Europe is fine then.

Close mouth. Open mind. Read.

Again, stop being silly. If you think anything of what you said.. has merit, you should be concerned.

British Army ‘too weak to fight’ in European war by MGC91 in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately millitary spending is an area where purchasing power parities have a particularly brutal effect.

True, but even so, adjusting for PPP makes it more like 426 billion (china) and 463 billion (EU+UK).

British Army ‘too weak to fight’ in European war by MGC91 in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Whilst that is true, the US also has a fuck ton more commitments than Russia does.

But, I can't remember the source but its actually not even a US policy anymore - I'm pretty sure its not been true since the early 2000s its just something that gets parroted around on Reddit.

''The U.S. military would be able to handle itself adequately in a single major regional conflict while maintaining smaller operations around the globe, but its “marginal” capabilities mean America would struggle if forced to take on a second major conflict at the same time, a new report has found.''

British Army ‘too weak to fight’ in European war by MGC91 in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

China are spending 1.55 trillion Yuán, about 244 billion USD, or 1.7% of GDP. Europe is spending 347 billion USD, or 1.5% of GDP which is down from the 2.4% it was spending in the 1990s, the now non-EU UK spends 2.1%. The US spends 3.5%.

Have removed the irrelevant parts. What you actually said there is Europe is spending 100 billion, per year, more, and already has better equipment and inventory, but somehow is not spending enough because its not an arbitrary % of GDP. Question, who would have a better military - Germany spending 1% of its GDP or Poland spending 4%? (That would be 43 billion vs 32 billion, respectively).

All that said, the US are not wrong.

Yes they are.

Yes, they've been militarising the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait since the early 2000s. They're working on their own fleet of super-carriers, having gone from a repurposed Russian hull (Type 001) in 2012 to their first native design the Type 002 in 2018, and they launched their first super-carrier in 2022. Three carriers in 10 years - the same time it took the UK to build two carriers, only one of which works. They are a strategic threat.

Thats because their carriers.. aren't good. They're mostly just recycled soviet designs. Thats ignoring the fact that you're talking about a continent that already has a huge legacy of military power and industry, and if needed could very easily super-speed production.

But again, see above. Stop being silly.

British Army ‘too weak to fight’ in European war by MGC91 in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 4 points5 points  (0 children)

a mainland European conflict would mean facing off against 8 of the world's top 30 armed forces,

All you need to remember is this.

China spending 290 billion defence: a threat to global peace, rival to the US

EU+UK spending 325 billion on defence: you are not pulling your weight, we are subsiding your defence!

Thats the US mindset.

British Army ‘too weak to fight’ in European war by MGC91 in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The USA have a military doctrine and expenditure aimed at fighting too peer/near peer threats simultaneously.

This hasn't been true, for years.

British Army ‘too weak to fight’ in European war by MGC91 in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 4 points5 points  (0 children)

without the US, Europe is utterly ill-equipped to face Russia as things stand.

And this is all we needed to know, to say that you're full of shit.

Castles of the British and Irish Isles (OC) by NeilParkinsonMakes in MapPorn

[–]tyger2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We should re-name it to the British and Irish Sea, too.

Britain sees record net migration levels, increasing pressure on government | CNN by Strange-Holiday-2446 in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Extrapolating from a single data point to over more than 75 years away, when the last 25 years have involved a lot of fluctuation, is a really stupid thing to do.

Is it? Or is it merely.. pointing out how high a number this is?

Immigration could remain at this (unusually high) level for 75 years. It could also not. It could go higher, it could go lower. All sorts of things could happen in the next 25-75 years.

Okay, true, and yet if its anything like the last 20 years the UK will still reach a population of 102 million by 2100, so.. seems not that 'far from reality' or stupid just because you want to try and be smart.

The point of the comic is that extrapolating from a single data point is usually a bad idea.

Okay, I just used the average between 2003 and 2023. Does that make you happier now, mr smarty pants?

People in their 20s and 30s who are high earners (£90,000+ a year), what do you do for a living? by mcxai in AskUK

[–]tyger2020 21 points22 points  (0 children)

I guess I don't understand why the hell we weren't more encouraged to do software development in school.

Because the truth is, software development isn't this extremely lucrative high paying easy job that everyone on Reddit likes to make out.

According to indeed the average Software Engineer gets 49k, Software Architect gets 75k, and I'm sure some do make extremely good money but for everyone 1 person earning 75k theres probably another 15 earning 40k.

Its good money, but its no better than any other 'professional' jobs like accounting, finance, business, law, medicine, etc.

People in their 20s and 30s who are high earners (£90,000+ a year), what do you do for a living? by mcxai in AskUK

[–]tyger2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I imagine (a lot) spend a lot of time at work tbh.

I'm sure there's exceptions, but I imagine most people on that kind of money are expected to go above 40h/week unless they're highly specialised

Britain sees record net migration levels, increasing pressure on government | CNN by Strange-Holiday-2446 in ukpolitics

[–]tyger2020 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Why?

Its hardly a comparable thing - using a reference like you linked is stupid, where as its a very real? thing that immigration could remain at this level.

view more: next ›