View Poll Results: 10 days left, what'll it be?

Voters
92. This poll is closed
  • Hard Brexit (crash out)

    45 48.91%
  • No Brexit (Remain by revoking A50)

    24 26.09%
  • Withdrawal Agreement (after a new session is called)

    0 0%
  • Extension + Withdrawal Agreement

    3 3.26%
  • Extension + Crashout

    9 9.78%
  • Extension + Remain

    11 11.96%
  1. #23401
    Quote Originally Posted by rewtlance View Post
    I was actually going to defend Johnson here because I'm not crazy about too much restriction on the use of language, but if you look at the original context it doesn't mitigate it at all, he was discussing Labour's Peter Mandelson (a gay man) in a context that seem unambiguous. In short it was just straight out gay hate.

    I suspect ordinary people would end up in trouble with the police saying stuff like Johnson does.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Are you actually too stupid to locate a primary source? How do you function as an adult?
    I wouldn't expect you to know much about citing where sources come from. Or should we play that game again about making accusations without sources?

    I fully expect there is a source, but this is how bourdon of proof works, you make a claim, you provide a link to a source to back it up.

    It's not about can I find the source it's about why I should provide a source for some one else's claim.

  2. #23402
    Quote Originally Posted by rewtlance View Post
    I would, in fact, expect someone with at least a double-digit IQ to be able to take the 10-20 seconds necessary to google the discussion in question, because that is more efficient than asking someone else to do it for you like they were your fucking butler or something.
    That's not how it works on principle. The person your trying to prove something to has no responsibility to find your evidence for you.

    And that's what your doing when you don't provide sources, you are asking some one else to do the leg work to prove your argument to them, like a butler. If it's your point, you provide the source, don't expect others to prove your point for you that's being entitled. It's something you learn on the first day at university's, cite and source your arguments. You wouldn't expect the person reading a paper to find your sources for you so don't expect a member of the public to either.

  3. #23403
    The Unstoppable Force Jessicka's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    20,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    That's not how it works on principle. The person your trying to prove something to has no responsibility to find your evidence for you.

    And that's what your doing when you don't provide sources, you are asking some one else to do the leg work to prove your argument to them, like a butler. If it's your point, you provide the source, don't expect others to prove your point for you that's being entitled. It's something you learn on the first day at university's, cite and source your arguments. You wouldn't expect the person reading a paper to find your sources for you so don't expect a member of the public to either.
    Those quotes have been very public knowledge for weeks, if not months, or even years. To plead ignorance and demand proof of them is honestly ridiculous at this point. But now it's been provided, and you're twisting the argument and shifting the goalposts. Still you deflect and defend a racist bigot that takes advice from a guy that espouses eugenics and pushes a manifesto (check page 48 of it) that seeks to weaken the judiciary and parliament to centralise power into the executive. He's showing all the signs of actual fascism in this.

    And still you hold him to lower standards than the competition.

  4. #23404
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    That's not how it works on principle. The person your trying to prove something to has no responsibility to find your evidence for you.

    And that's what your doing when you don't provide sources, you are asking some one else to do the leg work to prove your argument to them, like a butler. If it's your point, you provide the source, don't expect others to prove your point for you that's being entitled. It's something you learn on the first day at university's, cite and source your arguments. You wouldn't expect the person reading a paper to find your sources for you so don't expect a member of the public to either.
    There's your source. Took all of 3 seconds to Google it.

    If you were even slightly interested in educating yourself, instead of "winning" an internet debate by ignoring any comment unless it is "proved" then you could have done that yourself and saved us several posts. I'm literally astonished, however, that somebody apparently interested enough in politics to post on this thread as much as you have, has not heard of this story numerous time before. Where are you doing your political reading?
    When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
    Quote Originally Posted by George Carlin
    Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Douglas Adams
    It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

  5. #23405
    Elemental Lord
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    8,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    That's not how it works on principle.
    Actually it is, you see the principles are different depending on context. When your disputing easily/previously verifiable information or common knowledge then the onus is on you to disprove it. Here's some analogises to explain:

    If you tell me the Paris revolution of 1848 was caused by the king introducing a cheese tax then the onus is on you to back that up.
    If you tell me it's raining where you are then there's no onus on you to prove it and if I disbelieve you the onus would be on me to prove otherwise.
    If you tell me that it gets dark after the sun goes down then there's no onus on you to prove it because that's information that I should know.
    If we're discussing WW2 and you tell me that Germany lost then there's no onus on you to prove it because that's basic information that I should know to be participating in the discussion.

    There's also another factor to it, if somebody enters an ongoing discussion where something has already been sourced/verified and demands a source when it is mentioned again (as was the case here) then as long as it's easily traceable somebody who isn't feeling particularly helpful is perfectly entitled to tell them to find it by themselves.

  6. #23406
    Also helps to not be entering a discussion in good faith with an abject retard.
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    Posting here is primarily a way to strengthen your own viewpoint against common counter-arguments.

  7. #23407
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    Those quotes have been very public knowledge for weeks, if not months, or even years. To plead ignorance and demand proof of them is honestly ridiculous at this point. But now it's been provided, and you're twisting the argument and shifting the goalposts. Still you deflect and defend a racist bigot that takes advice from a guy that espouses eugenics and pushes a manifesto (check page 48 of it) that seeks to weaken the judiciary and parliament to centralise power into the executive. He's showing all the signs of actual fascism in this.

    And still you hold him to lower standards than the competition.
    just provide the bloody quotes its really not hard to state something and then provide a link, fuck i managed it for the guy who's spent a decade in jail for nicking a bike thanks to Blair.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl View Post
    There's your source. Took all of 3 seconds to Google it.

    If you were even slightly interested in educating yourself, instead of "winning" an internet debate by ignoring any comment unless it is "proved" then you could have done that yourself and saved us several posts. I'm literally astonished, however, that somebody apparently interested enough in politics to post on this thread as much as you have, has not heard of this story numerous time before. Where are you doing your political reading?
    cool thanks, wasn't fucking hard to source a statement fuck me.
    im not here to "educate" my self, its a fucking internet forum about an MMO, and you lot certainly are not educators or authority's, if i ask for proof of a point, possibly because i missed it or i don't consume the same media as who ever, then fucking provide it, the default for all arguments is false until proven true on the internet.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by AeneasBK View Post
    Also helps to not be entering a discussion in good faith with an abject retard.
    you wouldn't know good faith if it slapped you in the face with all the soc accounts you make. i think you forgot your not logged in your funtwant account when you posted that.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    Actually it is, you see the principles are different depending on context. When your disputing easily/previously verifiable information or common knowledge then the onus is on you to disprove it. Here's some analogises to explain:

    If you tell me the Paris revolution of 1848 was caused by the king introducing a cheese tax then the onus is on you to back that up.
    If you tell me it's raining where you are then there's no onus on you to prove it and if I disbelieve you the onus would be on me to prove otherwise.
    If you tell me that it gets dark after the sun goes down then there's no onus on you to prove it because that's information that I should know.
    If we're discussing WW2 and you tell me that Germany lost then there's no onus on you to prove it because that's basic information that I should know to be participating in the discussion.

    There's also another factor to it, if somebody enters an ongoing discussion where something has already been sourced/verified and demands a source when it is mentioned again (as was the case here) then as long as it's easily traceable somebody who isn't feeling particularly helpful is perfectly entitled to tell them to find it by themselves.
    but its not previously verifiable information. thats the problem, there has been nothing on this in the BBC or normal media channels i have been watching or have seen.

    the statement is boris is a homophobe and transphobe, first thats a very forward accusation, something that would normally require a good body of evidence or specific irrefutable statement. its not a verified position or commonly known thing. so the onus is on the person making the accusation to prove it and provide a source.

    if i said caervek is a homophobe because i read it in a blog post and i know tons of others have also read it and that blog post linked to some random time you said f slur. thats not verified, and you would be perfectly in the right to ask for a source, the same applies here, it's a bold claim and based on the nature and vitriol of political discourse currently, and how frequently labels are thrown around now, asking for a source is the right thing to do if you have doubts, and as it's not my statement and it's not varified common knowledge the bourdon of proof is on the one who make the statment as you have said.
    Last edited by Monster Hunter; 2019-12-09 at 07:39 PM.

  8. #23408
    The Unstoppable Force Jessicka's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    20,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post

    but its not previously verifiable information. thats the problem, there has been nothing on this in the BBC or normal media channels i have been watching or have seen.
    Then you haven't been paying attention. Now, the proof has been posted. Stop deflecting the argument. Why are you happy to sit there on your hands and let such a man into the highest office in the land?

    I did post a link to a source with excerpts from his book to show him also to be an anti-semite and racist as well (as well there are others).

    Why do you not hold him to the same standards you hold Corbyn?

  9. #23409
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    Then you haven't been paying attention. Now, the proof has been posted. Stop deflecting the argument. Why are you happy to sit there on your hands and let such a man into the highest office in the land?

    I did post a link to a source with excerpts from his book to show him also to be an anti-semite and racist as well (as well there are others).

    Why do you not hold him to the same standards you hold Corbyn?
    because Boris Jhonsons isn't the leader of the largest left wing party in Britain, that should be of a much higher moral standard than the conservatives in championing rights and equality's in the UK, the left wing must be held to a higher standard or its not right calling its self the left wing. what don't you get about that? is it ok the cons are racist? fuck no, is it a surprise? also no. but ill tell you want is a shock and fills me with fury the fact the only alternative is also busy pissing in the racist mud with conservatives. this should be an easy election, but people like you are determined to crash the left wing into a flaming pit and let the right wing dominate for decades and decades to defend that filthy old racist white man and give the people the only choice between two brands of racist when the left and labour SHOULD be better than that.

    also the cons and boris never had a chance of ever getting my vote, labour could have had it, if it wasn't dominated by a different brand of human garbage like the con's. unlike you, i wont bow to a racist just to keep out another racist. there both the same, only one of them is expected to be better.

    all you have managed to do is look exactly like the conservatives and then bitch at me for caring that my own house is on fire before complaining the guy across the streets is a rat infested smouldering dump. though ill give the burner guy (funtwant or w/e he's called now) one thing, i didn't like the response i got from my email to the lib-dems about antisemitism in the party so ill be either voting green or spoiling my ballot.
    Last edited by Monster Hunter; 2019-12-09 at 08:17 PM.

  10. #23410
    Elemental Lord
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    8,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    but its not previously verifiable information. thats the problem
    It's been mentioned/sourced previously in this thread. I don't me to be rude but you're using your own ignorance as a defence here.


    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    if i said caervek is a homophobe because i read it in a blog post and i know tons of others have also read it and that blog post linked to some random time you said f slur. thats not verified, and you would be perfectly in the right to ask for a source, the same applies here
    It's not the same, it would be the same if I used the f slur in a thread and then a few pages later you mentioned it and I demanded proof.

    Although I should point out I'm Welsh so it's not even a slur when I use it as it's a common insult meaning idiot/moron here :P

  11. #23411
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    It's been mentioned/sourced previously in this thread. I don't me to be rude but you're using your own ignorance as a defence here.



    It's not the same, it would be the same if I used the f slur in a thread and then a few pages later you mentioned it and I demanded proof.

    Although I should point out I'm Welsh so it's not even a slur when I use it as it's a common insult meaning idiot/moron here :P
    unlike a few i don't read every single page of the thread. but still its no exactly all over the media and something id bump into in my day to day, nor was it having been all ready posted. if they had said i posted it a few pages back then id have gone look, but they didn't. instead like the resentful, spiteful lot they are they chose simply to make assumptions and go on the attack. (i bet they wonder why the struggle to find voters).

    so as far as i was concerned and knew it was an unverified claim, a claim which they seemed to be trying to elude proving.

  12. #23412
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    the default for all arguments is false until proven true on the internet.
    I'm sorry, but I can't take that on face value. Can you provide some links to prove that this is how things are supposed to work on the internet? For all I know, you could just be making this up.
    When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
    Quote Originally Posted by George Carlin
    Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Douglas Adams
    It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

  13. #23413
    Quote Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl View Post
    I'm sorry, but I can't take that on face value. Can you provide some links to prove that this is how things are supposed to work on the internet? For all I know, you could just be making this up.
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?...Ctwgr%5Eauthor

    evidence enough you shouldn't take things on the net at face value?

  14. #23414
    The Unstoppable Force Jessicka's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    20,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    because Boris Jhonsons isn't the leader of the largest left wing party in Britain, that should be of a much higher moral standard than the conservatives in championing rights and equality's in the UK, the left wing must be held to a higher standard or its not right calling its self the left wing. what don't you get about that? is it ok the cons are racist? fuck no, is it a surprise? also no. but ill tell you want is a shock and fills me with fury the fact the only alternative is also busy pissing in the racist mud with conservatives. this should be an easy election, but people like you are determined to crash the left wing into a flaming pit and let the right wing dominate for decades and decades to defend that filthy old racist white man and give the people the only choice between two brands of racist when the left and labour SHOULD be better than that.

    also the cons and boris never had a chance of ever getting my vote, labour could have had it, if it wasn't dominated by a different brand of human garbage like the con's. unlike you, i wont bow to a racist just to keep out another racist. there both the same, only one of them is expected to be better.

    all you have managed to do is look exactly like the conservatives and then bitch at me for caring that my own house is on fire before complaining the guy across the streets is a rat infested smouldering dump. though ill give the burner guy (funtwant or w/e he's called now) one thing, i didn't like the response i got from my email to the lib-dems about antisemitism in the party so ill be either voting green or spoiling my ballot.
    So you're literally prepared to let in a party where you expect the worse of them, than a party that actively tries to do better, even if it's not there yet? You're seriously pretending you're just waiting it out until they're perfect, and in the meantime settle for a borderline fascist government?

    Are you fucking kidding?

    Things are shit, so let's let them be at least as shit but probably worse until someone can offer a utopia? The fuck is wrong with you.

  15. #23415
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    So you're literally prepared to let in a party where you expect the worse of them, than a party that actively tries to do better, even if it's not there yet? You're seriously pretending you're just waiting it out until they're perfect, and in the meantime settle for a borderline fascist government?

    Are you fucking kidding?

    Things are shit, so let's let them be at least as shit but probably worse until someone can offer a utopia? The fuck is wrong with you.
    things are shit, should i take a punt on a different brand of shit or stick with the devil we know?

    ever heard of gambling? thats what your doing. we have an utter economic shit fest coming up with Brexit, but you want to through nationalization and changing our economic structure in there as well as Brexit? lead by an old white guy who's supported groups who have called for the eradication of Jews and gay's and supported groups who have actively bombed uk city's ?

    In February 2016, the armed wing of Palestinian militant group Hamas carried out execution of Mahmoud Ishtiwi - one of the group’s leading commanders, under allegations of gay sex and theft.[5] Ishtiwi left two wives and three children.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capita...the_Gaza_Strip

    thats corbyn's "freinds" in hama's, Boris might well be a homophobe but at least he doesn't call people who actively kill gays "freinds" and "brothers" on camera..... and the fact im even saying this about the leader of the Labour party is fucking disgusting and you should be fucking ashamed to support him just as any one who supports Boris should be fucking ashamed, we deserve better than these two but by fucking god i wont sell my morals and vote for either of them just to avoid some economic upset, im done settling for the lesser evil and tbh i cant even tell which one the lesser evil is between them.

    what your asking me to choose between a racist homophobe who will be predictably shit, or a supporter of racisist homophobes that will be completely unpredictably shit (cos fuck knows how his ideas will work in a globalized modern world.... probably terribly which is why norway and sweaden don't do it).

    nope...fuck nope.... im not voting for either of them. and who ever does disgusts me.
    Last edited by Monster Hunter; 2019-12-09 at 08:49 PM.

  16. #23416
    The Unstoppable Force Jessicka's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    20,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    things are shit, should i take a punt on a different brand of shit or stick with the devil we know?

    ever heard of gambling? thats what your doing. we have an utter economic shit fest coming up with Brexit, but you want to through nationalization and changing our economic structure in there as well as Brexit? lead by an old white guy who's supported groups who have called for the eradication of Jews and gay's and supported groups who have actively bombed uk city's ?
    If you're worried about Brexit then there's literally only one way you're going to get to try to prevent that, or at least mitigate the shitshow of a deal Boris has for you.

    As for nationalisation, https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...box=1575909790 well this uses IFS numbers, and crunched by academics that show it'll pay for itself within 7 years. That's not a big gamble at all.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capita...the_Gaza_Strip

    thats corbyn's "freinds" in hama's, Boris might well be a homophobe but at least he doesn't call people who actively kill gays "freinds" and "brothers" on camera..... and the fact im even saying this about the leader of the Labour party is fucking disgusting and you should be fucking ashamed to support him just as any one who supports Boris should be fucking ashamed, we deserve better than these two but by fucking god i wont sell my morals and vote for either of them just to avoid some economic upset, im done settling for the lesser evil and tbh i cant even tell which one the lesser evil is between them.

    what your asking me to choose between a racist homophobe who will be predictably shit, or a supporter of racisist homophobes that will be completely unpredictably shit (cos fuck knows how his ideas will work in a globalized modern world.... probably terribly which is why norway and sweaden don't do it).

    nope...fuck nope.... im not voting for either of them. and who ever does disgusts me.
    For sure it's shit, but both sides of that battle are a fucking disasterpiece. Boris though is happy to encourage all that here, is all that himself and it too has very similar consequences.

    Again, you're ignoring a side wanting to do better to tacitly support a side who actively strives to do worse. It makes no sense.

    Abstaining in a contest of which shit smells sweeter isn't going to give you some kind of moral victory when the outcome is the worst smelling shit possible.

  17. #23417
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    If you're worried about Brexit then there's literally only one way you're going to get to try to prevent that, or at least mitigate the shitshow of a deal Boris has for you.

    As for nationalisation, https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...box=1575909790 well this uses IFS numbers, and crunched by academics that show it'll pay for itself within 7 years. That's not a big gamble at all.




    For sure it's shit, but both sides of that battle are a fucking disasterpiece. Boris though is happy to encourage all that here, is all that himself and it too has very similar consequences.

    Again, you're ignoring a side wanting to do better to tacitly support a side who actively strives to do worse. It makes no sense.

    Abstaining in a contest of which shit smells sweeter isn't going to give you some kind of moral victory when the outcome is the worst smelling shit possible.
    an election term is 4 years before you need to fight the next. if your running at a loss by then the whole things sunk at the voting booth when the torys come back and re-privatize, this goes back to what i said a while ago, its almost like you think if you win an election you will never loose one again.

    also the fuck are we supposed to do for those 7 years till it starts making a return, assuming the guardian is right its still a massive expense right at the time of leaving the EU with corbyn's shit deal if not bojo's, or possibly no deal if the Macron finally say's fuck you lot, your out ( hes no friend at all to socialists).

    it is a very big gamble the 7 years only put a time limit on how long we have to clench our ass cheeks for.

    also you know there is a BIG BIG difference in wanting to do better and actually being smart enough to well actually do better, it ok saying were gonna nationalise this and tax these guys and they wont run away to tax havens for some reason and trust us and our academics over those guys and there academics because were the trusty politicians not like every other politician this time were really trusty honesty!

    i mean come on... are you really buying that shit, that some how all these complex pieces of interconnected reforming legislation, many of which need each others to actually work, like how to not cause rent to sky rocket with the tax change the rent cap needs to also pass, are gonna both pass and also ACTUALY WORK TO MAKE THINGS BETTER and not end up making things worse by accident, with whats likely either a minority labour gov or labour with a waffer thin majority?

    come on. you asking for one hell of punt in exchange for disregarding all my morals and voting for basically some one who in my opinion is basically just as shit a person as boris but better at lieing and looking tame.

  18. #23418
    Elemental Lord
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    8,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    So you're literally prepared to let in a party where you expect the worse of them, than a party that actively tries to do better, even if it's not there yet? You're seriously pretending you're just waiting it out until they're perfect, and in the meantime settle for a borderline fascist government?
    Now you see, I like how the Autobots fight for truth/peace/justice, but I'm not sure what Optimus Prime's stance on underage drinking is, so I'm gonna vote for the Deceptions. Despite Megatron's enslave/kill all humans policy.

  19. #23419
    The Unstoppable Force Jessicka's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    20,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    an election term is 4 years before you need to fight the next. if your running at a loss by then the whole things sunk at the voting booth when the torys come back and re-privatize, this goes back to what i said a while ago, its almost like you think if you win an election you will never loose one again.

    also the fuck are we supposed to do for those 7 years till it starts making a return, assuming the guardian is right its still a massive expense right at the time of leaving the EU with corbyn's shit deal if not bojo's, or possibly no deal if the Macron finally say's fuck you lot, your out ( hes no friend at all to socialists).

    it is a very big gamble the 7 years only put a time limit on how long we have to clench our ass cheeks for.

    also you know there is a BIG BIG difference in wanting to do better and actually being smart enough to well actually do better, it ok saying were gonna nationalise this and tax these guys and they wont run away to tax havens for some reason and trust us and our academics over those guys and there academics because were the trusty politicians not like every other politician this time were really trusty honesty!

    i mean come on... are you really buying that shit, that some how all these complex pieces of interconnected reforming legislation, many of which need each others to actually work, like how to not cause rent to sky rocket with the tax change the rent cap needs to also pass, are gonna both pass and also ACTUALY WORK TO MAKE THINGS BETTER and not end up making things worse by accident, with whats likely either a minority labour gov or labour with a waffer thin majority?

    come on. you asking for one hell of punt in exchange for disregarding all my morals and voting for basically some one who in my opinion is basically just as shit a person as boris but better at lieing and looking tame.
    That's an independent examination of the costings, if you cared to actually read the article it actually answers all your own questions. The initial upfront loan costs fuck at all current rates, which is exactly why we should have been using those rates to invest as Iceland and other countries did to stimulate the economy. You want to pretend still that the tories are better at economic management, following not only the longest recession, but the longest and slowest period of recovery from a crash on top of that; caused by their own mismanagement of the aftermath of policies they supported in the US that caused the crash in the first place, which had the Tories been in power, would have had even less legislation and would have made our own crash even worse?

  20. #23420
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    Now you see, I like how the Autobots fight for truth/peace/justice, but I'm not sure what Optimus Prime's stance on underage drinking is, so I'm gonna vote for the Deceptions. Despite Megatron's enslave/kill all humans policy.
    The labour party can hardly call them selves hero's and champions of justice at this moment in time.

    Shit isn't that black and and white, tbh it rarely is but atm it's definatly two shades of black and I'm not about to choose one just because its got a bit of polish and promises to be a better going forward.

    If you fall for the promises of politicians, your a mug tbh. I might not be able to change that, but at least I can refuse to vote for the ones who call Muslim women letterboxes and support groups the stone people to death for daring to love some one of the same sex.

    And I don't think it should be asking much in 2019 that I shouldn't be asked to choose between the two.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    That's an independent examination of the costings, if you cared to actually read the article it actually answers all your own questions. The initial upfront loan costs fuck at all current rates, which is exactly why we should have been using those rates to invest as Iceland and other countries did to stimulate the economy. You want to pretend still that the tories are better at economic management, following not only the longest recession, but the longest and slowest period of recovery from a crash on top of that; caused by their own mismanagement of the aftermath of policies they supported in the US that caused the crash in the first place, which had the Tories been in power, would have had even less legislation and would have made our own crash even worse?
    There not better at economic management, there shit, eery one knows you invest during a down turn to stimulate growth. But that dosnt mean labour are any better at managing the economy. Why do things always have to be an either or? If I say the torys are shit at something people think that must mean I think Labour are better at it and vice versa? They hae both been historically fucking terrible at running the economy.

    I did read the article but it fails to answer the one must important question of polotics, why should I trust that article over the others. We don't have the same rating we had to borrow against as befor the recession for a start. How can I trust the goverment to run these company's well? Last time they skimmed the profit of company's to support failing industry's and the people never saw those better prices. And what about unions? Are the gov gonna use the police again to suppress strikes like last time because there the gaffer again?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •