Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: BillyStubbsTears on March 11, 2020, 06:18:41 pm
-
For the past 45 years, we've had Tory Chancellors and Shadow Chancellors telling us that you can't deliver growth through Government spending, and Governments spending has to be reined in.
Amazing how, when they are faced with the biggest economic threat since WWII, a Tory Chancellor suddenly tells us that the Govt needs to spend more to support economic growth.
Almost as if they never actually believed what they were saying all along isn't it?
Back in 2008-10, when we had what was then the worst economic shock since the War, the Tories were screaming at Labour for increasing Govt spending to get us out of the recession. They called them Deficit Deniers. They said that Austerity was the way to grow the economy.
Bunch of unprincipled bas**rds that they are.
For the avoidance of doubt, the fiscal stimulus announced today is welcome and needed (although it will prove to be pitifully small in relation to the economic challenge and will have to be increased later on). The point I'm making is that you would not find a Tory anywhere over the last two generations who would even admit that this was sensible economics. They have lied to the British people for nearly half a century on this topic. Until faced with a challenge that was too big for them to ignore basic economics.
-
So is it a good budget for the country or not?
-
Hound.
I think you missed the bit where I said this was welcome and neccessary.
Of course it is good for the country to finally invest in infrastructure. The frustrating thing is it is a decade late. I've been posting for ten years on here that we need it and that cutting investment spending in 2010 was the single most stupid economic mistake since the War.
So of COURSE I welcome it. I'm not commenting on that. I'm commenting on the hypocrisy of Tory politicians cheering this, when they have spent 2 generations denouncing it as fantasy economics.
-
And while we are talking about hypocrisy and terrible economic decisions, this.
https://mobile.twitter.com/CJFDillow/status/1237786269284995075
-
I can't understand you Billy, the Tories have been telling you in every interview for the last few elections they are now the party of the working man/woman.
You don't listen to them.
-
I can't understand you Billy, the Tories have been telling you in every interview for the last few elections they are now the party of the working man/woman.
You don't listen to them.
Hahaha
-
Hound.
I think you missed the bit where I said this was welcome and neccessary.
Of course it is good for the country to finally invest in infrastructure. The frustrating thing is it is a decade late. I've been posting for ten years on here that we need it and that cutting investment spending in 2010 was the single most stupid economic mistake since the War.
So of COURSE I welcome it. I'm not commenting on that. I'm commenting on the hypocrisy of Tory politicians cheering this, when they have spent 2 generations denouncing it as fantasy economics.
It is a good budget for the country but I knew you would still address it with a negative spin.
I see that no one else has been critical yet.
-
Hound.
I think you missed the bit where I said this was welcome and neccessary.
Of course it is good for the country to finally invest in infrastructure. The frustrating thing is it is a decade late. I've been posting for ten years on here that we need it and that cutting investment spending in 2010 was the single most stupid economic mistake since the War.
So of COURSE I welcome it. I'm not commenting on that. I'm commenting on the hypocrisy of Tory politicians cheering this, when they have spent 2 generations denouncing it as fantasy economics.
It is a good budget for the country but I knew you would still address it with a negative spin.
I see that no one else has been critical yet.
The Labour party were pretty negative in their response
-
Hound.
I think you missed the bit where I said this was welcome and neccessary.
Of course it is good for the country to finally invest in infrastructure. The frustrating thing is it is a decade late. I've been posting for ten years on here that we need it and that cutting investment spending in 2010 was the single most stupid economic mistake since the War.
So of COURSE I welcome it. I'm not commenting on that. I'm commenting on the hypocrisy of Tory politicians cheering this, when they have spent 2 generations denouncing it as fantasy economics.
It is a good budget for the country but I knew you would still address it with a negative spin.
I see that no one else has been critical yet.
There isn't anything wrong with what he's said though. This budget is good. Austerity wasn't needed and we should borrow and invest when interest is low, that's a fact. This is a forum, should we only post positive messages? It's like Rovers losing 10 in a row then finally winning one, should we ignore that previous run? And not say that the manager has learnt from his mistakes such as x, y and z?
-
Hound.
I think you missed the bit where I said this was welcome and neccessary.
Of course it is good for the country to finally invest in infrastructure. The frustrating thing is it is a decade late. I've been posting for ten years on here that we need it and that cutting investment spending in 2010 was the single most stupid economic mistake since the War.
So of COURSE I welcome it. I'm not commenting on that. I'm commenting on the hypocrisy of Tory politicians cheering this, when they have spent 2 generations denouncing it as fantasy economics.
It is a good budget for the country but I knew you would still address it with a negative spin.
I see that no one else has been critical yet.
There isn't anything wrong with what he's said though. This budget is good. Austerity wasn't needed and we should borrow and invest when interest is low, that's a fact. This is a forum, should we only post positive messages? It's like Rovers losing 10 in a row then finally winning one, should we ignore that previous run? And not say that the manager has learnt from his mistakes such as x, y and z?
DO, you know what, some people would say that the manager had learned from his mistakes.
Many have stuck up for him following the strange decision to persist with John at LB and with his tinkering with the team.
All I said was it was very predictable that BST would put a negative spin on a good for the country budget.
-
Well if people think announcing £600 billion of public spending without saying how it would be paid for then it's a good budget - or a magic money forest.
I notice Sadjid Javid and Teresa May were somewhat cautious about it. Funny old world.
-
Hound.
I think you missed the bit where I said this was welcome and neccessary.
Of course it is good for the country to finally invest in infrastructure. The frustrating thing is it is a decade late. I've been posting for ten years on here that we need it and that cutting investment spending in 2010 was the single most stupid economic mistake since the War.
So of COURSE I welcome it. I'm not commenting on that. I'm commenting on the hypocrisy of Tory politicians cheering this, when they have spent 2 generations denouncing it as fantasy economics.
It is a good budget for the country but I knew you would still address it with a negative spin.
I see that no one else has been critical yet.
There isn't anything wrong with what he's said though. This budget is good. Austerity wasn't needed and we should borrow and invest when interest is low, that's a fact. This is a forum, should we only post positive messages? It's like Rovers losing 10 in a row then finally winning one, should we ignore that previous run? And not say that the manager has learnt from his mistakes such as x, y and z?
Ah, but if we had a new manager, we wouldn't blame him for old team policies before he became manager, would we? After all, some people will still vote Labour in future despite the total inadequacies of its former leader,won't they?
-
Well if people think announcing £600 billion of public spending without saying how it would be paid for then it's a good budget - or a magic money forest.
I notice Sadjid Javid and Teresa May were somewhat cautious about it. Funny old world.
We don't question the Conservatives magic money trees though. They don't have to price things up, only other parties have to do that.
-
Hound.
I think you missed the bit where I said this was welcome and neccessary.
Of course it is good for the country to finally invest in infrastructure. The frustrating thing is it is a decade late. I've been posting for ten years on here that we need it and that cutting investment spending in 2010 was the single most stupid economic mistake since the War.
So of COURSE I welcome it. I'm not commenting on that. I'm commenting on the hypocrisy of Tory politicians cheering this, when they have spent 2 generations denouncing it as fantasy economics.
It is a good budget for the country but I knew you would still address it with a negative spin.
I see that no one else has been critical yet.
There isn't anything wrong with what he's said though. This budget is good. Austerity wasn't needed and we should borrow and invest when interest is low, that's a fact. This is a forum, should we only post positive messages? It's like Rovers losing 10 in a row then finally winning one, should we ignore that previous run? And not say that the manager has learnt from his mistakes such as x, y and z?
Ah, but if we had a new manager, we wouldn't blame him for old team policies before he became manager, would we? After all, some people will still vote Labour in future despite the total inadequacies of its former leader,won't they?
It's more like a new manager who was previously the goalkeeper coach though. He was still part of a failing regime and still had metaphorical blood on his hands.
-
Well if people think announcing £600 billion of public spending without saying how it would be paid for then it's a good budget - or a magic money forest.
I notice Sadjid Javid and Teresa May were somewhat cautious about it. Funny old world.
We don't question the Conservatives magic money trees though. They don't have to price things up, only other parties have to do that.
Mmmmm, I suppose the difference is though that this lot are in a position to put it into practice.
-
Ldr, labour? WHO?
-
Corbyn selby, in his budget response
-
Hound.
I think you missed the bit where I said this was welcome and neccessary.
Of course it is good for the country to finally invest in infrastructure. The frustrating thing is it is a decade late. I've been posting for ten years on here that we need it and that cutting investment spending in 2010 was the single most stupid economic mistake since the War.
So of COURSE I welcome it. I'm not commenting on that. I'm commenting on the hypocrisy of Tory politicians cheering this, when they have spent 2 generations denouncing it as fantasy economics.
It is a good budget for the country but I knew you would still address it with a negative spin.
I see that no one else has been critical yet.
There isn't anything wrong with what he's said though. This budget is good. Austerity wasn't needed and we should borrow and invest when interest is low, that's a fact. This is a forum, should we only post positive messages? It's like Rovers losing 10 in a row then finally winning one, should we ignore that previous run? And not say that the manager has learnt from his mistakes such as x, y and z?
Ah, but if we had a new manager, we wouldn't blame him for old team policies before he became manager, would we? After all, some people will still vote Labour in future despite the total inadequacies of its former leader,won't they?
It's more like a new manager who was previously the goalkeeper coach though. He was still part of a failing regime and still had metaphorical blood on his hands.
But according to voters it wasn't failing though, was it? His new regime might turn out like Bob Paisley's when he replaced Bill Shankly at Liverpool.
-
As for 'leveling up' in cash terms this budget will mean the very poorest will be worse off and richest better off. Now there's a surprise.
https://twitter.com/joncstone/status/1237747464393895936
-
As for 'leveling up' in cash terms this budget will mean the very poorest will be worse off and richest better off. Now there's a surprise.
https://twitter.com/joncstone/status/1237747464393895936
Some of the twitter replies say different.
-
As for 'leveling up' in cash terms this budget will mean the very poorest will be worse off and richest better off. Now there's a surprise.
https://twitter.com/joncstone/status/1237747464393895936
Some of the twitter replies say different.
People on twitter can't read a graph shock.
What do you say hound?
-
I suppose when, just before the next election and the tories finally admit brexit was a load of b*llocks because they cannot pay back any of the 2tn +++ back and decide to rejoin the EU all the johnson sycophants will be saying yeah go for it man?
-
Anger as UK slashes tax break for entrepreneurs (it says here)
https://twitter.com/ftukpolitics/status/1237804950513737730
-
I suppose when, just before the next election and the tories finally admit brexit was a load of b*llocks because they cannot pay back any of the 2tn +++ back and decide to rejoin the EU all the johnson sycophants will be saying yeah go for it man?
Wrong thread SR. This isn’t the Brexit thread.
-
Hound.
You've done your usual thing of reading stuff into my posts that aren't there.
Let me say it really simply.
1) Borrowing to invest in infrastructure =good. Unquestionably.
2) Claiming this to be genius economics after half a century of screaming that it was dangerous quasi-Marxist nonsense =hypocritical. The very person announcing this today has spent years as a wonk decrying the concept of Govt borrowing to invest. That strain of politics has pissed away the 2010s and given us the worst decade of economic performance since the Napoleonic Wars. So forgive me if I don't strip off and run down the street cheering about a belated conversion. It's better that it's happening than not happening. But they have a hell of a long way to go to make up for the damage of the last decade.
Clear enough?
-
BST, every journey starts with a single step.
Very clear to me.
-
BST is right that infrastructure investment is needed, not least to make up for pointless the austerity years.
That said, that money needs to earn a living. You can invest in infrastructure which services the old economy, and becomes a stranded asset.
Spending on new roads is a waste of resources, by and large. It may add to the problem of climate change, the biggest item on the economic agenda going forwards.
There was little in the budget to address social care, no focus on inequality, no attack on child poverty, fuel poverty was missing from the story, the future of public services not assured.
That is just a starters list.
So yes, some steps forward, but no real understanding of how an economy will function in the next decade.
-
The last article I read on the UK getting down to zero emmissions by 2050 would cost 33bn/year, good luck with that
-
I suppose when, just before the next election and the tories finally admit brexit was a load of b*llocks because they cannot pay back any of the 2tn +++ back and decide to rejoin the EU all the johnson sycophants will be saying yeah go for it man?
BST is correct, do you have reading problems?
Wrong thread SR. This isn’t the Brexit thread.
-
I suppose when, just before the next election and the tories finally admit brexit was a load of b*llocks because they cannot pay back any of the 2tn +++ back and decide to rejoin the EU all the johnson sycophants will be saying yeah go for it man?
BST is correct, do you have reading problems?
Wrong thread SR. This isn’t the Brexit thread.
No SR and I usually write my response to someone AFTER their copied post, unlike yourself.
-
BST, every journey starts with a single step.
Very clear to me.
So. No complaints about a wasted decade then? And you're happy that you can trust the Tory party when they ditch their entire economic philosophy of half a century and start implementing a policy that the were calling Marxist not 6 months back?
No issues about trust?
-
for someone that claims otherwise your posts always seem to defend tories hound, just balancing the debate?
-
tory fiscal manifesto out of the window then? I suppose it was a few months old.
''Sajid Javid, the former chancellor, used his speech in the budget debate to urge Rishi Sunak not to abandon the fiscal rules that he (Javid) announced during the general election campaign. Under these rules, that were included in the Conservative manifesto, the party committed to: 1) not borrowing to fund day-to-day spending; 2) capping average net public sector net investment at 3% of GDP; and 3) ensuring that debt interest payments don’t exceed 6% of government revenue''
-
It doesn't matter who we voted for now, the Tories won, so we should all hope they take us forward. Being bitter and twisted because you didn't vote for them seems a lot like desperation for them to fail, to me.
-
BST, every journey starts with a single step.
Very clear to me.
So. No complaints about a wasted decade then? And you're happy that you can trust the Tory party when they ditch their entire economic philosophy of half a century and start implementing a policy that the were calling Marxist not 6 months back?
No issues about trust?
BST, now you are reading things into MY posts that I haven’t said.
I haven’t said that I trust anyone, in fact as I have said many times before, I don’t particularly trust any politicians.
You yourself have said that this budget is a good one for the country and I happen to think it is too.
When things change for the better why put a negative (Labour Party member) spin on it.
-
BST is right that infrastructure investment is needed, not least to make up for pointless the austerity years.
That said, that money needs to earn a living. You can invest in infrastructure which services the old economy, and becomes a stranded asset.
Spending on new roads is a waste of resources, by and large. It may add to the problem of climate change, the biggest item on the economic agenda going forwards.
There was little in the budget to address social care, no focus on inequality, no attack on child poverty, fuel poverty was missing from the story, the future of public services not assured.
That is just a starters list.
So yes, some steps forward, but no real understanding of how an economy will function in the next decade.
Albie
Very good point. I'm a believer in the multiplier effect in depressed economies, and any infrastructure investment is better than none, even if it is spent on useless stuff. As Keynes said, in a depressed economy, Government using borrowing to buy gold sovereigns, out them at the bottom of a pit shaft, backfill it then let folk dig them out would actually more than pay for itself, even though all you'd have made was a spoil heap.
But of course, the best investment comes with a long term strategic plan to set out country up for the next century. Build it on stuff that is going to pay back dividends in the future as part of a joined up plan.
When Labour said before the Election that they would borrow to spend in investment to de-carbonise the economy, the Tories said it was fantasy economics. All of a sudden, they've been converted. Just without having a plan what to spend the money on.
-
for someone that claims otherwise your posts always seem to defend tories hound, just balancing the debate?
SR, see my post #34 to see what I think about all politicians.
I am just making my point to BST to balance his predictable “have a pop at the government” attitude even though the budget is a good one for the country.
-
Hound.
Because I don't believe all politicians are hypocrites. But some are. And they need pointing out and holding to task. Otherwise they will continue to be.
You clearly DON'T actually care about that, otherwise you would share my annoyance. Because theres been a decade long con trick played on the public.
1) Insist that Austerity is necessary (it wasn't).
2) When that policy results in a decade of stagnant wages, direct people's ire at the EU and tell them THEY are to blame for your life being shit (they weren't)
3) Continue to insist that Labour are dangerous radicals for proposing textbook economics (they aren't).
4) After that wins you an election, flip your policies round 180 degrees and say that you deserve credit (they don't).
I don't think politics should be like that. I don't think it HAS been like that most of the time. But it will be in future if people just "Meh" at it.
-
BST, I have told you many times that I don’t support any political party.
The reason that the Torys are in power is because Labour are unelectable.
What is the alternative to the Torys under those circumstances.
-
for someone that claims otherwise your posts always seem to defend tories hound, just balancing the debate?
SR, see my post #34 to see what I think about all politicians.
I am just making my point to BST to balance his predictable “have a pop at the government” attitude even though the budget is a good one for the country.
Why don't you try your hand and debating with your views from your position, as has been said before a balanced debate is not about equal numbers on either side it's about discussing facts.
-
for someone that claims otherwise your posts always seem to defend tories hound, just balancing the debate?
SR, see my post #34 to see what I think about all politicians.
I am just making my point to BST to balance his predictable “have a pop at the government” attitude even though the budget is a good one for the country.
Why don't you try your hand and debating with your views from your position, as has been said before a balanced debate is not about equal numbers on either side it's about discussing facts.
Who said anything about equal numbers on either side.
-
That's your standard answer I'm just balancing the debate or someone's comment, if you addressed the content of 'someones' comment rather than ignore what you don't like or agree with I could see your point better
-
Who is Corbyn Ldr?
-
who is selby :lol:
-
That's your standard answer I'm just balancing the debate or someone's comment, if you addressed the content of 'someones' comment rather than ignore what you don't like or agree with I could see your point better
Before you poked your nose in I was addressing BST.
I remember the slug balancer in Blackadder and as funny as that was, you make me laugh more.
-
BST, every journey starts with a single step.
Very clear to me.
Shame all the steps in the 2010s were backwards ones.
-
BST, every journey starts with a single step.
Very clear to me.
Shame all the steps in the 2010s were backwards ones.
The third amigo enters the scene.
-
That's your standard answer I'm just balancing the debate or someone's comment, if you addressed the content of 'someones' comment rather than ignore what you don't like or agree with I could see your point better
Before you poked your nose in I was addressing BST.
I remember the slug balancer in Blackadder and as funny as that was, you make me laugh more.
You must have missed the bit on 'someones'comment that stated 'just to be clear then'hound
When you become a moderator :lol: you can decide who posts
-
BST, every journey starts with a single step.
Very clear to me.
Shame all the steps in the 2010s were backwards ones.
The third amigo enters the scene.
Your not very original BB
-
That's your standard answer I'm just balancing the debate or someone's comment, if you addressed the content of 'someones' comment rather than ignore what you don't like or agree with I could see your point better
Before you poked your nose in I was addressing BST.
I remember the slug balancer in Blackadder and as funny as that was, you make me laugh more.
You must have missed the bit on 'someones'comment that stated 'just to be clear then'hound
When you become a moderator :lol: you can decide who posts
No mate, I want you to keep posting, it keeps me smiling.
-
BST, every journey starts with a single step.
Very clear to me.
Shame all the steps in the 2010s were backwards ones.
The third amigo enters the scene.
Your not very original BB
BB?
You are so funny Sydney.
-
Why thank you kind sir :)
-
BST, every journey starts with a single step.
Very clear to me.
Shame all the steps in the 2010s were backwards ones.
The third amigo enters the scene.
Your not very original BB
I can just imagine Syderney sat with his didgeridoo playing Dancing Queen.
Now THAT'S Abba-riginal.
-
Some say that you play with your didgeridoo far too much bb :)
-
That's why I'm quite big down under.
-
Labour are unelectable, right?
But this man IS electable as PM?
https://mobile.twitter.com/hannahITV/status/1234430884863971329
Remind me why Labour are unelectable, judged by this standard.
-
BST, every journey starts with a single step.
Very clear to me.
Shame all the steps in the 2010s were backwards ones.
The third amigo enters the scene.
And he speaks the truth, hence the stupid hound comment that ignores the issue.
-
What's the Ad Hominem response? Is that the 5th worst out of 7 possible responses in a discussion?
-
That's why I'm quite big down under.
Blowing your own trumpet bb? :)
-
I tend to prefer it to blowing other peoples.
-
How are the Tories electable?
-
Well they clearly are DO.
The bigger question is WHY? When they have given us the most disastrous economic performance for 200 years.
The OBR released figures yesterday that Sunak conveniently ignored.
The ONLY thing that matters to our long term economic health is productivity. If we don't improve the amount we produce per hour, we don't get better off.
Between 1945 and 2009, our productivity increased on average by 2.5% per year. That's important. It meant that, for example, in 1980, an hour of work would produce 28% more value output than the same hour did in 1970.
That's why we get better off.
Anyway, from the OBR's figures, productivity growth from 2009-2019 has been 0.3%.
So in 2019, an hour of work produced just 3% more value than in 2009.
This is a horrific national problem. And not even a word about it in the Budget.
-
I work in the Motor Industry & I've come in this morning to see the government grants been reduced & in some cases, completely removed from electric vehicles.
Enjoy your Thursday! I know I will.
-
Enlightening, this thread. It shows you can kick some people up the arse for 10 years and, when you finally stop, they'll turn around and thank you. Fascinating mindset ingrained in some people.
-
Yep, those who don't think the same as you are really thick.
-
Surely such a seismic change in policy should make anyone question the reasoning behind it BB?
-
Idler, playing the man instead of the ball is often condemned on his forum. Playing millions of people instead of the ball is stretching it a bit! In fact, playing enough people to elect a majority government instead of the ball is taking it to an all-time level!
I've been accused of playing the man instead of the ball in the past. I don't get mad, I just get even.
-
So getting back to Idlers comment BB?
-
Syderney, the 'seismic change' is a different subject to playing the man instead of the ball.
-
Syderney, the 'seismic change' is a different subject to playing the man instead of the ball.
Who said it wasn't, it's a fair comment addressed to you.
-
And I answered it!
-
Surely such a seismic change in policy should make anyone question the reasoning behind it BB?
That's the bit I don't get. This is a shift bigger than anything we've seen in politics since the War. It's massive. The Tories have insisted for decades and they've screamed for the past 12 years that the debt is all that matters. We have to get the debt down.
And then, with the debt at the highest level it has been since before Bobby Moore picked up the World Cup, they turn round without a moment's thought and say, "You know that debt? It's not actually that important."
Which is EXACTLY what people on the Left have been saying for 12 years, ever since the GFC. And they've been accused of not being serious. Of being Marxists. Of being irresponsible. Of being a danger to our children's inheritance.
All b*llocks. Every single word of that criticism was based on b*llocks that ignored basic economics.
So yes, I'm delighted it's changing. But I simply do not understand people who aren't furious that it didn't change 10 years ago. Because Austerity was never about economics. It was the most cynical political con trick of our lifetimes. It was a put up job to give the Tories a stick to beat Labour with. And it worked. And the penalty we have paid is a totally lost decade. And if you don't hold cynical politicians to account when they do that, guess what? They will do it again. And again.
-
Yep, those who don't think the same as you are really thick.
There's certainly a strong argument to suggest that maybe those less well off people who voted Tory to 'get brexit done' without knowing what type of brexit was going to get done were BB.
-
Enlightening, this thread. It shows you can kick some people up the arse for 10 years and, when you finally stop, they'll turn around and thank you. Fascinating mindset ingrained in some people.
I suppose it could also be that some people weren’t kicked up the arse during the last ten years.
-
That's right Hound. Pensioners, as a demographic group, did financially better than anyone over the past decade.
I don't begrudge them that. But I do wonder about some of their attitudes to the folks who are working to pay those pensions.
-
I have only been retired for just over two years BST but on a personal note, I can’t complain about the ten years before then either.
As for the people who are working to pay the pensioners of today, well I did my fair share of that in the forty eight years that I worked.
-
Yep, those who don't think the same as you are really thick.
There's certainly a strong argument to suggest that maybe those less well off people who voted Tory to 'get brexit done' without knowing what type of brexit was going to get done were BB.
Maybe then you should ask the question of why 'the party for the poor' Labour party deserted their wishes to get Brexit done.
-
BST, every journey starts with a single step.
Very clear to me.
Shame all the steps in the 2010s were backwards ones.
The third amigo enters the scene.
It's actually four Hound, with NNK making up the quartet of all knowing, all wise sages.
It's strange though how all 4 of them continuously keep backing political losers.
-
SS.
The great German physicist and astronomer was once asked why he spent his spare time arguing against commonly held ideas like superstition against witches. Why not make his life easier by accepting what the majority thought.
He said, "I always want to be on the side of the majority: unless they are wrong."
Being in a majority, and being right is not always the same thing. You'd do well to ponder that instead of stooping to weak ad hominems.
-
SS.
The great German physicist and astronomer was once asked why he spent his spare time arguing against commonly held ideas like superstition against witches. Why not make his life easier by accepting what the majority thought.
He said, "I always want to be on the side of the majority: unless they are wrong."
Being in a majority, and being right is not always the same thing. You'd do well to ponder that instead of stooping to weak ad hominems.
Actually you're right; I should stop and think a bit more. After all, you could be Rovers' biggest asset next year. All you have to do is go on BB's PvO competition and tip Rovers to lose every week.
That way we'll be certs to win the f*cking league next season.
-
The problem here is that some people let personalities get in the way of reason.
Just because you don't like or usually agree with a person doesn't mean that they will always be wrong.
Some of the disagreements on here are pathetic.
I hope that in the fullness of time folk can reflect and admit when they are wrong and let personalities colour their views.
-
Idler, I resent that remark. In the unlikely event of me being wr......wro....wron..... incorrect in future, I'll be the first to admit it. I would have done so already if I'd ever been
wro Incorrect in the past.
-
I know what you mean BB, I'm never wr*** either. My wife might tell you that I'm not right a lot of the time though.🤔
-
BST, every journey starts with a single step.
Very clear to me.
Shame all the steps in the 2010s were backwards ones.
The third amigo enters the scene.
It's actually four Hound, with NNK making up the quartet of all knowing, all wise sages.
It's strange though how all 4 of them continuously keep backing political losers.
So Steve, you either think that less well off people didn't vote Tory to 'get Brexit done', (in spite of it being the only thing coming from them during the election campaign). Or that they knew exactly which form of Brexit that was going to 'get done' and thought it was a jolly good thing for themselves and the country then?
Whichever one you chose you're going to look rather daft, unless of course you agree with me; but then, what would have been the point of your post?
-
Remind me Steve when will brexit get done? :)
Added: and while your replying tell us what we'll get and will match up with what you voted for?
It's understandable if you don't know as no one else does either.
-
Historians will be astonished that so many less well off people voted to be even worse off so that a few millionaires could keep their money offshore and avoid paying any tax.