dark light

Beermat

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 706 through 720 (of 3,326 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: General Discussion #234011
    Beermat
    Participant

    Ha bloody ha, Tony 🙂

    in reply to: General Discussion #234015
    Beermat
    Participant

    Sorry, should I have voted Tory now?.. it’s getting hard to keep track of who I should now trust to protect me from these foreigners.

    I wasn’t entirely serious.

    in reply to: General Discussion #234019
    Beermat
    Participant

    OK then, how about ‘most Arabs interpret the Koran in the most violent way’.

    Or do you like them for that imagined nonsense?

    Interesting you have picked up on John’s ‘liberal left’ misapprehension, too.

    Bit late in the day to argue evidence, but there is nothing to prove anything either way. You misunderstand the meaning of ‘historical evidence’. There is history, and there is precedent. ‘Historical evidence’ does not exist in the way you use it. There is evidence of things that have happened in the past, and technically ‘historical evidence’ means some record that was made.

    If you are looking for precedent of corporation tax rise, you have to go back to 1973, though even this was a re-structuring of the system to collect more rather than a simple rate rise. You will find that the take also rose.

    Your ‘evidence’ boils down to this – https://www.ft.com/content/ca3e5bd2-2a7e-11e7-9ec8-168383da43b7?mhq5j=e1. This is not a precedent case. It does not even establish causality. Your own graphs prove tax take to be cyclical, and this is not at all controversial. There are some statistics published by the TUC that show a drop off in economic performance above 30% corp tax if you interpret an enormous spread of indicators, but even this plot is so homogenous as to have limited statistical significance.

    in reply to: General Discussion #234146
    Beermat
    Participant

    Just got back from the polling station. Voted UKIP – on the way I saw a brown face, and panicked.

    in reply to: General Discussion #234147
    Beermat
    Participant

    🙂

    in reply to: General Discussion #234149
    Beermat
    Participant

    All true, yep. Absolutely, there is nothing there that argues against any policy of Corbyn or May – except maybe that the Open University (set up as as a centrally-funded scheme for public benefit that enabled people to self-help in this way) was an initiative of the rather left-wing (from a 2017 perspective) Wilson government – and it would not happen now we are all ‘right thinking people’.. apparently.

    in reply to: General Discussion #234152
    Beermat
    Participant

    Good principle – but please bear in mind that you cannot simultaneously build your own hospital, train your own doctors, teach yourself to degree level, be your own cancer research institute, gather your own intelligence on terrorist activity. These things are communal efforts. Or corporate ones, depending on who’s language you use – and politicians do have influence on them as the elected representatives of our communities / corporations. (Not saying the S word, I feel the ghost of Mrs. T looming over me today).

    in reply to: General Discussion #234154
    Beermat
    Participant

    John, that ‘back of a drag curve’ jibe (very clever, by the way – do you get advance copy of a particular journal?) suggests things are somehow moving in an inevitable and definable direction politically, that thoughts that don’t agree with this are somehow ‘holding back’ this progression, and that this is a Bad Thing. Bit like the ‘herd’ principle I mentioned earlier.

    As you will know from Newtonian physics we are simply talking opposing forces here. There is no ‘natural’ direction for anything, and it’s all about your points of reference anyway.

    CD, I don’t try to do myself any favours – I am not looking to get voted for. All political leaders in this debate are avoiding pointing out genuine ignorance or idiocy among their opposition’s support base as they think it will alienate. Least of all will you hear a Labour leader calling out the stupidity of those who take ‘the Sun says’ as political instruction. Maybe there is room for one who does, I don’t know. But regardless of this, I can!

    in reply to: General Discussion #234157
    Beermat
    Participant

    Ryan, they are not ‘my numbers’.

    Read your own propaganda sheets for the foreigner references.

    Planemike, look at the policies rather than how the campaign went. Funnily enough if we all were looking at just the quality of the campaigns we’d be on about 50/50 or even slightly to the left – but is not the X factor and we are not awarding points for some kind of show.

    You really have to look at how the parties’ plans affect those you care about, whether that’s just yourself, your immediate family, your ‘community’ however you define it, the nation as a whole or even (Green party) the world. Even the scale of that focus is your own personal decision. Once you know who really matters you then can decide which set of policies serves that constituency best.

    Best advice I can give – but I live in a bin, apparently, so you don’t have to listen.

    in reply to: General Discussion #234169
    Beermat
    Participant

    I don’t know, it never happens.

    Here’s why – this is the standard of the political journalism fed to us, from today’s Sun online:

    [ATTACH]253929[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: General Discussion #234196
    Beermat
    Participant

    It is a constituency beyond critical thought I was referring to. Not yourself, or John, or TonyT or anyone prepared to argue from the right using logic and fact – I did say ‘whatever the rights and wrongs’. I also implied that both right and left arguments can be made thoughtfully, but that isn’t what happened here.

    I meant the race to the bottom that has been won by the right. It is not any rational centre-rightist argument that is winning the day for what I hope is a rational centre-right government, is it? It is an appeal to a dislike of the ‘foreign’ plus lashings of misinformation and old-fashioned character assassination that halted the policy-argument-based advance of the alternative political view.

    I know that’s politics, and I know I don’t have to like it!

    in reply to: General Discussion #234291
    Beermat
    Participant

    Yawn. Nobody trusts Hillary. Vaguely familiar? Strong and Stable. Make Britain Great Again.

    You are an idiot. A dupe. You repeat, and believe, what you are told by your right-wing newspapers and websites. You are incapable of wider thought or analysis, whatever the rights or wrongs of political or economic policy.

    There are enough like you to mean the Conservative party, with decades of compliant tabloid media behind them, will win this election. Not every conservative is unthinking, as not every leftie is thoughtful or critical.

    Far from unthinking, it is overt policy to race to the bottom, to harness the vote of people who uncritically believe short and badly written pieces on prejudice-affiirming websites.

    It is the captive herd of mooing Ryans – outside of actual political thinking – that mean we have a consistently centre-right government – now to the point of their mouthpieces saying ‘nobody’ trusts Jeremy Corbyn.

    Where did you read that? Is there any point at all in me saying that is simply not true? No, I guess not.

    The saddest part for me is this policy of ‘Ryan farming’ is based on a presumption of bovine stupidity among a sufficient number of non-wealthy British people.

    This is an old-school conservative idea – that the ‘proles’ are dimmer than themselves, and the only way to be democratically succesful as a minority is to tell them what to think – essentialy tell the turkeys to vote for Christmas. One method is to whip up nationalism, another is to emphasise the ‘strengh and stability’ of the unquestionable leader.

    A common method is to tell those with the strongest herd instinct that this is what ‘everybody else’ is thinking.

    It is sad as it appears to have worked. Not all proles are dim, Ryan, but you are too dim to understand that.

    in reply to: General Discussion #234295
    Beermat
    Participant

    The other thing you need to bear in mind is the newspaper this appeared in. Yes, I am sure he had a file. I am also sure he wasn’t monitored for twenty years. This is a desperate attempt to scoop up a last few ‘uncritical’ (I am being kind) voters. If you can’t see it for what it is – a wildly exagerared story that was dropped in at the very last before there is time to investigate or correct – then you are indeed the target audience. It’s what gave America Trump, and I hope you are very proud.

    in reply to: General Discussion #234307
    Beermat
    Participant

    Thank God for a bit of insight from someone who knows what they are talking about.

    in reply to: General Discussion #234309
    Beermat
    Participant

    Ryan, Labour politicians from Stafford Cripps through Bessie Bradock and Harold Wilson to Tony Benn have had files opened on them – ‘coincidentally’ only while in opposition. The timing (it’s actually an old story they tried the first time in 2015) and spin of this is clearly their last big push.

    No, you called Corbyn a communist and I suggested this would be extraordinarily unlikely. I am sure he did have Irish nationalist sympathies and I neither hold that against him or in his favour. I hold his views about the Falklands against him. One does not have to agree with everything a party leader says – there’s a word for that.

Viewing 15 posts - 706 through 720 (of 3,326 total)