Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
PorcupineorPineapple
25 Jul 16 08:34
Joined:
Date Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 12,847 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
Had a nice relaxing day yesterday (thanks for asking). Read the papers, took the kids out, nice meal etc etc. Didn't venture near the net much at all, and definitely not this place. But I did see one article someone put up on FB that I enjoyed so thought to share it here. No doubt the usual deniers will have already read enough but hey ho. Hope those who do stick with it enjoy it and think about it.

The ‘Overton window’ is a term from political science meaning the acceptable range of political thought in a culture at a given moment. It was the creation of Joseph Overton, a think-tank intellectual based in Michigan, who died in 2003 at 43 after a solo plane accident. His crucial insight, one which both emerged from and was central to the work of the think tank Right, was that the window of acceptability can be moved. An idea can start far outside the political mainstream – flat taxes, abolish the IRS, more guns in schools, building a beautiful wall and making Mexico pay – but once it has been stated and argued for, framed and restated, it becomes thinkable. It crosses over from the fringe of right-wing think-tankery to journalistic fellow-travellers; then it crosses over to the fringe of electoral politics; then it becomes a thing people start seriously advocating as a possible policy. The window has moved, and rough beasts come slouching through it to be born.

British politics has never seen a purer example of the Overton window than the referendum on membership of the EU. In 1994, the billionaire James Goldsmith founded a political party whose sole purpose was to advocate a referendum. The Referendum Party was a long, long way outside the political mainstream, and a significant number of its members were openly mad. The party’s one moment of – ‘success’ is the wrong word – mainstream attention came when Goldsmith himself stood in the 1997 general election in Putney against David Mellor, the cabinet minister who had been caught having an affair with an actress. Her ****-and-tell story ran in the tabloids and included the fictional detail that (to quote the front page of the Sun) ‘Mellor Made Love in Chelsea Strip’. In a better-ordered society, making up things like that wins you the Prix Goncourt. Goldsmith did poorly, coming fourth with 1518 votes, but Mellor lost anyway. At the declaration of the result, Goldsmith and his supporters chanted ‘Out! Out! Out!’ while Mellor was making his concession speech, the words sounding a lot like ‘Raus! Raus! Raus!’ and providing one of the 1997 election’s most memorably ugly moments. The Referendum Party contested 547 seats and lost all of them.

The story of how that idea, self-evidently ridiculous in 1997, came to be a reality in 2016 is going to be often retold as we live through its consequences over the next few decades. One of the characteristics of the story is a distinctly British unseriousness: tragedy and farce, as so often in this country’s political life, were hard to tell apart. The climax was the referendum itself, which was promised in 2013 at a point when David Cameron was sure he wouldn’t have to deliver. The evidence strongly suggested he’d be able to do the same thing in 2015 as he’d done in 2010: blame his Lib Dem coalition partners for negotiating away manifesto commitments. When the campaign came, its main protagonist, Boris Johnson, was a man known not to be in favour of his own arguments, manoeuvring for position in the Tory leadership battle due to come at some point between a Remain victory and the 2020 general election. I don’t think there’s ever been a time in British politics when so many people in public life spent so much time loudly declaring things they knew not to be true.

Kipling asked a good question: ‘What do they know of England who only England know?’ But there’s a variation which, today, might be more relevant: ‘What do they know of the UK who only London know?’ The answer to both questions turns out to be the same: ‘Not nearly enough.’ England is so small, geographically, that it is easy to forget that it is also surprisingly big. There is no rich country of equivalent size that is more densely populated. The only country which has both more people than England and more people per square kilometre is Bangladesh. What this means, experientially, is that there is a kind of denseness to England and to Englishness; England is both very similar to itself and significantly different when you move ten miles down the road. When my family lived in Norfolk, I could have instantly picked the difference between a Suffolk and a Norfolk accent – I’d have been doing so unconsciously, without thinking about it: that person isn’t from round here. The Suffolk border was about fifteen miles away. I moved to London in early 1987 – when I got a job at the LRB, as it happens – and I don’t miss Norfolk, but I do often think of it.

In the years since, most of my travelling around the UK has been attached to various forms of media work. It would take a hard-working satirist to concoct a more metropolitan trade than being a restaurant critic, but the fact is I was one, twice, and a side effect is that I spent vastly more time travelling around England than I would otherwise have done; especially bits of England that I would, in the normal run of things, have had no reason to visit. If I weren’t swanking about promoting books and/or complaining about insufficiently caramelised scallops, I would never have had a reason to visit Hull or Wellingborough or Newcastle or Liverpool or Manchester or Leeds or Sheffield or Hexham or Budleigh Salterton or the Wirral or Chesterfield or Stowmarket or Brighton or Lancaster or Ludlow or Stamford. I’m very glad I did, because it was a big part of my education. The main things I took away from it are as follows: that England is both a small country and a big one; that there is a lot of Deep England out there and that the various forms of Deep England feel very different from one another – Ludlow is as English as G.K. Chesterton, and so is Newmarket, and so is Chesterfield, and so is Redruth, but they aren’t at all the same place.

I once asked Danny Dorling why, when I was at school, geography was about the shapes of rivers, but now all the best-known geographers seem to be Marxists. He said it’s because when you look at a map and see that the people on one side of some line are rich and healthy and long-lived and the people on the other side are poor and sick and die young, you start to wonder why, and that turns you towards deep-causal explanations, which then lead in the direction of Marxism. Travelling around England, I’ve often had cause to remember that remark. We’re used to political analysis based on class, not least because Britain’s political system is arranged around two political parties whose fundamental orientations are around class. What strikes you if you travel to different parts of the country, though, is that the primary reality of modern Britain is not so much class as geography. Geography is destiny. And for much of the country, not a happy destiny.

To be born in many places in Britain is to suffer an irreversible lifelong defeat – a truncation of opportunity, of education, of access to power, of life expectancy. The people who grow up in these places come from a cultural background which equipped them for reasonably well-paid manual labour, un- and semi- and skilled. Children left school as soon as they could and went to work in the same industries that had employed their parents. The academically able kids used to go to grammar school and be educated into the middle class. All that has now gone, the jobs and the grammar schools, and the vista instead is a landscape where there is often work – there are pockets of unemployment, but in general there’s no shortage of jobs and the labour force participation rate is the highest it has ever been, a full 15 points higher than in the US – but it’s unsatisfying, insecure and low-paid. This new work doesn’t do what the old work did: it doesn’t offer a sense of identity or community or self-worth. The word ‘precarious’ has as its underlying sense ‘depending on the favour of another person’. Somebody can take away the things you have whenever they feel like it. The precariat, as the new class is called, might not know the etymology, but it doesn’t need to: the reality is all too familiar.

What, over the last few decades, has been the political ‘offer’ to these people? In truth, nothing much. The reality of the modern British economy is that the thriving sectors raise the taxes which pay for the rest. The old work has gone and is not coming back. The decline in UK manufacturing is real but the headline figure – it used to be 25 per cent of our economy and is now 10 per cent – conceals the fact that we are still a significant manufacturing economy. Our proportion of manufacturing is more or less the same as in the US and France; we are the eighth biggest manufacturing economy in the world. Some of the decline is relative, since the services part of the economy has grown faster. But these jobs aren’t quite the same as they used to be. UK manufacturing is now a high-skill, high-value industry; we don’t make cars and fridges and washing machines and phones and things that everybody notices, but we do make high-technology components and industrial devices of a sort that nobody ever thinks about. The UK, for instance, has the second biggest aerospace industry in the world. The most complicated bit of a plane is the wing; the world’s biggest passenger aircraft wing belongs to the Airbus 380, which is made in Wales. (They’re so big that they travel from the Dee estuary in North Wales to Pauillac on the Gironde estuary on a specially built roll-on roll-off ship.) This industrial work is high-skill, high-value, and doesn’t provide mass employment; it’s a lot like the kind of service work which thrives in London and the South-East.

These jobs are dependent on the UK being a liberal, open, internationalised economy with high skill levels in particular areas. That has been the direction of travel in UK politics and economics since 1979, and both parties have pursued policies with that goal in mind. The Labour government offered more social protection but did so largely by stealth and without explaining and arguing for its actions. There was no strategy to replace the lost industry; that was left to the free market. With these policies, parts of the country have simply been left behind. The white working class is correct to feel abandoned: it has been. No political party has anything to offer it except varying levels of benefits. The people in the rich parts of the country pay the taxes which support the poor parts. If I had to pick a single fact which has played no role in political discourse but which sums up the current position of the UK, it would be that most people in the UK receive more from the state, in direct cash transfers and in benefits such as health and education, than they contribute to it. The numbers are eerily similar to the referendum outcome: 48 per cent net contributors, 52 per cent net recipients. It’s a system bitterly resented both by the beneficiaries and by the suppliers of the largesse.​

One of the things you notice, travelling around the country talking to people about economics, is that young people in particular feel they are living in an economic system rather than a political one. They think about jobs and paying the rent and whether they will ever own a home and, increasingly, about student debt, and they don’t see politics as having anything to say to them about those issues. That’s because the economics are the same irrespective of which political party is in charge. This is one of the reasons the Remain campaign failed to win the argument. Making economic arguments to voters who feel oppressed by economics is risky: they’re quite likely to tell you to go **** yourself. That in effect is what the electorate did to the almost comic cavalcade of sages and bigshots who took the trouble to explain that Brexit would be ruinous folly: Obama, Lagarde, Carney, the IMF, the OECD, the ECB, and every commentator and pundit you can think of. The counter-argument wasn’t really an argument but a very clever appeal to emotion, to the idea that the UK could ‘Take back control’.

Whoever came up with that slogan had spent more time listening than talking. The Remain campaign failed to do that. The dominant note out there in the country since the credit crunch and Great Recession has been one of bafflement, of bewilderment and disorientation. How did this happen? How did we get here? Why does nobody listen to us, why does nobody care about us? It’s the thing you keep hearing when you engage with an audience on this subject. Although people talk about anger, it’s revealing that they often do so by asking why people aren’t more angry. If I had to pick one sentence I’ve heard more than any other in the last six years of conversation about economics, it would be ‘Why aren’t people more angry?’ The Brexit vote showed that plenty of them are. But perhaps it expressed that other feeling, the one of bewilderment, just as much. ‘Take back control’ is a cynical but extremely astute pitch to an electorate in that state of mind.

Immigration, the issue on which Leave campaigned most effectively and most cynically, is the subject on which this bewilderment is most apparent. There are obviously strong elements of racism and xenophobia in anti-immigrant sentiment. All racists who voted, voted Leave. But there are plenty of people who aren’t so much hostile to immigrants as baffled by them. They feel left behind, abandoned, poor, ignored and struggling; so how come immigrants want to come here, and do so well when they get here? If Britain is broken, which is what many Leave voters think, why is it so attractive? How can so many people succeed where they are failing? A revealing, and sad, piece in the Economist in 2014 described Tilbury, forty minutes from London, where the white working class look on resentfully as immigrants get up early and get the train to jobs in the capital which, to them, seems impossibly distant. ‘Most residents of the town, one of England’s poorest places, are as likely to commute to the capital as fly to the moon.’

The evidence on immigration is clear: EU immigrants are net contributors to the UK’s finances, and are less likely to claim benefits than the native British. The average immigrant is younger, better educated and healthier than the average British citizen. In other words, for every immigrant we let in, the country is richer, more able to pay for its health, education and welfare needs, and less dependent on benefits. They are exactly the demographic the UK needs. As for the much touted Australian ‘points system’, we have nothing to learn from it: immigrants to the UK are better educated and more skilled than immigrants to Australia. In addition, most of the people who appear as immigrants in the migration statistics are students, because the Home Office chooses to count students who come for the duration of degree courses as migrants. Of the 330,000 net arrivals in the latest numbers, 169,000 are students. Do you consider students to be migrants? Personally, I don’t.​† These facts, freely available to anyone who takes an interest in the subject, had no traction in the referendum debate. That’s partly to do with Remain’s incompetence, but perhaps it also reflects the fact that the reality of young, healthy, aspirational, hard-working, thriving immigrants wouldn’t have helped the Remain case: it touches on too many sore points about being left behind.

One of the most important ideas to emerge from micro-economics – or at least, the one with the most consequences for democratic politics – is ‘loss aversion’. People hate to have things taken away from them. But whole swathes of the UK have spent the last decades feeling that things are being taken away from them: their jobs, their sense that they are heard, their understanding of how the world works and their place in it. The gaps in our society have just grown too big. I wrote in the last sentences of How to Speak Money that the existing structural tensions in Western society were so great that things could not go on as they were.

That’s not to say that I saw this coming in 2014. I thought the crisis in British (and indeed Western) society would be economic before it was political. It may yet turn out that way. For now, though, what has happened amounts to a collapse of our political system. The fact that the leadership of both main parties has disintegrated would under normal circumstances be a big story, but in the current chaos it is no more than a side effect. The deeper problem is that the referendum has exposed splits in society which aren’t mapped by the political parties as they are currently constituted. People talk about Britain being ‘divided’ as if that’s a new issue, but societies are often divided, and the interests of all groups and individuals do not align. If they did, humanity would be the Borg. Political parties are the mechanism through which divisions in society are argued over and competing interests asserted.

The trouble with where we are now is that the configuration of the parties doesn’t match the issues which need to be resolved. To simplify, the Tories are a coalition of nationalists, who voted out, and business interests, who voted in; Labour is a coalition of urban liberals, who voted in, and the working class, who voted out. This means that if a general election were held tomorrow on the single issue of the referendum, the voter wouldn’t know whom to vote for. It wouldn’t be at all clear which faction in either party was likely to prevail when the hugely important details of what Brexit means come to be debated.

This problem was compounded, or even created, by the nature of the Leave campaign. Leave’s arguments were based on lies. The first of these was that Britain ‘sends’ £350 million a week to the EU. This is a straightforward, knowing falsehood, and the fact that so many prominent Brexiters started rowing backwards on it the day after the vote is a sign that they knew it all along. The campaign’s second big lie was that the UK would be able to have access to the single market without accepting the free movement of people from the EU. No country has this arrangement, and there is no reason to think it is possible. If Britain were to secure a deal whereby it had access to the single market and control over EU immigration, it would be the end of the EU – because other countries would leave the EU and demand the same. Leave campaigners don’t seem to understand that Continental elites feel just as strongly about the continued existence of the EU as the Leavers feel about Brexit. For the EU to survive, it will be important for the UK to be seen to pay a high price for leaving. We don’t know what that price is going to be, and I don’t look forward to finding out.

It’s been widely remarked that the geographical and class-based nature of the UK’s divisions means that many people live in communities where they don’t know anyone who voted for the other side in the referendum. For me, that’s largely true: Lambeth, where I live, was the most pro-Remain place in the UK, and every neighbour I’ve spoken to was aghast at the outcome. I do know some Leavers, though, mainly people who work in finance. Their arguments for voting Leave are a mixture of abstract concerns about sovereignty (with which it’s easy to sympathise), deep apprehension about the economic risks for the Eurozone (ditto), and worries about regulatory crackdowns on the City of London (not so much). What all these Brexiters have in common is a belief that not much will change after the vote. The UK will have the same arrangement as Norway: we will make cash payments to the EU and accept free movement of people in return for access to the single market. That sounds fine to me; it sounds like the least bad outcome given where we are. The problem, however, is that it isn’t what most Leavers voted for. They were promised that they/we would ‘Take back control’, in a campaign whose principal focus was immigration. A stitch-up over immigration and access to the single market would be by far the best option for the UK, but it would also be a betrayal of these Leave voters.

The mendacity of the Leave campaign may represent a recalibration of our system along American lines, where voters only listen to people whom they already believe, and there are in effect no penalties for falsehood, especially not on the political right. The second toxic legacy of the campaign concerns the shamelessly xenophobic nature of the Leave message. There were good reasons why British public life had strong taboos around the subject of immigration. It is true that this caused resentment about the fact that it became impossible to voice concerns about immigration without being accused of racism. Forbidden topics generate powerful feelings. The taboo also stopped people making arguments in favour of immigration, and cut off the debate before it could properly begin. The economic arguments in favour of immigration, in rich Western countries with low birthrates, are pretty straightforward: since the next generation of taxpayers aren’t being born, we’re going to have to import them, if we want to keep our healthcare systems, pensions and welfare states. The Office for Budget Responsibility puts the necessary level of long-term immigration at 140,000 a year. But while the benefits of immigration are generally shared, the local impacts can sometimes seem overwhelming, especially when an area with no previous experience of immigration suddenly finds itself with thousands or tens of thousands of new arrivals, and no corresponding increase in resources to help with the pressure on housing, schools, healthcare and the rest. Governments have been far too slow to respond to this tension between long-term collective good and short-term local costs. The plan sometimes seems to involve waiting for the next census in ten years’ time and then having a think about it. (One simple but surely effective technique would be to monitor local surges in the languages used for Google searches.) But that’s no plan at all, and this is an area where government in the UK, as well as politics in the UK, has comprehensively failed, both to make the arguments about the realities of immigration and to make plans to deal with it.

It may now be too late to repair the debate about immigration. The silence around the subject had negative consequences, but the breaking of the taboo is a long-term disaster. It immediately led to a spike in racist abuse. All those millions of our fellow citizens who have spent the last few decades privately muttering to themselves that Enoch had a point now feel empowered, entitled, free to speak their minds at last. There is a real darkness in this country, a xenophobic, racist sickness of heart that is closer to the surface today than it has been for decades. That is a direct result of the referendum campaign. The campaign’s dual legacy is the end of the idea that politics is based on rational argument, and a new permission to hate immigrants. In politics, these new realities are going to be much more important in the years ahead than the details of exactly which half-bright Tory is in charge. Not that it will seem that way to anyone in the Tory Party. Writing in the Guardian in the immediate aftermath of the referendum result, Rafael Behr quoted a Downing Street source describing what had happened as the fulfilment of a long-term plan on the part of the Tory right to destroy Cameron. Strange as it may seem to non-Tories, many Conservatives don’t really regard Cameron as one of them: he’s too metropolitan and socially liberal, and in person he is notoriously cold, which matters inside the parliamentary party. The media, the source said, ‘were obsessed with blue-on-blue and they weren’t even getting that right. It wasn’t really Dave v. Boris. It was a well-organised right-wing coup.’ Theresa May’s appointments to the cabinet give a lot of credence to that theory. It now looks as if the party’s right in effect borrowed Cameron to win an unlikely election victory that they could never have achieved themselves, and then had him deposed.

As for the economics of the post-Brexit world, the immediate chaos was both predictable and predicted. The longer-term picture is much harder to discern. It’s not all bad news: the weakened pound is a good thing, and the likely crash in London property was long overdue. It might even make property in the capital affordable for the young again, which would be a strong overall positive for our national life. The uncertainties around the immediate future are quite likely to make demand slow down so much that it triggers another recession. The primary victims of that will be the working-class voters who voted Leave; the recessionary shrinking of the tax take will target them too. The faltering economy will cause immigration to slow, which will further damage the economy.

Once the particularities of our post-Brexit arrangement have been established, we’ll know a lot more about where we are. A great deal of economic uncertainty will attach not so much to the issue of trade – since the advantages of the freest trade possible are clear to all parties – as to the status of the City of London. Nobody outside the City loves the City, but the tax revenues raised by London’s global role in financial services are very important to the UK. At the moment, the City is the beneficiary of ‘passporting’, which allows it to deal freely in services across the EU. That passporting is likely, highly likely, to be the subject of an attack by the combined powers of Frankfurt and Paris (and English-speaking, low-business tax, well-educated Dublin too). Other anti-London regulatory moves can be expected. That could prove expensive for the UK.

A reduction in the dominance of finance might be a net positive; we would have a smaller GDP, probably, but the country wouldn’t be bent out of shape – or not to the same degree – by the supremacy of the City. There’s a lot to unpick here, though. For one thing, the anti-London moves might well have been coming anyway: one finance-world Brexiter of my acquaintance was in favour of Leave precisely because a narrow win for Remain (which is what he was expecting) would in his view have encouraged the regulatory bodies to gang up and crack down on London. There are likely to be all sorts of unintended consequences to exploit, and the City is full of people whose entire working lives revolve around exploiting unintended consequences. The biggest source of finance in the world is Eurodollars, the confusing name for dollars held on deposit outside the US. That entire market was an unintended consequence of US banking regulation in the 1960s and 1970s. The Eurobond (a bond denominated in a currency not native to the country where it is issued) was a huge new market created in the City in 1963, long before the Euro was even a glint in Frankfurt’s eye. The City is creative, opportunistic, experienced and amoral; if any entity has the right ‘skill-set’ to benefit from the post-Brexit world, it is the City of London.

In addition, nervous governments, desperate for revenue, are likely to bend even further backwards to give the City the policies it wants. An early sign of policy direction was George Osborne’s announcement that he wanted to cut corporation tax to 15 per cent to show that post-Brexit Britain is ‘open for business’. Osborne has gone; the policy probably hasn’t. The business press has been full of speculation that the government will backtrack on its plans to crack down on non-domiciled tax status for ultra-wealthy foreigners. The need for revenues makes it important not to drive non-doms out of the country, one City lawyer told the FT. ‘We need a friendly regime.’ There will be plenty more where that came from.

None of this is what working-class voters had in mind when they opted for Leave. If it’s combined with the policy every business interest in the UK wants – the Norwegian option, in which we contribute to the EU and accept free movement of labour, i.e. immigration, as part of the price – it will be a profound betrayal of much of the Leave vote. If we do anything else, we will be inflicting severe economic damage on ourselves, and following a policy which most of the electorate (48 per cent Remain, plus economically liberal Leavers) think is wrong. So the likeliest outcome, I’d have thought, is a betrayal of the white working class. They should be used to it by now.
Pause Switch to Standard View Another Brexit article
Show More
Loading...
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 6:57 PM BST
jesus man, mocking! You'd struggle to mock a tapeworm.



So after me and several others pointing out that your post was, well, discerbibly proved false, you're still flapping round throwing various flares and counter measures hither and thither as you try to wriggle off the line.


And to bat away this one in the hope it brings us one step closer to your answer...please go back and count the number of times I've said lies were made by both sides of the argument. It is legion. Well, at least several.

As for Osborne himself, he's a scoundrel, a con man and a fraud (please control your libel semi) so the idea I would be swayed into believing anything that comes out of his mouth is as laughable as your Liverpool betting thread.
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 7:08 PM BST
As for you being less than a tapeworm, well I wouldn't have gone that far but it does explain quite a bit.

Getting back to the point you didn't prove anything in my post as false you just started ranting as per usual. I've spent the majority of the afternoon gently mocking you because you seemingly didn't know there was going to be no Ermengency Budget.

We know what you think of Osborne because you resort to throwing libels at him when you get riled.

Nice of you to bring up the Liverpool betting thread, where you and a couple of Liverpool fans disagreed with what I was saying and got abusive because you didn't like it. How similar to the politics forum where you start spouting the same abuse when people don't agree with you. Much like the Liverpool thread I suspect I'm the one making money in the long run, sucks eh?
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 7:11 PM BST
Probably worth pulling up that thread in a couple of weeks before the season starts. One of those like the nocko one which just provides constant amusement. Hubris. Another word for you to look up.


Still can't bring yourself to defend your post I see. Any other roadblocks to try to dredge up instead of explaining it?
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 7:21 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 1:11PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Probably worth pulling up that thread in a couple of weeks before the season starts. One of those like the nocko one which just provides constant amusement. Hubris. Another word for you to look up.Still can't bring yourself to defend your post I see. Any other roadblocks to try to dredge up instead of explaining it?


It probably is worth bumping that Liverpool thread, one of the people on there who can do statistics will be able to tell you that it was another season notched up that proves my point. You won't agree and will just start shouting and screaming again, no doubt.

What am I supposed to be defending this time? I'm not sure if you've just blocked out current affairs or are generally not understanding what's happening in politics? I suspect it's the latter, quite funny considering you keep accusing other people of being 'thick'. If you disagree with me try to debate it instead of resorting to abuse.

I won't hold my breath.

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 7:26 PM BST
What am I supposed to be defending this time?


Glad you asked.



I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved false


That
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 7:32 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 1:26PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


What am I supposed to be defending this time? Glad you asked.I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved falseThat


Great.

Do you understand that Osborne isn't going to be producing an Emergency Budget?

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 7:35 PM BST
asked and answered.


your turn.
Report Burton-Brewers July 27, 2016 7:37 PM BST
what was your previous username?
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 7:37 PM BST
True story: my eldest just came over and asked what I was giggling at on the computer. Was disappointed to see this page.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 7:38 PM BST
why?
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 7:42 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 1:35PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


asked and answered.your turn.


Lol.

For someone who has spends his time calling others thick that's a corker.

Perhaps you can get your eldest to come on and give you a bit of help?

Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 7:43 PM BST
There's an open goal for you with that abuse of English as well.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 7:46 PM BST
I wasn't waiting for any other budget or anything else uttered by that blert. His word is not worth a tuppence. Happy? I know it's not the answer you were desperate for but I'm sure you'll get over it.



Now then...


What am I supposed to be defending this time?

Glad you asked.



I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved false



That




Go on, another chance.
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 7:52 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 1:46PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


I wasn't waiting for any other budget or anything else uttered by that blert. His word is not worth a tuppence. Happy? I know it's not the answer you were desperate for but I'm sure you'll get over it.Now then...What am I supposed to be defending this time?Glad you asked.I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved falseThatGo on, another chance.


I remember when you tried telling me you were a trader Laugh, I'll take with a pinch of salt anything you say. At least you didn't resort of libel this time. Seems having your eldest overhearing you stops your screaming and shouting at the computer.

It doesn't matter what you think after the event in any case.

Let's have another go.. Do you understand that Osborne will not be giving an Emergency Budget? It's not a hard question.. Well it will be to you, but that's beside the point.

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 7:54 PM BST
Is your inability to read your most crippling handicap? Seriously.


I know you're desperate to attempt some witty last word but I'm here for hours yet, so you're gonna have to show some persistence.


Now then...


What am I supposed to be defending this time?

Glad you asked.



I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved false



That
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 7:59 PM BST
So you don't know? Do you think it could happen? Do you think it's possible it won't?

Come on let us know.. You are supposed to be suuuuuuper intelligent remember?

Perhaps your eldest will be able to do it better? Go give them a shout.. 'Dad's a bit stuck on the Inernet, drop the Spot books and come give me hand'
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:04 PM BST
Now then...


What am I supposed to be defending this time?

Glad you asked.



I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved false


That




Condolences to your parents at their disappointment with how you turned out. Stupid and a sh!thouse. Not a good combination.
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 8:10 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 2:04PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Now then...What am I supposed to be defending this time?Glad you asked.I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved falseThatCondolences to your parents at their disappointment with how you turned out. Stupid and a sh!thouse. Not a good combination.


Says the man who isn't able to answer a question and needs to resort to abuse? Tee-Hee

I pity your eldest. Although I suspect that even they may be laughing at the mess you've got yourself into..

"Why won't you answer Dad? It's such an easy question"

I can hear the answer.. 'It's heavy fascist stuff maaan'

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:11 PM BST
Now then...


What am I supposed to be defending this time?

Glad you asked.



I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved false


That




Anyone else willing to jump in and guess what he meant by "discernibly proved false". The lad's a bit lost here.
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 8:17 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 2:11PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Now then...What am I supposed to be defending this time?Glad you asked.I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved falseThatAnyone else willing to jump in and guess what he meant by "discernibly proved false". The lad's a bit lost here.


You mean you want someone to jump in and save you because you've managed to get yourself into a complete mess? Why can't you answer a simple question, it's not that challenging is it?

I bet your eldest wouldn't have got himself into such a mess. Let's hope if it's true that you have offspring they take after your partner.

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:19 PM BST
Go on, ask your question again and I'll give you a straight answer.



Will you have the guts to do the same?
Report sean rua July 27, 2016 8:19 PM BST
Tony, bruv,

ye are sounding like hamilton ( tory).

Brexit has NOT happened yet.

Ye won't know the effects for years and years - maybe never.


--
I repeat, there will be nothing good for the working class until we understand what is going down and bring in a new , better system.

Negative, miserable folk will try to tell ye that there is no better system, but they say that,

a) bc they have a privileged position that they don't want to lose

b) bc they have no more idea than anybody else.


I have been concinced for more than hald a century that a truly socialist system would do most of us a lot of good. That's what I believe in.

In practice, as ye say, we do live in a capitalist world, so we have to do what we have to do.

That does not mean that things can never change.

They will, and we'll have to make it go our way.

'Tis up to us.

Mess about with futile reformism ( eg brexit etc) and ye will find that we get nowhere. What is the point of that?
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 8:25 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 2:19PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Go on, ask your question again and I'll give you a straight answer.Will you have the guts to do the same?


You mean after refusing to answer a question for X amount of times because you know it'll make you look stupid, you now want to answer it?

Sure..

Let's see what you come up with. Perhaps get your eldest to come over and help you? Hopefully they don't follow you..

So a nice easy question..

George Osborne threatened an Ermergency Budget suggesting there would be economic armageddon if there was a 'Leave' vote. Do you understand that Osborne will not be making an Emergency Budget?

I won't hold my breath that you'll answer.

Report Burton-Brewers July 27, 2016 8:26 PM BST
Go on, ask your question again and I'll give you a straight answer.



Will you have the guts to do the same?




what was your previous username?
Report sean rua July 27, 2016 8:28 PM BST
Daft as a brush! Laugh

Georgie boy: must have been one of the worst chancellors ever, along with g.brown.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:28 PM BST
George Osborne threatened an Ermergency Budget suggesting there would be economic armageddon if there was a 'Leave' vote. Do you understand that Osborne will not be making an Emergency Budget?


Of course he won't. There.



Now then...


What am I supposed to be defending this time?

Glad you asked.



I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved false


That
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:28 PM BST
Burton - why?
Report Burton-Brewers July 27, 2016 8:30 PM BST
well you don't deflect questions according to another most you made, so what was it?
Report tony57 July 27, 2016 8:31 PM BST
sean,
    i know brexit will take years, but we can do plenty to prepare for it , we can start to let our fishermen get there boats back? get the money and loan fishermen the money to go back to sea and get the industry going again...atm we pay the spanish for fish they catch in our waters??
farmers must be told what is going to happen they are vital to the nation..stuff like that will only help..i belive this could be done a lot quicker than is thought..if we stop with all this we want to stay in the single market crap, call the eu bluff..tell them we want wto rules...but article 50 must be triggerd before new year.
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 8:33 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 2:28PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


George Osborne threatened an Ermergency Budget suggesting there would be economic armageddon if there was a 'Leave' vote. Do you understand that Osborne will not be making an Emergency Budget? Of course he won't. There. Now then...What am I supposed to be defending this time?Glad you asked.I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved falseThat


We are making progress.. So we've made it clear that you now know that there will be no Emergency Budget by Osborne. Do you understand that the reason there will be no Ermengency Budget is because there has been no economic armageddon after the Leave vote?

Let's hope your eldest is back with you and is able to answer again.

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:38 PM BST
Jesus CJ, you really don't want to face up to your idiotic statement do you.



The reason I know it is far simpler: he's no longer chancellor. As for an economic armageddon, I didn't realise "after the Leave vote" had finished. Is this a new time period altogether?

In fact don't take my word for it, use tony's first sentence in his post above your last one.





Burton - I'll happily tell you. Just want to know why you're so keen to know.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:39 PM BST
anyway, back on point (is anyone counting?)


Now then...


What am I supposed to be defending this time?

Glad you asked.



I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved false


That
Report Burton-Brewers July 27, 2016 8:42 PM BST
Burton - I'll happily tell you. Just want to know why you're so keen to know.

well you've happily avoided it 4 times so far, I'm curious that's all.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:46 PM BST
Yes, but why are you curious? Do you think I am someone specific? If so, who?
Report Burton-Brewers July 27, 2016 8:48 PM BST
I'm a curious person, I don't think you are anyone specific
Report sean rua July 27, 2016 8:49 PM BST
And, tony,

tesco have withdrawn a lot of john west tuna.

Bad as they are, we have to give them credit. Some fkr has got to have some morals and make a stand.

As it is, half of the working class in the english conurbations ( inc merseyside) rely on stolen grub. That's the harsh reality.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:51 PM BST
ok, I think you're lying.


Commonly known as O4K. They're initials (mostly).
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 8:52 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 2:38PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Jesus CJ, you really don't want to face up to your idiotic statement do you.The reason I know it is far simpler: he's no longer chancellor. As for an economic armageddon, I didn't realise "after the Leave vote" had finished. Is this a new time period altogether? In fact don't take my word for it, use tony's first sentence in his post above your last one.Burton - I'll happily tell you. Just want to know why you're so keen to know.


Amusing. That you have the gall to call anyone else thick makes me laugh.

An Emergency Budget is an Emergency Budget, this is the problem we are having, you simply don't seem to understand terms. If an Emergency Budget takes place it's in an emergency, hence the name. Trying to say that there might be an Emergency Budget somewhere down the line to save face is even more laughable.

I can imagine a War Chancellor just sitting there on an Ermenegency Budget. Don't worry that the enemy is at the door, we'll wait 3 months before having an Emergency Budget!

It's laughable that you've spent the whole of your afternoon spamming the same question and it relies on you just not understanding simple terms. Let's hope your eldest doesn't come in and laugh at what a simple fellow their father is!

Give me strength!

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:55 PM BST
So you've now changed your question to "an emergency budget by whoever happens to be chancellor"?


Can you give me a timeframe at least. This week? This year? Decade? Century?
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 8:55 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 2:51PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


ok, I think you're lying.Commonly known as O4K. They're initials (mostly).


What a surprise.

Can I take a guess that the previous account was banned for throwing out abuse and libel when you got riled because you couldn't debate?

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:55 PM BST
nyway, back on point (is anyone counting?)


Now then...


What am I supposed to be defending this time?

Glad you asked.



I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved false


That




Come on, don't be scared. We're all eager to here your brains.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 8:55 PM BST
hear. Sheesh!
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 8:56 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 2:55PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


So you've now changed your question to "an emergency budget by whoever happens to be chancellor"?Can you give me a timeframe at least. This week? This year? Decade? Century?


Nope. ThickyMcThickface.

An Emergency Budget means an Emergency Budget. I can't believe you've spent all day on here trying this when it's just a simple case that you don't understand basic terminology.

Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 8:57 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 2:55PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


nyway, back on point (is anyone counting?)Now then...What am I supposed to be defending this time?Glad you asked.I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved falseThatCome on, don't be scared. We're all eager to here your brains.


Oops Laugh

Report sean rua July 27, 2016 8:59 PM BST
Will your crowd produce a budget in the autumn and call a General Election in Spring, CJ?
Report sean rua July 27, 2016 9:00 PM BST
And will they ever trigger article 50?
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 9:01 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 2:59PM, sean rua wrote:


Will your crowd produce a budget in the autumn and call a General Election in Spring, CJ?


Not my crowd but it's virtually impossible to call an election because of the Fixed-Term Parliament act.

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 9:05 PM BST
George Osborne threatened an Ermergency Budget suggesting there would be economic armageddon if there was a 'Leave' vote. Do you understand that Osborne will not be making an Emergency Budget?



Not my words. The words of some twonk on here.








Anyway, back on point (is anyone counting?)


Now then...


What am I supposed to be defending this time?

Glad you asked.



I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved false


That
Report sean rua July 27, 2016 9:06 PM BST
The way she'd have to do it is organised a "vote of no-confidence in the govt".

'Tis a pretty dangerous tactic, especially as she has a small majority and plenty of enemies now on her back-benches.

She may be tempted to hit nu-labor while they are still in an awful mess.

With tories, ye know your self, nobody can trust them. They are dodgy.
Report sean rua July 27, 2016 9:06 PM BST
I take it carswell votes with the govt?
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 9:07 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 3:05PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


George Osborne threatened an Ermergency Budget suggesting there would be economic armageddon if there was a 'Leave' vote. Do you understand that Osborne will not be making an Emergency Budget? Not my words. The words of some twonk on here.Anyway, back on point (is anyone counting?)Now then...What am I supposed to be defending this time?Glad you asked.I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved falseThat


Bless. I'd have thought that you'd have given up after it was clear you were making a fool of yourself.

Spending all afternoon posting the same nonsense only to find out that you didn't understand the fundamentals. The fact you've tried to call other people thick all day takes the biscuit.

Get your eldest to sit you down and give you a slap for being so dull. No wonder they appear at the computer and laugh. FFS

Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 9:08 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 3:06PM, sean rua wrote:


The way she'd have to do it is organised a "vote of no-confidence in the govt".'Tis a pretty dangerous tactic, especially as she has a small majority and plenty of enemies now on her back-benches.She may be tempted to hit nu-labor while they are still in an awful mess.With tories, ye know your self, nobody can trust them. They are dodgy.


Why would Lab. vote for a no-confidence motion when it results in them being wiped out in an election?

Report sean rua July 27, 2016 9:10 PM BST
Good point, CJ.

Maybe bc they said they were ready for an election? Laugh
Report sean rua July 27, 2016 9:11 PM BST
They'll be wiped out anyway, imo, once they split.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 9:11 PM BST
FundamentalsLaugh Christ lad, stop wriggling.



Got to give you points for avoiding answering the question though. Here for another hour or so. Don't worry though I'll be asking you tomorrow if I'm on or at least when I next catch you on here. Wouldn't want to miss your explanation.
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 9:12 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 3:10PM, sean rua wrote:


Good point, CJ.Maybe bc they said they were ready for an election?


If they were ready for an election then Con. wouldn't want one.

Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 9:14 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 3:11PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Fundamentals Christ lad, stop wriggling.Got to give you points for avoiding answering the question though. Here for another hour or so. Don't worry though I'll be asking you tomorrow if I'm on or at least when I next catch you on here. Wouldn't want to miss your explanation.


Wriggling?

I was wondering what you were playing at all day, why you'd kept posting the same thing when the answer was obvious to anyone with half an ounce of sense. Then you come out with the nonsense that you don't understand basic terms.

For god sake... Let's hope your eldest doesn't follow you or there's a bleak future ahead.

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 9:18 PM BST
Anyway, back on point (is anyone counting?)


Now then...


What am I supposed to be defending this time?

Glad you asked.



I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved false


That
Report CJ70 July 27, 2016 9:26 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 3:18PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Anyway, back on point (is anyone counting?)Now then...What am I supposed to be defending this time?Glad you asked.I think most of the remain voters fell for the economic armageddon argument. Now that is discernibly proved falseThat


Christ on a bike. You really still don't understand do you?

I've spent all day gently mocking you because I thought you were generally behind political times. Then when it's explained to you in technicolor, you still don't understand it! You've even answered the said question yourself.

You can't be this stupid, surely?

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 9:35 PM BST
So you think this is a brave new world. And any economic troubles that come in the next couple of years are in no way related to Brexit whatsoever. Must be easy pleased.
Report ZenMaster July 27, 2016 10:27 PM BST
Poor show Pineapple.

Emergency
a serious, unexpected, and often dangerous situation requiring immediate action.


You look a right chump.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 27, 2016 10:31 PM BST
You should lend CJ your dictionary zen.
Report ZenMaster July 27, 2016 10:36 PM BST
Osbourne's Emergency Budget, would come under the *requiring immediate action*

Hence you have well and truly lost the the argument Pineapple.
It didn't happen
It won't happen ( a the immediate time-frame has surpassed )

hth
Report sean rua July 28, 2016 9:52 AM BST
One point that may be overlooked in this childish spat between reformists, is that MANY SERIOUS WORLD PROBLEMS ( emergencies? Happy) do get overlooked and do NOT receive PROMPT ATTENTION  from the useless rulers.

Here are three

CYBER WARFARE
cLIMATE CHANGE
SUPERBUGS.

Meanwhile, the two factions of the con & U party ( leave/remain) continue to bicker about fk all.Laugh

Good for nothing reformists!

NERO would be a good name for the dopes.

And the new thatcher, besides removing the useless osburn, also got rid of the ENVIRONMENTAL dept!

Totally short-sighted.

And none of the tssrs can face up to the Border in Ireland.
Report CJ70 July 28, 2016 3:14 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 3:35PM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


So you think this is a brave new world. And any economic troubles that come in the next couple of years are in no way related to Brexit whatsoever. Must be easy pleased.


No, I didn't say that. The problem is you don't read what others say and don't seem to understand politics. It's as if you saw the EU vote and decided you were an expert.

This just leads you to lash out and rant anytime somebody doesn't agree with your simplistic theories.

Report Burton-Brewers July 28, 2016 4:59 PM BST
PP or ours4keeps as he was known, seemed to do the same thing on the football forum, he doesn't seem to visit it anymore must be embarrassed at being a Liverpool supporter.
Report Ski-Wiz July 28, 2016 5:10 PM BST

Jul 27, 2016 -- 11:02AM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


The national debt isn't down to migrants, it's down to politicians spending more than we make. Pensions are the biggest spend. You can speak to the bankers who got the country in so much trouble before getting bailed out and happily going about their bonus-busting antics as if nothing had happened, yep you can speak to them about why pensions need so much help.Maybe you can then look into how much we're spending on replacing trident. How much we're losing by tax evasion from the rich and big multi-nationals. Maybe look how much the Thames Garden Bridge is costing. Check out HS2 while you're at it.


When you have immigrants pouring in..... government spending goes up and so does the national debt. It isn't rocket science.

Report CJ70 July 28, 2016 5:26 PM BST

Jul 28, 2016 -- 10:59AM, Burton-Brewers wrote:


PP or ours4keeps as he was known, seemed to do the same thing on the football forum, he doesn't seem to visit it anymore must be embarrassed at being a Liverpool supporter.


I'm guessing he followed me down here as we've had previous on the football forum and then he appeared here. From what we've seen so far he has absolutely no idea about politics so it doesn't rule out that theory.

What did ours4keeps get banned for?

Report mobo July 28, 2016 5:55 PM BST
porki is just another remainer who lost and is so bitter about it
he resorts to personal insults and slurs
but I am too young to have an opinion on here

this is their type of tactic to divert

how is the disaster of pre brexit referendum going -  the markets seem to disagree with porki and the remainers
Report sean rua July 28, 2016 6:16 PM BST
Ski,

ye chat about "immigrants pouring in".

Can ye tell us what were the IMMIGRATION FIGURES for """INDEPENDENCE DAY""" 23 jUNE 2016,please?

Ye sound like ye know.

I have asked the con &U party directly, but nothing back from them yet.

My own guess is that immigration has surged since the referendum.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 29, 2016 8:50 AM BST
Have you missed me?


Burton - looks live you've been doing quite a bit of digging on me. Well done you. So then "embarrassed at being a Liverpool supporter". Embarrassed at what exactly?


Ski-wiz - I admire your attempts at reducing economic arguments down into such simplistic terms. Whatever makes you sleep better.


CJ - an absolute legend in the amount of things he can be wrong for at the same time. A joy to behold.


Mobo - following the classic zen route of trying to make me one of "them". Again whatever makes you sleep more peacefully I suppose.
Report Burton-Brewers July 29, 2016 9:12 AM BST
who did you upset on the football forum ours4keeps?
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 29, 2016 9:13 AM BST
Burton - you seem awfully interested in me.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 29, 2016 9:13 AM BST
You seem to have trawled the Liverpool thread trying to find info. Seek and ye shall find.
Report CJ70 July 29, 2016 10:00 AM BST

Jul 29, 2016 -- 2:50AM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Have you missed me?Burton - looks live you've been doing quite a bit of digging on me. Well done you. So then "embarrassed at being a Liverpool supporter". Embarrassed at what exactly?Ski-wiz - I admire your attempts at reducing economic arguments down into such simplistic terms. Whatever makes you sleep better.CJ - an absolute legend in the amount of things he can be wrong for at the same time. A joy to behold.Mobo - following the classic zen route of trying to make me one of "them". Again whatever makes you sleep more peacefully I suppose.


You've spent numerous posts in this thread telling me I'm wrong over something or other and it's turned out that the problem was you didn't understand what you were talking about.

What am I supposed to be wrong about this time?

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 29, 2016 10:13 AM BST
Jesus again? Go and read your new dictionary and bore someone else eh? You're too stupid and stubborn to educate and life's too short frankly.
Report CJ70 July 29, 2016 10:18 AM BST

Jul 29, 2016 -- 4:13AM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Jesus again? Go and read your new dictionary and bore someone else eh? You're too stupid and stubborn to educate and life's too short frankly.


Bless. The fact you can call anyone else stupid after your performances on Wednesday is a bit rich.

We'll put it down to 'I don't know why you are wrong! You just are' then shall we?

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 29, 2016 10:20 AM BST
Put it down to what you like. As long as you promise to try and not be such a dull boy, then whatever gets your rocks off frankly.
Report CJ70 July 29, 2016 10:25 AM BST

Jul 29, 2016 -- 4:20AM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Put it down to what you like. As long as you promise to try and not be such a dull boy, then whatever gets your rocks off frankly.


If I'd spent most of my day on Wednesday being having to be taught basic terms because I didn't understand I wouldn't be screaming that the person schooling me was 'dull'. It wouldn't reflect well.

Of course, the fact you have needed to resort to using a new name suggests that this 'dull' behaviour is par for the course.

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 29, 2016 10:34 AM BST
Still committed to be being utterly wrong I see. Joyful.  Right, you can have the last word you're so desperate for now as I've other things to do.
Report CJ70 July 29, 2016 10:40 AM BST

Jul 29, 2016 -- 4:34AM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Still committed to be being utterly wrong I see. Joyful.

Report CJ70 July 29, 2016 10:40 AM BST
You've had a while to think now. Any closer to suggesting what I might be wrong about? Or just wrong.. because *sulk*.

It's going to be the latter again isn't it?
Report mobo July 29, 2016 11:19 AM BST
you carry on with the insults porki - you are betrayed by your utterances - some debater you are - but I couldn't possibly comment as I am too young  and link everything to Isis.  You just don't like it when someone has an opposite view and resort to the usual tactic of diversion via personal insults and smearing.  I do hope you sleep well at night.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 29, 2016 11:21 AM BST
Mobo - have a go at me by all means. I am just me though, not one of "them" no matter how convenient that would be for you.
Report CJ70 July 29, 2016 1:08 PM BST

Jul 29, 2016 -- 5:21AM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Mobo - have a go at me by all means. I am just me though, not one of "them" no matter how convenient that would be for you.


In fairness you accused him and others of bullying you earlier in the week because they wouldn't agree with your simplistic views. No matter that you put up an argument that was clearly wrong that response when things don't go your way tells a story.

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 29, 2016 1:20 PM BST
Do you want to try that last sentence again?
Report CJ70 July 29, 2016 1:28 PM BST

Jul 29, 2016 -- 7:20AM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Do you want to try that last sentence again?


Bless.

Report CJ70 July 29, 2016 1:35 PM BST

Jul 29, 2016 -- 7:30AM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


(I'm an idiot and have been found out again, what do I write? Got it. Bless.)Right off again, at least until someone with an IQ higher than a gnat writes something interesting.


Bless his cotton socks. At least he's trying.

It's not very good, but at least he's trying.

Report sean rua July 29, 2016 6:52 PM BST
Daft thread!

I'd say if anybody was to be embarrassed by soccer teams, it must be england: they were sh ite in France and were **** in South Africa.

Dunno what's the matter with them.

Not that tht's important; this is supposed to be the politics forum.
Report PorcupineorPineapple July 30, 2016 9:34 AM BST
Odd that my last post to cj got pulled but the copy in his reply remained. Someone on here is clearly a moderator or close to one. And is a bit stupid obviously.
Report sean rua July 30, 2016 10:11 AM BST
Pineapple,

That is the modus operandi of the ulta-conservative activists who are the ruling clique on here. I don't know why ye didn't realise that earlier.

They have no principles ( or none that they're brave enough to put up here, with the possible exception of Wilde

They have no "facts" ( other than those they are given on their propaganda sheets)

They try firstly to berate and belittle any poster who poses a threat to their nonsense

They then move on to their trump card: CENSORSHIP OF THE TRUTH  and DELETION OF POSTS.

Finally, they deny all and go back to pretending they are just banterers. Happy

-

On the other hand, there some nu-labor stalwarts who are daft as a brush and haven't a scooby how to run a penny-bun stall, let allone take political power.

And so the pantomime goes on! Laugh
Report sean rua July 30, 2016 10:16 AM BST
I never did find out what this was all about, or to whom 'twas directed.
Report sean rua July 30, 2016 10:17 AM BST
Amazing to think that some of their gang have suggested that my posts are removed , soley bc of the ""swearing"".
Report CJ70 July 30, 2016 10:40 AM BST

Jul 30, 2016 -- 3:34AM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Odd that my last post to cj got pulled but the copy in his reply remained. Someone on here is clearly a moderator or close to one. And is a bit stupid obviously.


Someone else who's stupid, there's a surprise! Do you ever think it may just be you?

Saying that, thinking isn't your strong point is it?

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 30, 2016 10:47 AM BST
Jesus. He blocked my post because of some perceived offence (or maybe someone rep'd it) but in your bid to outdo zen in stalking me, your copy of it remained here for all to see.


Do you get it now? I kept it to words of max 2 syllables to try to help youHappy
Report CJ70 July 30, 2016 11:00 AM BST

Jul 30, 2016 -- 4:47AM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


Jesus. He blocked my post because of some perceived offence (or maybe someone rep'd it) but in your bid to outdo zen in stalking me, your copy of it remained here for all to see. Do you get it now? I kept it to words of max 2 syllables to try to help you


Well you've proved thinking isn't your strong point.

Can you possibly think of a reason why my post wouldn't have been deleted? It's not hard.. Well it probably is for you, but have a go anyway.

Report PorcupineorPineapple July 30, 2016 11:12 AM BST
tell you what, I couldn't give a monkeys. Now please have your precious last word in the space below and bore someone else. Ciao.
Report CJ70 July 30, 2016 11:19 AM BST

Jul 30, 2016 -- 5:12AM, PorcupineorPineapple wrote:


tell you what, I couldn't give a monkeys. Now please have your precious last word in the space below and bore someone else. Ciao.


You should have called your eldest to give you a hand.   

Although if they follow you there's not much hope I guess?

Report mobo July 30, 2016 7:48 PM BST
I would like to comment but I am too young according to porki and I link everything to ISIS
smearin and personal insults are all part of his diversive tactics
hope this helps
Report mobo July 30, 2016 7:49 PM BST
smearing  hahaha
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com